Walt Nauta Claimed Trump Hoarded Hairspray Cans in His Storage Rooms

The transcript from Walt Nauta’s May 26, 2022 FBI interview, at which he allegedly lied about his knowledge of Trump’s boxes of classified documents, has been released.

Several times, Nauta comes off as a skilled liar. For example, when the FBI asked reiterated that they wanted to know where the boxes that were sent to NARA in January 2022 had been stored and if there were more, Nauta changed the subject to the Embassy in Madrid.

But when the FBI asked Nauta what was in Trump’s storage rooms, he claimed that Trump hoarded hair spray.

He later went on to claim that Trump had so many golf shoes, but the FBI noted those wouldn’t be in bankers boxes.

Ultimately, Nauta came off like a guy who was wildly impressed with his own stature.

It is like, wow. Now how do I transition from a guy who used to scramble eggs to now I’m working for a former President?

It’s not surprising he was unwilling to give that up. I mean, if Trump regains the Presidency it will all have been worth it.

137 replies
  1. Tetman Callis says:

    Trump’s a hoarder? I’m not surprised. Ever in search of his “Rosebud,” that one beloved object taken from him when he was young — that binky, that blankie, that special toy, that one comfort he could always turn to and count on — until the day came it was stripped from him, never again to be found.

  2. BRUCE F COLE says:

    DeOliveira is the one that surprised me that he didn’t flip. Nauta is his live-in body man, so the loyalty is hardly surprising, but DeOliveira was/is an onsite functionary who actually had a life and family offsite, and many Mar-a-Lago-ites didn’t even know who the guy was when the superseding indictment came down.
    If Cannon had handled the conflict hearing like a normal Judge (or simply, pro forma, ordered un-conflicted counsel for both co-defendants without even holding a hearing, as is often done in other jurisdictions) I’m guessing DeOliveira would have flipped just as Taveras did. She didn’t even see fit to have a translator on hand for him, a fairly recent Portuguese immigrant.

    Nauta, otoh, is all kool-aided up.

  3. PeteT0323 says:

    As is often said “both things can be true” which can also mean multiple things can be true at the same time.

    Hair spray, deodorant, and classified docs. All one degree of separation in a MaL storage room.

    • xyxyxyxy says:

      Your name Pete brings to mind Sellers as “the innocent” Chauncey Gardener with all this shit that’s going on from these cons. I can’t take it anymore and hope the upcoming fraud trial finally has some impact on the fools who would die for Trump. It’s Jonestown!

      • bmaz says:

        Welp, I was right that it is completely open season at Emptywheel now. This is absurd, and not how th blog came to prominence, indeed the antithesis of it.

        [Moderator’s note: you have been warned several times that comments complaining about this site’s moderation will be binned. At least two comments you’ve made in this thread have now been removed. Furthermore, you have claimed to be a First Amendment absolutist and yet you attack other commenters here who are doing nothing more than sharing opinion in relation to the subject of the post above. Give it a rest. /~Rayne 2:58 p.m. ET ]

        • Harry Eagar says:

          I bet that by Monday, the gang will be back to examining the entrails with a microscope. Meanwhile, the idea of a quondam billionaire hoarding hairspray is pretty funny.

          I doubt we’ll get many more yuks for weeks or months.

        • GlennDexter says:

          Yes, hairspray came up more than twice, seemed like multiple times.
          Somewhere, there’s an endorsement just waiting to be had or is Trump planning his own brand, ‘Trump Laquer Mist’, in the near future.

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          My mistake, “guy who used to scramble eggs to now I’m working for a former president”.
          Okay, so he didn’t garden and he didn’t become the president…and “so that must suck when you have to take, like, normal flights”

  4. MsJennyMD says:

    Trump Not a Fan of Pump Hairspray

    “You can’t use hairspray because hairspray is going to affect the ozone. They want me to use the pump because the other one, which I really like better than going ‘bing,’ ‘bing,’ ‘bing,’ and then it comes out in big globs, right? And it’s stuck in your hair, and you say, ‘Oh my God, I got to take a shower again, my hair’s all screwed up,’ right? I want to use hairspray.”

