Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
If every Tom, Dick, and Harry were influencers, maybe.
It Begins, DOJ Files Motion to Limit President Trump’s Ability to Defend Himself
- Thread starter excalibur
- Start date
As long as they are a member of the cult you are good.
Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
You are the member of a cult. What you think and say isn't remotely American.
No Trump Humper, you are in a cult.
Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
It is Trump's policies, not Trump. But I do like him.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Except that the Intelligence Agencies weren't more powerful. Felt outed Nixon's criminality, but he didn't gain power himself. He was forced out of his job, convicted of misconduct in another case, and had to rely on Reagan for a Pardon.
So, um, now is that more powerful.
The real problem is Trump was completely unfit to be president, and the Legislative Branch refused to do it's job to remove him.
Independent thinker
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2015
- 31,780
- 27,598
- 2,788
There's a reason why they call it the DEEP state. It's DEEP.The DOJ using lawfare. And deny people proper defense.
...Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him. Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured. Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it. THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE. This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense. Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic. President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment....I am correct about the documents grabbed.I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place……and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!
Wait for it!
The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.Some baselines are needed to understand what is happening.First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed. Now we turn to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.♦ During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place. The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:
Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval. It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un]. CNN even wrote about it HERE.[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea. This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue. Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.” A diplomatic détente was created.NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?Would all of this “nuclear national defense” hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim? YES! Would President Trump even characterize those letters as government property? NO!...
Read the rest HERE
dudmuck
Diamond Member
I thought Ford pardoned NIxon.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
He did.
And Reagan pardoned Mark Felt (AKA Deep Throat) after he was convicted for his role in COINTELPRO which spied on political groups.
Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
They assassinated president Kennedy. That is powerful.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Quick, if you have proof of that, you'd better alert Congress.
Because every investigation found Oswald acted alone.
Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
They know. We were lied to again. Do you think this unique? It seems to happen all the time.
And the Congress let an election be stolen. Do not count on them to do anything to help this country.
Last edited:
jknowgood
Diamond Member
Don't forget a place that Chinese officials have access and after paying Hunter millions.
JoeB131
Diamond Member
Guy, the election wasn't stolen.
People never wanted Trump to be president. After Covid, the recession and the riots, they REALLY didn't want him.
Biden got more votes, period.
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
2054. Synopsis Of Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA)
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.
18a U.S. Code Compiled Act 96-456 - CLASSIFIED INFORMATION PROCEDURES ACT
Just so that people know. The protective requested is the norm for a criminal trial and there are existing laws (Classified Information Procedures Act) in the code as 18a United States Code Appendix 96-456.
Management of classified information and access to it is NORMAL in a criminal case.
The CIPA was passed in 1980 and has been in place for DECADES, this is not something new made up just for the Ex-President.
WW
Lastamender
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2011
- 65,087
- 59,277
- 3,600
Guy, the election was obviously stolen. Period.
ABikerSailor
Diamond Member
If those EO's you claim exist, then you should have no problem linking to them. I'm guessing that they don't say what you think they do.
As far as a president traveling and needing access to material that is classified? No. They don't "automatically declassify" the information, they travel around with a mobile SCIF where they can access what they need.
And yes, if a document is declassified, there WILL be a record of it's change in status from secret to unclassified. Why? Simple. Because classified material isn't held at only one place, there are copies of that information in other places. If it is declassified, a memo stating that it's status has changed must be sent to the other places where that information is also held so that they can update the classification of the material where they are.
ABikerSailor
Diamond Member
So what if you don't think Kid Rock isn't a traitor? He's still a civilian and doesn't have access to classified information. And how do you know he's not a traitor? John Walker was a military man who held a high clearance who was selling secrets to the Russians, as well as got his son involved in gathering and selling information. Those 2 individuals passed all the screenings required for access to classified information and weren't considered traitors either until they were caught.
As far as "chances are the documents were declassified"? Well, if they actually were declassified, there would be a memo somewhere reflecting the change of the information from secret to unclassified. Try again simp.
BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Lawfare is a fascinating term.The DOJ using lawfare. And deny people proper defense.
...Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him. Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured. Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it. THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE. This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense. Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic. President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment....I am correct about the documents grabbed.I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place……and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!
Wait for it!
The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.Some baselines are needed to understand what is happening.First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed. Now we turn to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.♦ During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place. The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval. It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un]. CNN even wrote about it HERE.[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea. This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue. Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.” A diplomatic détente was created.NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?Would all of this “nuclear national defense” hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim? YES! Would President Trump even characterize those letters as government property? NO!...
Read the rest HERE
And the DOJ (Smith) is a disgrace to the profession of prosecution.
Excellent OP.
Similar threads
