Former Trump aide Kash Patel set to testify in Mar-a-Lago docs probe: report

[struth]

Rudy Guilliani and Sidney Powell are good examples.

Google their public statements claiming to have evidence election fraud between Nov. 2020 and Jan. 2021.

But rhen when they found themselves before federal judges (64 in all) and found themselves in a position to acrually present said evidence....kept changing their story.

"Uh....we don't actually HAVE the evidence Your Honor....b-but we're pretty sure SOME must exist SOMEWHERE!"

Then, aftwr being tgrown out of court over and over again they'd go stand in front of the microphones and repeat tge lies again...

only to get laughed out of the next court.

Those are public v private statements. Moreover, they are talking about themselves.

 

[struth]

Polishprince ... Said he could. Go back and look.

No, that's not what he said. He said he can testify to what he personally believed. With that said, he's made clear publicly what Trump had said.

I also take issue with the poster comparing an actual Grand Jury to the parody impeachment hearings.

 

[berg80]

And it did support the claim made that Patel took the fifth and that the DOJ had to slink in to request that the judge grant him immunity.

Patel did take the 5th so the DoJ gave him immunity which compels his testimony. The good thing about immunity for the DoJ is Patel can still be charged with perjury if he lies under oath.

The bottom line here is the DoJ wants to know what Patel knows with regard to actions taken by Trump, if any, to declassify docs. Remember, so far Trump's lawyers have yet to make any assertion of declassification in court or provide any evidence of such.

 

[MagicMike]

No rational, informed, intelligent and honest person denies the accusation of Trump having “stolen” the documents.

The Office of National Archives disagrees with you.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You don’t know that, you dishonest Retard. Grand jury proceedings are secret.
It might very well be that he refuses to answer any questions.

Your guess-work is without substance. Compounding it doesn’t help.

He now will be required to answer questions. That much is true.

I would say he maneuvered them.

Your guesswork is far off base, yet again. Your error begins with the ASSumption that Patel wont be “able” to testify that Trump did order the declassification. But you’re seriously lacking in any basis to explain why not.

Nope. Assuming that he does testify as I (not you) expect, then the Brandon Department of Miscarriage of Justice will be stymied in its fucking track.

There is no evidence that anything was declassified. If there were the agencies who classified that material would know. They do not. Everyone from the Archives to the DOJ are operating as if they are not. It’s literally a phone call to the agency that owns the docs in Trump’s possession to inquire about their classification status.

All that of course is irrelevant to the fact that it’s illegal for Trump to have those docs regardless of their classifications.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I’d ask Hutch Starskey to carefully explain something:

Back in May, Brietbart ran a piece on what Kash Patel had to say: Documents at Mar-a-Lago Marked 'Classified' Were Already Declassified

On what alleged factual basis do you pretend to know that Kash Patel was not being honest and factually correct?

He certainly wouldn’t need protection from incriminating himself if they were, dope.

 

[MagicMike]

There is no evidence that anything was declassified. If there were the agencies who classified that material would know. They do not. Everyone from the Archives to the DOJ are operating as if they are not. It’s literally a phone call to the agency that owns the docs in Trump’s possession to inquire about their classification status.

All that of course is irrelevant to the fact that it’s illegal for Trump to have those docs regardless of their classifications.

This Trumptards are becomming hard pressed to continue pivoting and splaining away the orange cat-turd king's crimes.
They are so numerous.

It is almost comical watching them scrambling to make excuses for him anymore.

 

[Lesh]

we know what he is gonna say…he’s already said it publicly

Shit said in the media is often different from what’s said under oath

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They don't know the difference since their leaders keep swearing in "witnesses" to give opinions.

Uh huh. Who do you imagine could speak to the
classification status of docs other that Patel or Trump?

Maybe the agencies that actually created, classified and curated said docs? The actual owners of the information contained therein?

You don’t think that maybe that was the first conversations the DOJ had when beginning their investigations? How is it that the Archives knew Trump had docs and that they were classified?
No one seems to be under the impression that anything had been declassified. Certainly not in any real or substantive way as is routinely done.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This Trumptards are becomming hard pressed to continue pivoting and splaining away the orange cat-turd king's crimes.
They are so numerous.