      • ExRacerX says:

        I picture a big lump of cottage cheese topped with a moldy old orange, whining loudly about the water pressure.

    • Bombay Troubadour says:

      So depressing, these quotes and hundreds of other examples of ridiculous, horrible words and thoughts from the former perhaps future, supposed leader of the free world.
      It is not comforting to remember our history, our great leaders, our struggles and sacrifices as a country to get here, and to have it all shit upon by TFG and his enablers.
      Thank you to Marcy and contributors here, I have learned much.

      • xyxyxyxy says:

        Great leaders?
        Were Nixon, Reagan, two Bushes great leaders?
        And that’s only the Republicans.
        What in their leadership was great?
        Nixon hiding breakin at Watergate and continuing endless war in Nam and other wars in Asia, Reagan asking Iran to hold back return of US hostages and declaring war on drugs – just say no – and HIV patients and Welfare Queens, Bush 2 attacking and destroying Iraq and its population while lying to the public or maybe sitting and reading nursery school tales while there’s an attack on the US and Bush1 on Willy Horton.

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          He also wanted medicare for everyone.
          And sacrifices, hundreds of thousands dead and injured in Nam under Ike, JFK, LBJ, Tricky and Iraq and Afghanistan of US and “enemies “.

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          Another version of the Endangered Nixon Action, you may mean “Nixon’s Presidental campaign needed the [Nam] war to continue, since Nixon was running on a platform that opposed the war.”
          “In 1968, the Paris Peace talks, intended to put an end to the 13-year-long Vietnam War, failed because an aide working for then-Presidential candidate Richard Nixon convinced the South Vietnamese to walk away from the dealings, says a new report by the BBC’s David Taylor.”
          Unless there’s been an update in the past decade, the following stands, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/nixon-prolonged-vietnam-war-for-political-gainand-johnson-knew-about-it-newly-unclassified-tapes-suggest-3595441/
          Now that’s great leadership.

        • CPtight617 says:

          It was concocted by John Ehrlichman as a cynical ploy to appease the Rockefeller-Romney wing of the GOP, which did not like the Southern strategy, and to show up NYC Mayor John Lindsay, who had gotten a political boost from facilitating the first Earth Day and who Nixon was super jealous of.

        • CovariantTensor says:

          I disagreed with almost everything Reagan said and did, policy-wise, but I never doubted that he was trying in good faith to run the executive branch in a way he thought was best for the country. I never had the urge to vomit when The President appeared on TV. From 2017-2021, both were different.

  5. BRUCE F COLE says:

    Here’s the transcription doc: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24543166-nauta-transcript

    I’ve only just started reading but it’s interesting stuff. The FBI guys are very jocular, I think trying to soften him up, but after a fairly long, joke-riddled settling-in, the lead agent frames the interview on p.18 as them trying to figure out what NatSec programs they’re going to have to shut down, etc, based on just that first batch of docs that Trump falsely told them was everything he had. That’s would have been a pretty sobering commentary for Nauta (a former Navy Seal with a Senior Chief rank) to have to absorb.

    Even only 18 pages into a 102 page transcript, several things jumped out:
    — Nauta, when questioned about his reasons for leaving the service to work for Trump, leaves out that he got busted for sexual harassment and forced to leave the WH. Don’t know if they’ll press him later about it in the session…
    — The interview starts out with the lead guy telling him (p.6) that this is a voluntary interview and that it needs to remain confidential. I’m pretty sure they’ve released this because Nauta didn’t stick with the confidentiality agreement he assented to on that page.
    — I didn’t know that Nauta was a Seal. He said he was about to re-up for another 3 year stint when Trump’s invite changed his mind. Again, no mention of his getting busted having a role in that decision. He had a very promising career going.
    — An inidentified woman, in the early stages (p.15), mentions that Trump is waiting outside the interview room for them. That comes after the agent asked him how much he hangs with Trump to which Nauta says pretty much all the time, “except for days like this,” as if he’s on his own. It’s a pretty funny spot, and one that highlights his proclivity for prevarication that Marcy mentions above.
    — I wonder who that woman is and how she got herself into the room? She’s not listed in the beginning as a participant.
    — That woman’s actual quote is “He’s waiting for us in the lobby. He’s (indiscernible).” I’m pretty sure “indiscernible” was something like “He’s in a hurry,” because the agent follows that with “OK, we’ll be quick. Don’t want to leave the man waiting.” Then he spends another page’s worth of transcript cracking jokes. That tickled me shitless.

