Kash Patel Undermines His "Big Case" Against Wisconsin Judge

[Marener]

It matters because the classification only comes from his powers as elected president.

Ask Hillary about her Email server on that one.

What difference does it make where the classification comes from?

Claiming the classified documents were secure at Mar a Lago is idiotic. They weren't in government custody. They weren't monitored. They were in boxes in a basement of a social club. That's not how the government secures classified documents.

 

[martybegan]

What difference does it make where the classification comes from?

Claiming the classified documents were secure at Mar a Lago is idiotic. They weren't in government custody. They weren't monitored. They were in boxes in a basement of a social club. That's not how the government secures classified documents.

Because of who you are accusing of having documents, or more than likely copies of documents classified under their administration.

LOL, ask Ames how well they secured documents.

 

[Marener]

Because of who you are accusing of having documents, or more than likely copies of documents classified under their administration.

LOL, ask Ames how well they secured documents.

We are accusing a guy who used to have government authority, but no longer does. Which is pretty typical for the people that get busted with classified documents, such as David Patreus. Still waiting for you to explain why it makes a difference.

Trump's classified documents were not secured by any definition applicable to the matter. It's idiotic to suggest otherwise.

 

[Cellblock2429]

View attachment 1105449

For those who might have a genuine concern this judge broke the law, this should infuriate you. Your own team is undermining the case against the judge. It is a prosecutorial axiom that you try the case in court, and not the in public, as Patel is doing. It’s also a prosecutorial axiom that you don’t give the defense any freebie arguments through your own actions, as Patel is doing in this case. If nothing else Patel is giving defense counsel leverage in any plea agreement negotiations. At worst, his repeated flouting of guidelines aimed at protecting a fair trial for defendants risks a sympathetic judge dismissing the case.

Kash Patel Undermines His Big Case Against Wisconsin Judge.

Patel’s tweets and disclosures risk undermining DOJ’s case against Judge Dugan. See what this means for the trial.

www.dailykos.com

Shouldn't be a problem, since Trump is in such good standing with the judiciary...

/—-/ It may be a shot across the bow to warn other judges and public officials that there are real consequences to their actions. It’s not empty threats.

 

[struth]

I have no idea what you mean by "the CIA ha more power". This has absolutely nothing to do with the authority of a sitting president since Trump was not the sitting president.

The issue was that classified government documents were being kept unsecured in a private residence. That's obviously something the government would want to deal with since it's a national security issue.

So, you agree Xiden and Clinton should be prosecuted and jailed? They never should of had them to begin with, keep them hidden for years, it's not like they were actively working with thte NA, like Trump was, when he left office to ensure everything was returned that was suppose to be returned.

 

[martybegan]

We are accusing a guy who used to have government authority, but no longer does. Which is pretty typical for the people that get busted with classified documents, such as David Patreus. Still waiting for you to explain why it makes a difference.

Trump's classified documents were not secured by any definition applicable to the matter. It's idiotic to suggest otherwise.

because all classification powers over that document came from the person in Question.

None of the other cases ever involved the President under which the documents were classified.

Meaningless.

 

[struth]

We are accusing a guy who used to have government authority, but no longer does. Which is pretty typical for the people that get busted with classified documents, such as David Patreus. Still waiting for you to explain why it makes a difference.

Trump's classified documents were not secured by any definition applicable to the matter. It's idiotic to suggest otherwise.

Geez, you are clueless, David Patreus was still in office, he was the acting CIA director....he was allowed to have the documents, unlike Xiden and Clinton, who never were.

Patreus was busted for sharing the intel with a ghost writer, while active CIA director in the Obama admin, which is what Xiden also did with the documents he stole. and should never of had, after he left office.

 

[Marener]

because all classification powers over that document came from the person in Question.

None of the other cases ever involved the President under which the documents were classified.

Meaningless.

Again, why does it matter if the classification powers come from Trump? They're classified and he had them illegally.

Add to that the obstruction of justice, and it's something that should be prosecuted.

 

[martybegan]

Again, why does it matter if the classification powers come from Trump? They're classified and he had them illegally.

Add to that the obstruction of justice, and it's something that should be prosecuted.

He did not have them illegally. The archive wanted to check and see if they had copies of them.

It became a legal issue when Biden decided to up the lawfare, or at least the people controlling Biden's strings decided to up the lawfare.

What justice?

As opposed to letting a person with a valid detainer avoid federal officers?

 

[Delldude]

Your own team is undermining the case against the judge.

It was so much fun when your crowd did it to Trump.....why not now?

 

[Billiejeens]

She lied to federal agents and aided an illegal alien with a valid detainer is attempting to evade capture.

She should be charged and tried as such.

She is looking at 6 years.

 

[Delldude]

Trump's classified documents were not secured by any definition applicable to the matter. It's idiotic to suggest otherwise.

His claim was they were declassified.

 

[Marener]

He did not have them illegally. The archive wanted to check and see if they had copies of them.

It became a legal issue when Biden decided to up the lawfare, or at least the people controlling Biden's strings decided to up the lawfare.

What justice?

As opposed to letting a person with a valid detainer avoid federal officers?

Of course he had them illegally. He wasn't in government anymore. When you leave government, you don't take classified government anymore. People that do, get prosecuted.

I've already said the judge can be prosecuted. You don’t get to lie to federal agents. Has nothing to do with the detainer.

 

[struth]

Of course he had them illegally. He wasn't in government anymore. When you leave government, you don't take classified government anymore. People that do, get prosecuted.

I've already said the judge can be prosecuted. You don’t get to lie to federal agents. Has nothing to do with the detainer.

That's not true, Clinton and Xiden got to.

You all wanted to give Clinton a promotion, and re-elect Xiden

 

[Marener]

His claim was they were declassified.

He still has to turn them over because of the subpoena. But he didn’t. He obstructed justice.

 

[struth]

He still has to turn them over because of the subpoena. But he didn’t. He obstructed justice.

Jack Smith was illegally appointed, therefore you can't obstruct an illegal investigation.

Violating a subpoena? Did a court even hold him in contempt for violating that order? haha

 

[Delldude]

He still has to turn them over because of the subpoena. But he didn’t. He obstructed justice.

If He did , why were they recently returned?

 

[Delldude]

I'm curious as to why there's still argument over inconsequential issues.......daily .

 

[Marener]

I'm curious as to why there's still argument over inconsequential issues.......daily .

The judge's actions were inconsequential, but they're being prosecuted anyway.

 

[TimFitz]

oh no, it's very true, the Trump lawyers obviously raised the issue that the prosecution was illegal, and the Courts agreed. The Rule of Law once again got in the way of the demafacist abuse of power

It was more like the lickspittle to Trump. It isn't as if Eileen Cannon's rulings weren't overturned, or widely criticized by the legal community for their blatant bias for the defendent.