FBI doubted probable cause for Mar-a-Lago raid but pushed forward amid pressure from Biden DOJ, emails reveal

[Nostra]

It's like a shoplifting conviction.

you can absolutely be charged with shoplifting before leaving the store, as the crime is often complete the moment you take possession of an item with the intent to steal it

And what is needed to show intent?

When the Crime is Complete (Inside the Store)

Concealing Merchandise: Hiding items in a purse, pocket, or under clothes shows intent to deprive the owner.
Altering Price Tags: Switching tags or removing security devices.
Passing Checkout: Walking through security gates without paying after concealing items.

Hur could not prove intent. Which is the hill you chose to die on.

Tater willfully retained his stolen documents, so it wasn't an accident each time he slinked out of a SCIFF with TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS shoved down his Depends over decades.

 

[Nostra]

It's like a shoplifting conviction.

you can absolutely be charged with shoplifting before leaving the store, as the crime is often complete the moment you take possession of an item with the intent to steal it

And what is needed to show intent?

When the Crime is Complete (Inside the Store)

Concealing Merchandise: Hiding items in a purse, pocket, or under clothes shows intent to deprive the owner.
Altering Price Tags: Switching tags or removing security devices.
Passing Checkout: Walking through security gates without paying after concealing items.

Hur could not prove intent. Which is the hill you chose to die on.

Using your logic I could steal a car and drive it around for years. And when I get caught driving it around I can just give it back and there is no crime.

 

[Marener]

He did, myself and others quoted directly from the report.

Merry Christmas, dickhead.

Hur specifically says he couldn’t prove it

You need to stop lying.

 

[Marener]

Hur’s report stated that his investigation “uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice-presidency when he was a private citizen.”

 

[Delldude]

Hur specifically says he couldn’t prove it.

You should include his entire reasoning on the subject.

You are lying by deception.

Merry Christmas dickhead.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You should include his entire reasoning on the subject.

Translation: You should cherry pick one line out of the report and soothe me

 

[postman]

No stupid, he said a jury would be "sympathetic" to the Vegetable who wouldn't know WTF was happening to him in a courtroom.

You know that doesn't fly in the face of Voir Dire
Any sympathetic jurors would be excluded
As would antithetic jurors

 

[postman]

Using your logic I could steal a car and drive it around for years. And when I get caught driving it around I can just give it back and there is no crime.

Different statute. No "intent to retain" required.

 

[postman]

Hur specifically says he couldn’t prove it

You need to stop lying.

Hur said he COULD prove it.
But Hur also concluded he COULD NOT legally prove it.

It's like the claims all of Trump's lawyers made after the 2020 election, claiming it was stolen.
They claimed to have all kinds of proof.
But in a court of law, none of it got beyond hearsay, inuendo, and supposition.

They had no actual proof, while claiming they did.

 

[Delldude]

Any sympathetic jurors would be excluded

I wasn't aware someone having sympathy was one of the determinations made when seating a jury.

'Could you convict a president with the IQ of a cucumber and known for willingly and knowingly falling up and down stairs' ?

 

[Delldude]

They had no actual proof, while claiming they did.

Spelled out in the report.

Stop with the lies.

'The Marener always rings twice'

 

[postman]

I wasn't aware someone having sympathy was one of the determinations made when seating a jury.

'Could you convict a president with the IQ of a cucumber and known for willingly and knowingly falling up and down stairs' ?

Jury exclusion due to sympathy involves potential jurors being removed (or removing themselves) if their strong feelings for a party (plaintiff/defendant) might prevent fair judgment,

where lawyers use voir dire to find biased jurors

In Summary: Jurors are excused if sympathy prevents impartiality;

 

[postman]

Spelled out in the report.

Stop with the lies.

'The Marener always rings twice'

It was spelled out that Hur thought he had proof
But also concluded he didn't have legal proof (enough to convince a jury)

 

[Delldude]

Summary: Jurors are excused if sympathy prevents impartiality

was spelled out that Hur thought he had proof
But also concluded he didn't have legal proof (enough to convince a jury)

Wouldn't have mattered, you can't indict a sitting president.


Makes all your rants an epic failure.

 

[postman]

Wouldn't have mattered, you can't indict a sitting president.


Makes all your rants an epic failure.

Hur covered that. Saying that even if that wasn't a barrier, he wouldn't have charged Biden.

We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.

We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president.

 

[Delldude]

Hur covered that. Saying that even if that wasn't a barrier, he wouldn't have charged Biden.

We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.

We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president.

You can't indict a nice older vegetable.

 

[postman]

You can't indict a nice older vegetable.

That's not what Hur said.
He said he didn't have enough evidence to convince a jury. Which means he had no legal case to bring.

 

[Delldude]

He said he didn't have enough evidence to convince a jury.

Ah ha. There's that word 'evidence' again.

Quit with the ballet, you and your alterego lost the argument some 600 posts ago.

 

[postman]

Ah ha. There's that word 'evidence' again.

Quit with the ballet, your and your alterego lost the argument some 600 posts ago.

To repeat, Hur said he didn't have enough evidence to convince a jury.

I said Hur had evidence, just not enough.

We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter

 

[Delldude]

To repeat, Hur said he didn't have enough evidence to convince a jury.

Quit with the ballet, you and your alterego lost the argument some 600 posts ago.