    • M. N. White says:

      Smith et al didn’t release this transcript, Nauta’s team did. They’ve wanted to attach it as an exhibit to a motion to dismiss, and to make it public. Smith didn’t want it to be public, and especially wanted names redacted. This came out today because of Cannon’s ruling earlier in the week granting Smith’s motion to reconsider.

      • BRUCE F COLE says:

        See my correction/apology directly above your comment, posted 1 hr prior to your comment.

    • Rugger_9 says:

      I didn’t know Nauta was a SEAL either and to me he looks very young to have been a Senior CPO (E-8) considering how long he’d been with Defendant-1. One normally doesn’t hit SCPO until the mid-30s just due to the time in service requirements up the enlisted ladder and FWIW each rating (like OS here) can be ‘impacted’, which means that ranks will not be filled until there is a billet with budget (i.e. one can stay at a level for a very long time). It’s one reason why officers generally do not go to the SEALs, because the ladder for advancement is pretty restricted. Perhaps someone should give Don Shipley a call, he outs phonies and would be willing to check this guy out. Given how easily Nauta has lied to date, what’s one more?

      Make Nauta cough up his DD-214 discharge.

      • FrankM78 says:

        After enlistment, he became a Culinary Specialist, according to Wikipedia. No mention of Seal qualifications. Agree, if true, prove his Trident. Navy vet here.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Staff jobs, which is essentially the job Nauta eventually did for Trump, just before he left the Navy, are often a good way to get a double promotion: one going in, one coming out. Nauta made Senior Chief (E-8) before leaving the Navy, which is one grade above a Marine Gunnery Sergeant, so a senior rating.

        Sources on Nauta say he was a cook, not a SEAL. But Nauta’s dialogue with the Bureau implies that Navy staff, which operate the WH kitchens, are trained operatives, who also cook. FBI Agent 1 then specifically asks Nauta if he’s a SEAL, because, he says, he’s thinking of “Under Siege,” and Nauta says, “Yeah.” (Transcript, lines 20-25.)

        That seems like an odd way for this fairly important factoid to come out. Would be nice to see confirmation, but that snippet follows the FBI informing Nauta that lying to the Bureau is a felony.

        • John Paul Jones says:

          In Under Seige the Steven Segal character is a cook who used to be a SEAL. I believe that might be the reference.

          He was in for 20 years altogether, so it’s possible he had SEAL training earlier, and then transitioned into “culinary specialist.”

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          In the transcript, FBI Agent 1 brought up the Under Siege reference as a preliminary to asking Nauta if Nauta was a SEAL. Nauta answered “Yeah,” he was.

          Nauta was not confirming that the film Under Siege involved a former SEAL who became a cook on the Missouri, “to finish out his 20.”

          It’s a nit. But it suggests something about the Navy staff running WH kitchens that, if true, the USSS would probably have preferred not be made public. It also says something about Nauta that, if true, isn’t disclosed in other public sources about him. It would explain why a president would want him as a “body man,” and why Nauta seems so full of himself.

        • Scott_in_MI says:

          “So we provide food security. The main thing is food security.” (p.14)

          Is this a meaning of “food security” of which I was previously unaware? Or is Nauta just pulling this out of his ass?

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Nauta does not seem to be the brightest bulb in the pack. That discussion of “food security” sounded like he was a food tester who had just watched I, Claudius.

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          Whether he was a SEAL or a security taster, he was willing to give his life for the good of the country.
          On the other hand, he knows that his SEAL buddies may be compromised by Trump.
          Picking one petal off a daisy, loyalty to money vs lives, lives vs money, money vs lives, etc.

