Ignorance Of The Law Is No Excuse

[bripat9643]

Maybe. What Trump thinks isn’t as relevant here as what they clearly are.

Trump decides what his documents are, not the national archives. That's the bottom line. It doesn't matter if they were once classified.

 

[Billo_Really]

Maybe I'm a pussy but at least I'm not stupid as a rock like you are.That article I provided has all the information you need. You are just too dumb to understand anything. LOLView attachment 796464

If it does, then why can't you state your take on the article? Don't you read what you post?

 

[Marener]

Trump decides what his documents are, not the national archives. That's the bottom line. It doesn't matter if they were once classified.

So you think that the plan to invade Iran is his “personal document” and not a “presidential record”?

Are you delusional?

 

[Billo_Really]

At least I know how to click on a link. I'm not as stupid as a rock like you. I also don't idolize a wannabe dictator like you do you little bitch View attachment 796465

OMG, he violated the flag code! What is this country coming to? It's not like he took money from the Russians?

 

[Blisterfinger]

OMG, he violated the flag code! What is this country coming to? It's not like he took money from the Russians?

Actually it is like Biden took money from the russians!. LOL it's like you are too stupid for words!

Hunter Biden received $3.5M wire transfer from Russian billionaire: Senate report

Hunter Biden received a $3.5 million wire transfer from Elena Baturina, the richest woman in Russia and the widow of Yury Luzhkov, the former mayor of Moscow, Senate Republicans revealed in their r…

nypost.com

 

[HaShev]

So, we've got numerous people, with Hillary Clinton being the very worst offender, who have not been charged with any crimes related to the mishandling of classified documents. Joe Biden was found to have classified documents against law and they kept it hush, hush because the election was right around the corner and, he continued having classified documents against the law months after that. He knowingly had classified documents in violation of the law and he and his lawyers and others purposely obstructed justice by keeping it quiet instead of returning them to the National Archives. They kept it all quiet until they knew it was coming out in the media and then decided to come clean.

Hillary had set up an illegal server in her basement where numerous classified documents were funneled through and could be hacked (some by Wikileaks), with some of them winding up on Anthony Wiener's laptop and Huma Abedin (a person with ties to radical Islam) had access to many classified documents. Did she or Anthony Weiner have clearance to see those classified documents? After receiving a subpoena to keep records for an investigation, Hillary obstructed justice and had 30,000 emails deleted.

And yet the DOJ is trying to claim that these people didn't intend on breaking the law so were not charged while claiming that Trump intended to break the law by not returning "classified" documents when ordered to do so. Apparently just the fact of having classified documents illegally was OK with the DOJ just as long as you returned them when asked or ordered to do so. If not, then, all of a sudden, having classified documents is not OK, even though it was OK beforehand.

Hillary certainly wasn't ignorant of the law (hell, she's a lawyer) at least when she had 30,000 emails deleted against a subpoena (and probably other aspects of her case as well). Why should Trump be held accountable for merely having documents in his possession that were OK to have before as well as numerous other people, including Biden, and why should Trump be held accountable for obstruction of justice when others weren't? Why can Huma Abedin and Anthony Weiner and Wikileaks have access to classified documents and everyone who came in and out of Biden's garage and other places but Trump must be held accountable for others seeing classified documents? So, what happened to ignorance of the law is no excuse? The others should be charged even if the DOJ claims they were ignorant of the laws. Otherwise, it looks like weaponized law enforcement doing a political hit job.

The media won't say this, but it's not just Hillary oops mishandling emails that was a huge security risk due to easy foreign access, it's the intent to circumvent the watchdog and that implication of improprieties she needs to subvert the system keeping her in check by communicating her shenanigans privately. Then when caught and court ordered subpoena to hand over the communications she illegally destroys evidence and obstructed the case (more proof she had evidence of worse things on there) and then abused power to get others to go along protecting her crimes from prosecution and thus manipulating elections. She even interfered by illegally paying for the server tech's lawyer.

 

[bripat9643]

So you think that the plan to invade Iran is his “personal document” and not a “presidential record”?

Are you delusional?

If he decided it is, then it is. That's what judge Amy Jackson Berman ruled, moron.

Judicial Watch: Clinton Sock Drawer Audio Tape Case Exonerates Pres. Trump - Judicial Watch​

“Amy Berman Jackson, the judge presiding on that case, said a couple of very important things,” said Farrell. “That the president had an absolute, unreviewable right to take any records or documents that he wants when he leaves office. “ ​

​

“No one can come back and second guess or double think or ask questions about what the president elects to take with him,” Farrell continued. ​

​

In her ruling, Jackson wrote that “the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: ‘[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.’” ​

​

Leftwing morons hate it when their own government officials rule against their idiotic claims.

