BREAKING! The Florida Grand Jury Was Never Told About 'The Presidential Records Act' Or The 'Clinton Socks Case', Both Exonerating!

[WorldWatcher]

Yeah, it does. I remember the case well. And agreed with the ruling.

Link provided in previous post. Ownership image of the United States Code provided in previous post.

The court was correct in that the law (previous image supplied) clearly defines what are "Presidential Records" and what are "Personal Records" in terms of who has ownership and as the court said, it cannot change that definition. (Images provided in this post.)

The court did not say that Presidential Records become Personal Records as defined by the law simply because the FPOTUS said so.

The records in the #45 FPOTUS case are not diaries, journals, and personal notes - they are official administration documents.

(And this is an interesting side discussion but one that has nothing to do with the FPOTUS indictment because the indictment has nothing to do with "Presidential Records", the indictment is about willful retention of classified documents and the FPOTUS's failure to return them upon notification by the property US Government officer or employee under 18 USC 793(e) [Espionage Act].

WW

 

[Devils_Advocate]

He doesn't need to keep his mouth shut. He's not under oath.

True, but his words can be used against him during the trial and any good lawyer would duct tape Trump's mouth!

 

[Orangecat]

He's an "or something"!

He can be both.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You mean like xiden already has?

Sheesh you're stupid

Yeah, dope. Show me one time he’s said as much.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Are you retarded or something?

Another one who embarrasses themselves readily.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Not as dumb as you are and as your Potato in Chief is. Or the Dim bench is.

we’ll see where this lands, professor.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Trump had every right to HIS documents, you boob. Just like every POTUS before him.

This "case" is pure unadulterated bullshit.

They weren’t “his” documents, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yeah, it does. I remember the case well. And agreed with the ruling.

The ruling that said they were personal property? That one , dope?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yeah, it was.

What a moron.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Try listening for 37 seconds: battle plans are Trump's personal documents? In what universe?

 

[Dante Reawakened]

No, you blithering fool. He is claiming they AREN'T illegal. The PRA MAKES it so.

DURRRRRR

Try listening for 37 seconds: battle plans are Trump's personal documents? In what universe?

I don't believe the PRA protects Donald here.

 

[westwall]

They weren’t “his” documents, dope.

Yeah, they are dumbfuck. Just like Clinton's were his, and obummers were his.

DURRRRRR

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Yeah, they are dumbfuck. Just like Clinton's were his, and obummers were his.

DURRRRRR

Yep… that’s exactly what the indictment states.
Such a moron.

 

[Orangecat]

Another one who embarrasses themselves readily.

Retarded it is. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[busybee01]

Well what do you know!!!

Corrupt Jack Smith got an indictment against Trump taking advantage of the jurors ignorance pertaining to presidential records when a president leaves office. That's okay! Judge Eileen Cannon will see the treachery in this.

Truth Social

Truth Social is America's "Big Tent" social media platform that encourages an open, free, and honest global conversation without discriminating on the basis of political ideology.

truthsocial.com

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

THE GRAND JURY WAS NEVER TOLD ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT OR THE CLINTON SOCKS CASE, BOTH EXONERATING!

NEITHER OF THEM ARE RELEVENT. THEY PERTAIN TO PERSONAL DOCUMENTS NOT GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS MORON.

 

[BackAgain]

we’ll see where this lands

Yes. You will.