        • dopefish says:

          It might not be available to the public, but surely in their investigation the SCO would have found out what Nauta’s Navy record actually says?

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Pretty sure nobody, Nauta included, thinks he was anything but a cook. An important job, but not one involving combat arms.

        • Bruce Olsen says:

          Thanks for the “I, Claudius” reminder. I missed the original broadcast in the late 1970s; I didn’t watch Dallas either so I had no clue what the folks around the water cooler were talking about, though I do recall multiple comments about “that Livia.”

          Finally read it, and “Claudius the God” in the mid-1980s, and a couple of years ago caught up with the original BBC series.

          I expected to hear Sejanus blurt out “Engage!” at some point…

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          A mixing of parts. One episode of Star Trek, the NG, probably paid more than his whole role in that series.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I think the FBI was messing with his head, seemingly not hard to do, and he took the bait, but corrected himself later in the interview.

        • Savage Librarian says:

          Nauta probably meant he was a SEAL, as in having passed the training for the Good Box Keeping SEAL of Approval./s

        • Booksellerb4 says:

          Agree with Marcy about the BS. I’m still reading the transcript, but when good ole Walt says he doesn’t ask questions, just does what he’s told…”makes it easier”, I thought that was a clue…the best BS’ers always admit it at some point.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Nauta seems to clarify on p. 78, lines 17-23, that’s he’s not a SEAL or special operator. Technically, he says he’s not “Steven Seagal” (who wasn’t a SEAL, either).

        • John Paul Jones says:

          Sorry, I was less than clear. I understood that the SA brought it up, and that Nauta agreed. But the point of the reference, apparently, for both men, was the link to the Segal character.

          Whether he really was a SEAL I guess we will find out hereafter.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Pretty sure we already know Walt was not a SEAL. For one thing, he says so. Regardless, Nauta, the WH, the USSS, the FBI, and the SC already know.

        • emptywheel says:

          I think his testimony was incompatible with the discipline he faced before he decided to take the Trump job. So, uh, I’m not sure that stuff is true either, just maybe not material to the case.

      • P J Evans says:

        SEAL training would be some months long, and I doubt that they’d let him be a WH cook or valet based on that. He’s a good liar, though.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          SEAL training is quite a bit longer. Formal initial training, in several parts, is about a year and a half. Upon joining a team, about another year and a half of field experience is required before the “community” considers you a qualified SEAL.

          Other specialists also train with SEALs: some rescue swimmers and what used to be called underwater demolition teams (now designated SEAL delivery teams).

        • Joseph Andrews says:

          Earl: thanks for your post here. Folks with real knowledge to bear on these matters post here. And I get to learn. Thanks.

        • Michael Allen says:


          [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the SAME USERNAME and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. You have previously published comments as “emjayay,” “Michael,” and “Emjayay”, none of which comply with the site’s current username standard. I’m going to assume “Michael Allen” is your new username chosen because it’s more than 8 letters long and will expect to see it used in future comments. Thanks. /~Rayne]

      • Thorvold says:

        The point that I find hard to believe is that a 20 year Navy Senior Chief working in the White House where the Situation Room is had to be told what a SCIF is (Secure Compartmentalized Information Facility) on page 62. As a White House valet, I am sure there would have been times when he was unable to enter a conference room because there was a classified meeting going on or have to clear out of a room that he was in because a classified meeting was about to start and he didn’t have need-to-know.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          A SCIF is a dedicated facility, not a multi-purpose room. But it’s an acronym most people in the WH would have heard of and understood.

          As a presidential valet, Nauta would have known that much, because the guy he worked for would have been frequently in one being briefed.

        • bidrec-gap says:

          I would assume that Navy valets stationed in the White House have top secret clearances because enlisted members of the White House Honor Guard do and they are basically just ornamental.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Not sure I would make that assumption.

          As for being ornamental, the WH Honor Guard, as with Marine guards at US embassies and the famously changing Guards at Buckingham Palace (the ones in the tall bearskin headgear), is comprised of qualified service members, who are very skilled at what they do.