 

[Marener]

If he decided it is, then it is. That's what judge Amy Jackson Berman ruled, moron.

No, she didn’t rule that which is why you are quoting some hack from Judicial Watch and not the judge.

If you’re not delusional, then can you admit that the Pentagon’s war plans aren’t personal documents?

 

[bripat9643]

No, she didn’t rule that which is why you are quoting some hack from Judicial Watch and not the judge.

If you’re not delusional, then can you admit that the Pentagon’s war plans aren’t personal documents?

Yes she did, you stupid fuck. I quoted her ruling. Judicial Watch quoted her ruling, but you're too fucking sleazy and dishonest to admit obvious facts.

 

[bripat9643]

No, she didn’t rule that which is why you are quoting some hack from Judicial Watch and not the judge.

If you’re not delusional, then can you admit that the Pentagon’s war plans aren’t personal documents?

Allow m to quote judge Jackson again:

​

In her ruling, Jackson wrote that “the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: ‘[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.’” ​

 

[Marener]

Yes she did, you stupid fuck. I quoted her ruling. Judicial Watch quoted her ruling, but you're too fucking sleazy and dishonest to admit obvious facts.

You quoted some asshole talking about her ruling.

Are you ready to admit that DoD invasion plans aren’t personal documents?

 

[Marener]

Allow m to quote judge Jackson again:

​

In her ruling, Jackson wrote that “the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: ‘[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.’” ​

Hey dip shit. We aren’t talking about disposal of documents.

We are talking about the former president taking highly classified government documents to play with at home.

 

[bripat9643]

You quoted some asshole talking about her ruling.

Are you ready to admit that DoD invasion plans aren’t personal documents?

She was directly quoted, you lying scumbag. Do you actually believe people can't read what I posted, asshole?

Trump decides what his personal documents are. Not me. Not you. Not some judge.

 

[Marener]

She was directly quoted, you lying scumbag. Do you actually believe people can read what I posted, asshole?

Trump decides what his personal documents are. Not me. Not you. Not some judge.

I didn’t ask you who decides. I asked you if you think military invasion plans are personal documents.

Apparently you’re too stupid to have your own thoughts or else you could answer the question.

 

[bripat9643]

I didn’t ask you who decides. I asked you if you think military invasion plans are personal documents.

Apparently you’re too stupid to have your own thoughts or else you could answer the question.

If Trump says they are, then they are. That's the law.

How many times do you have to be told?

 

[Marener]

If Trump says they are, then they are. That's the law.

How many times do you have to be told?

Actually the law defines presidential records and personal records.

44 U.S. Code § 2201 - Definitions

www.law.cornell.edu

The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the Presidentwhose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

The term “personal records” means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion therof,[2] of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

Now, do you think an invasion plan prepared by the DoD would be a presidential record or a personal record under these definitions?

 

[bripat9643]

Actually the law defines presidential records and personal records.

44 U.S. Code § 2201 - Definitions

www.law.cornell.edu

The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the Presidentwhose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

The term “personal records” means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion therof,[2] of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

Now, do you think an invasion plan prepared by the DoD would be a presidential record or a personal record under these definitions?

How many times do I have to quote this, you fucking moron?

Judicial Watch: Clinton Sock Drawer Audio Tape Case Exonerates Pres. Trump - Judicial Watch​

“Amy Berman Jackson, the judge presiding on that case, said a couple of very important things,” said Farrell. “That the president had an absolute, unreviewable right to take any records or documents that he wants when he leaves office. “ ​

​

“No one can come back and second guess or double think or ask questions about what the president elects to take with him,” Farrell continued. ​

​

In her ruling, Jackson wrote that “the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: ‘[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.’” ​

 

[Marener]

In her ruling, Jackson wrote that “the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: ‘[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.’”

We aren’t talking about disposing records, dipshit.

I knew you are incapable of thinking for yourself. You can’t answer a simple question

 

[Blisterfinger]

We aren’t talking about disposing records, dipshit.

I knew you are incapable of thinking for yourself. You can’t answer a simple question

Typical democrat, as stupid as a fence post.

 

[bripat9643]

We aren’t talking about disposing records, dipshit.

I knew you are incapable of thinking for yourself. You can’t answer a simple question

That's exactly what we're talking about, you colossal dumbfuck.

The idea that you are capable of rational thought is too absurd for words.