It is almost comical watching them scrambling to make excuses for him anymore.

They certainly take their idiotic assertions to lengths unimaginable by most people.
It’s fascinating though to watch them so thoroughly debase and humiliate themselves over and over to achieve so few relevant points or gain any ground at all.
Definitely cult-like behavior. They know nothing beyond the cues given them in their feeds.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Shit said in the media is often different from what’s sail under oath

Why is it necessary to even point such a simple thing out to other supposedly grown people?

These zombies are sad and ridiculous.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Apparently he knows what crime he may have committed. Otherwise why plead the 5th?

Indeed.
Patel is a former federal prosecutor. He certainly knows he now has no room to tap dance around questions.

 

[struth]

Shit said in the media is often different from what’s said under oath

So you literally have no examples of what someone said in private v. under oath or in public...gotcha

 

[Lesh]

So you literally have no examples of what someone said in private v. under oath or in public...gotcha

Roody and the Kraken Lady are good examples.

They said all sorts of shit in the media that they would dare say in court

 

[struth]

Roody and the Kraken Lady are good examples.

They said all sorts of shit in the media that they would dare say in court

no they aren’t you have never provided anything they said in private.

they have never been under oath in court. Moreover the examples you provided of things they said about themselves not trump

 

[Blaster]

The Office of National Archives disagrees with you.

Fuck that agency.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Uh huh. Who do you imagine could speak to the
classification status of docs other that Patel or Trump?

Maybe the agencies that actually created, classified and curated said docs? The actual owners of the information contained therein?

Wow, are you confused. No wonder Democrats don’t care if we lose our republic. They don’t even know that we have one.

In our republic, the people own classified documents created by our employees in the government using equipment and supplies that we bought them.

Just like when you wrap a burger at your job. That burger belongs to the owners of the restaurant, it isn’t yours because you processed it. You are paid by those owners to process their property. If you invent a new burger on the job and call it the Husky Burger, guess who owns it?

All those agencies could testify to is that they handled those documents as classified, under the authority of the president who is the sole arbiter of what is and is not classified. They could never testify that they somehow forbade the president from declassifying documents without the agencies asking first.

Nor could they cite any law requiring the president to get permission from anyone ever to classify and declassify information.

You don’t think that maybe that was the first conversations the DOJ had when beginning their investigations? How is it that the Archives knew Trump had docs and that they were classified?
No one seems to be under the impression that anything had been declassified. Certainly not in any real or substantive way as is routinely done.

Trump demonstrated his belief that the documents were declassified by taking them out of the White House and to his private residence. If you could point to a specific law that requires the president to follow a specific procedure or be “real or substantive as is routinely done (by non-presidents), you would have an argument to say “he thought they were declassified, but he thought wrong because declassification requires ______________ according to law _______________ .”

Of course, that law would have to somehow over-ride the constitution since the president is the sole final decider of what is and is not classified.

 

[BackAgain]

Patel did take the 5th so the DoJ gave him immunity which compels his testimony. The good thing about immunity for the DoJ is Patel can still be charged with perjury if he lies under oath.

Zzz

The bottom line here is the DoJ wants to know what Patel knows with regard to actions taken by Trump, if any, to declassify docs.

That’s one spin. And I’m sure they do want to “know.”

Remember, so far Trump's lawyers have yet to make any assertion of declassification in court or provide any evidence of such.

Why would they? He isn’t charged with anything.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They will indite after the midterms.

How soon?

There is an infinite amount of time “after the midterms,” can you narrow it down? Ten years from now? Five?

 

[BackAgain]

Apparently he knows what crime he may have committed. Otherwise why plead the 5th?

Your legal knowledge is utterly lacking.

You have no clue about anything in life any witness may have done. And, with the advice of counsel, it is sometimes the case that a witness believes that he might have to reveal something which could be construed as criminal. It doesn’t have to be directly related to the matter under consideration for a witness to say, “nah. Why take a risk? I’ll take the fifth instead.”