        • pcpablo321 says:

          I spent a year in the Coast Guard Honor Guard, and originally had White House Grounds clearance, then WH building clearance, but only with advanced scheduling for ceremonies. I never had any secret clearance.

        • pcpablo321 says:

          We were strictly ornamental, our M1’s didn’t have any firing pins, (but we did have bayonets).

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Most honor guards are the real thing. Were you an actor in a costume, or did you have CQC training? But I can see why the USSS would want to be the only armed guards around.

        • pcpablo321 says:

          At that time, (1967-68) we Coasties had no combat training, just a smattering of weapons training, much different now. I went immediately from boot camp to DC, then a year later I went to Corpsman school. I always considered my time there as an acting gig (except the funerals), but I did get up-close time with LBJ and Haile Selassie at age 17.

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          How often did you check your M1’s to see they didn’t have any firing pins especially seeing that there was somehow a live weapon on a movie “shoot”.

        • pcpablo321 says:

          Before every event, on the grounds, our CO checked that our weapons were clear. The SS never intervened, I guess they trusted us, but the way we banged those rifles around on drill team events, I wouldn’t want to be near one that was being fired!

        • bidrec-gap says:

          When I began the journey to my clearance there was a briefing of about ten of us. The briefer assumed we were all going into communications and he was surprised there was one there that was going into the honor guard. The briefer told him he was crazy because you could get busted for smiling at the wrong time. Later (this was fifty years ago) there was a scandal over the guard smoking marijuana and a number were demoted or punished another way.

    • Troutwaxer says:

      Sexual harassment? I wonder what else he might have done and what anyone might have on him? Honeytrap much?

      • ShadeSeeker says:

        Perfect! Dismissal from the WH for sexual harassment – (Trump or Trump stooge – ‘we’ve heard about your WH dismissal how embarrassing for you, come and work for me (unspoken… don’t do anything stupid that could damage your future career)’

        Not only does Trump hoard hair spray he loves “hoarding sensitive, secret information and wielding it regularly and precisely for his own ends”. ProPublica gives several examples of this, eg Atlantic city tunnel project and Whitman, also compromising reporters Neil Barsky and Charles V. Bagli.


        • CovariantTensor says:

          Thanks for the link. We’ve already seen Trump reveal classified contingency plans for an invasion of Iran, in order to “prove” Gen. Milley was planning one. They probably have contingency plans for armed conflict with nearly every nation on the globe. International situations can be fluid. But they’re secret (and rarely acted upon), for good reasons.

    • Fly by Night says:

      Nauta was not a SEAL. He was cook who worked his way up to cooking in the White House. It is difficult for me, a retired O-5 who also worked for the White House, to see a fellow veteran (who earned significant enlisted rank) turn his loyalty away from the country and to a person like Trump. But Trump seems very adept at attracting people like that.

      • Rugger_9 says:

        Agree about the problem with where Nauta’s true loyalty lies. I suppose cooks aren’t as tuned into the fundamentals about opsec and why our adversaries don’t like us which may explain why it’s not as hot button an issue for him. My time was during the Cold War, so the GOP kissing of Putin’s arse really rankles me given how he’s an unreconstructed Soviet agent. That starts from Defendant-1 all the way down.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        If so, Nauta lied to the FBI about something that the USSS already knew to be false, and the FBI could prove or disprove in a heartbeat. If a lie, it doesn’t appear to be material, but it sets the stage for his willingness to lie, which is not good for Nauta.

        Yeah, as an inherent predator, Trump is very good at identifying and seeking out people like that, and working only with people like that.

        • Rugger_9 says:

          Well, that kind of knowledge would be leverage to enforce loyalty, and don’t think that wasn’t part of the calculations.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Finally got to p. 78, lines 17-23, where Nauta implies that he’s not a special operator, when he says, “I wish I was something — I wish I was Steven Seagal, but no.”

        • FL Resister says:

          Walt Nauta’s wiki page says he was a cook in the US Navy.
          His bio says nothing about Navy seal.
          Something abhorrent about claiming something one has no right to. Yet another magical thinking balloon in Trumpworld ready to pop.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Wiki is a useful start; it’s not the be all and end all source for accurate information.

          The Fibbers were messing with Nauta’s head, and it seemed to work. When prompted by one of them, Nauta said he was a SEAL, then corrected himself later in the same interview. There’s no liability for that. Even if he hadn’t, it’s not a material lie. But it does suggest that Nauta is easily led.

    • soundgood2 says:

      So Trump is waiting outside in the lobby but Nauta tells agents Trump doesn’t know he is doing the interview and thinks he is out jogging?

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Trump never jogs. If he did, he wouldn’t do it in public, so he wouldn’t be “out” doing it.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      On p. 78, Nauta says he was not “Steven Seagal,” presumably meaning he wasn’t a SEAL.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          From Nauta, that might be overthinking it. The film was about superman, disguised as a Navy cook. The Fibbers were playing with him, and Nauta played along for a few minutes, before reality set in.

  6. Discontinued Barbie says:

    I imagine that after hanging out with Trump, these men have seen him lie continuously and without much consequence. Trump has spent his whole life lying and is somewhat of an expert with alternative facts and “truthiness”. I wonder if these men think they can lie as well as Trump after being in his paltering ecosystem for so long.

  7. Sussex Trafalgar says:

    To understand Nauta, one needs to understand CIA Operative Felix Rodriguez and his efforts to overthrow Castro and his communist regime in Cuba.

    Rodriguez is a hero to generations of new mercenary soldiers like Nauta, especially those who reside in southern Florida.

    Long past time for people in the US to study Rodriguez, Batista and the Batista allies who lived in exile in southern Florida and their relationships with Meyer Lansky and his US Mafia. The late attorney, Roy Cohn, knew it well. He helped educate Trump.

    Judge Cannon’s mother and maternal grandparents know the Rodriquez bio. So, too, does Judge Cannon.

    And Trump saw a lot of Rodriguez’s CIA and Operation Mongoose documents when he was president.

    Trump’s anti-communist/anti-socialistic campaign messaging originates from the Batista exile community in southern Florida.

    • Joseph Andrews says:

      My goodness what a great post, a post that supplies as good an explanation I’ve read as to at least some of the ‘behavior’ of Judge Cannon. My oh my…

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        If you’re talking about Sussex’s comment, it’s a comment. The post is by Marcy Wheeler.

        As for the comment, it’s a hobbyhorse Sussex keeps riding, which makes a host of unsupported assumptions.

    • Michael Allen says:

      Donald’s anti-communist/anti-socialistic campaign messaging also originates from his Queens childhood in the 1950s plus having a known fascist father. Make America Great Again means make it like when he was a child. He has never really progressed beyond that stage.

  8. Bugboy321 says:

    “For example, when the FBI asked reiterated that they wanted to know where…”
    Sorry for the late copy editing, but I think you have an extra word in there?

  9. originalK says:

    Ya gotta love where his attorney says (p. 82, line 12) “It seems like you all are trying to get at something…if you could be more pointed in what you are asking” and the agents take him up on it, and get the location and extent of the document hoard along with the information they need for a lying to the FBI charge. (And then they turn around and soften WN up some more with the – legitimate! – importance of his knowledge, and he and his lawyer work to give them even more detail?!) The agents’ skill on display like this may be the security risk for the release of the transcript – It definitely doesn’t reflect favorably on the innocence of WN or, especially, his boss.

    • Bruce Olsen says:

      Definitely can recommend that article.

      I don’t think anyone is going to accept this bond.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      A refreshingly decent article by the Daily Beast. There are a litany of problems with that bond and its issuer. The biggest is that the issuer does NOT promise to pay anything to anybody for any reason, despite the bond having adopted the form of bonds that do.

      The issuer hasn’t the surplus assets to make good on that bond. That its parent or affiliated companies or reinsurers might have money it needs to make good on it is irrelevant. The exception would be if they are directly liable on the bond – they are not – or have and immediately enforce commitments from those companies to pay the issuer what it needs to make good on that bond. The NYAG as zero information on whether that’s true. The only prudent assumption is that they do not.

      Absent its own resources, the issuer would have to be ready, willing, and able to immediately enforce its presumed security interest in the Trump “cash” it says it’s taken as collateral, assuming it’s still there when it comes calling. The NYAG apparently has no direct knowledge of what that collateral is, and whether it’s sufficient and able to be promptly turned into cash.

      This bond is a house of cards. It is not a close call. This is not rocket science. Every normal NY state appeals bond issuer and its counsel know what the requirements are. If Trump had really put up cash collateral for the full amount of this bond, he would have been able to get one of them to issue a compliant bond. Trump is fucking around.

      Judge Engoron should reject it, and tell Trump he has 48 hours to provide a compliant bond from a NY state-approved issuer, or allow the NYAG to immediately enforce its judgment. If he doesn’t, this merry-go-round will go on until doomsday.

      • xyxyxyxy says:

        48 hours, how about half a minute.
        He’s already had 30 days + 10 days + 10 or 20 days.
        When is enough – enough – already?

      • dopefish says:

        Wanna bet that when the Court rejects this bond, Trump will take to Truth Social to whine about how he had a Beautiful bond, the Best bond, and it was rejected by the TRUMP-HATING JUDGE as part of a BIDEN DOJ conspiracy to interfere with his election chances?

    • Patrick Carty says:

      I’ve read where some are saying this would be a problem for Letitia James to collect, being an offshore account, and that Trump pulled another fast one. Now I am not a lawyer but isn’t this Trump’s responsibility to provide the bond versus the prosecution’s challenge to collect it? Can I bounce a check for a parking ticket and tell City Hall to stuff it?

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Yes, the burden is on the appellant, here, Trump, to provide a compliant bond. He has no done so, after being given several chances. That should lead to the lapse of the temporary stay on enforcing the judgment. It would not affect his appeal, only who holds the money pending its resolution.

        NY state has rules for bonds and bond issuers for a reason. The major purpose is to enable beneficiaries to collect on them without fuss. Trump is naturally flouting them, as is Knight Specialty and Don Hankey. They both know what Hankey has offered is worthless. It’s probably what Trump paid for.

  10. zscoreUSA says:

    Dang, I didn’t even know hairspray was still manufactured. I haven’t seen since probably the 90s when aquanet was a necessity.

    In other news, Weiss and Smirnov want to move the trial away from next week and to after the November election.

  11. Zinsky123 says:

    Meanwhile, the House Speaker is at Mar-a-Lardo to kiss the ring of the King in absentia, while the House is proposing bills like the Refrigerator Freedom Bill and similar nonsensical drivel to satisfy the anti-science MAGA zealots. Pathetic. Maybe Trump will catch the measles in anti-vax Florida and that will be his droll Shakespearean demise.

    • Henry the Horse says:

      See, this is how the pros do it…the tiniest bit of something truthy mixed with a word salad with heavy bullshit dressing.

      I mean, who wouldn’t believe that TFG has a warehouse size bathroom filled with cases of Aquanet? That sounds right.

      BTW I am from the dry look generation. I, or any of my friends would have been mocked unendingly for using hairspray. That’s what our moms used to get the high topped beehive.

      Great report Dr don’t let the bastards grind you down!!

    • Michael Allen says:

      When he was a child a lot – maybe most if not almost all – kids got measles. So he’s probably immune.

  12. Konny_2022 says:

    Back to Nauta: The Times of San Diego had an article last July, titled “Walt Nauta’s ‘Weird’ Navy Bio: Why Was Trump Aide in San Diego Only a Month?” by Ken Stone, which is pretty detailed. According to a CV pictured there, Nauta was delegated to the “Presidential Food Service, White House, Washington, D.C.” from 11/22/2012 to 05/08/2021. Hence Trump had “inherited” him from Obama.

    Here’s the link:

  13. Booksellerb4 says:

    Back again. Read through most of 102 pages and thought the FBI did waaayyy too much talking compared with Mr. Nauta responses – glad I never had such-type interview.

    Page 41 Line 5: (in reply to “Who moved the boxes?” from the WH residence to MAL in Jan 2021)
    Mr. Nauta: I think it was a, it was a gambit of, like, White House staffers.

    Very curious usage of the term “gambit”. . . does Walt play chess? Or did he just plug in that term in the “heat of the moment”?

    gambit – An opening in chess in which the player risks one or more minor pieces, usually a pawn, in order to gain a favorable position.
    A maneuver, stratagem, or opening remark, especially one intended to bring about a desired result.

    • originalK says:

      It might be a transcription error for gamut, like “ran the gamut”. Still an interesting use of that word, tho’.

      • Booksellerb4 says:

        Yes! Maybe not a chess player . . .maybe “Catachresis – “the misuse or strained use of words, as in a mixed metaphor, occurring either in error or for rhetorical effect.” Or as: “The use of a word in a way that is not correct, for example, the use of mitigate for militate.” ?
        Anyway, Walt comes off as less than sincere in matters of security, food or otherwise.

        TY for “gamut” ++

        • originalK says:

          I thought his use of gamut outside of the “ran the gamut” idiom was an awkward way to describe that many different staffers worked to pack boxes. But it could be a bit of a Freudian slip if either he or the court reporter associated the word gambit with their activities that day.

        • Booksellerb4 says:

          Ha! IDK.
          I have more confidence in the court reporter/transcriber than in Walt, for sure.

          But Earthworm’s comment about Malapropism(s) reminded me of the comedian, Norm Crosby (DEC11/8/2020), who made me giggle with his word usage. In polite company, now, I usually refrain from correcting folks who have intentionally, but incorrectly inserted a fancy word – especially when a plain one would do.*

          *(ref George Orwell’s 6 Rules v and vi)

        • xyxyxyxy says:

          As far as the court reporting, there were so many times of “indiscernible” that it made many sentences worthless.
          Is that normally the case and how is evidence taken out of so much “indiscernible”?
          Do the agents do their own review and corrections for their own records just so there’s some kind of flow, if only for internal purposes?

  14. Tarrforme says:

    Is this interview just about the 15 boxes Trump returned?

    Where are the questions about removing boxes before the lawyer checked for classified doc’s? Why no questions about wanting to delete security footage?

    Was this interview before the superseding indictment?

  15. harpie says:

    TRUMP asks CANNON for DELAY:

    Apr 13, 2024 at 5:00 PM

    Breaking: Trump asks Cannon to put deadlines in his Florida federal documents criminal case on hold until three weeks after his New York hush money criminal trial ends because he was unsuccessful at stopping the NY case from going forward. [link][screenshot]


    [pdf1/6] […] As explained below, the May 9 deadlines would deny President Trump his constitutional right to participate in critical aspects of his defense, and infringe on his constitutional right to counsel of his choice in this case. Accordingly, President Trump respectfully requests an adjournment of the May 9, 2024 deadlines until three weeks after the conclusion of the trial in People v. Trump. […]

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      If Trump gets this delay, he will subsequently ask, in effect, to delay all proceedings before Judge Cannon. It’s a delay tactic, not a case management tactic. According to Trump, he’s wealthy enough to have separate teams of lawyers working on each case. His personal involvement is very limited until trial.

  16. Rayne says:

    wetzel-rhymes-with: I am NOT clearing your 7:30 p.m. ET 424-word essay for publication in this comment thread.

    Marcy’s post above is 182 words long. There’s no good reason the comment you’ve attempted to submit should be twice as long.

    Run a copy of your comment through hemingwayapp.com; pare down the 8 adverbs, 2 complex phrases, 3 hard-to-read and 6 very-hard-to-read sentences. Your final comment should be at least 30-40% shorter.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        A very Germanic trick. But no one here is William Faulkner, or even Ernest Hemingway. Only Faulkner could have turned To Have and Have Not into a passable film.

Comments are closed.