Lawyer Who Lost Clinton “Socks Case” in 2012 Defends President Trump’s Actions (He Will Win!)

[MAGA Macho Man]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

 

[Rambunctious]

Equal treatment under the law... it is of the upmost importance to the constitution and the nation.... so many lawyers and justices don't follow that rule today and its destroying the people's faith in our system of justice... and if you libs think that's okay you are crazy...

 

[White 6]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Just a thought, but wouldn't Donny be better off with Lawyers known for the cases they won, not the cases they lost? Not that I care. Just sayin...

 

[MarathonMike]

Ah what does he know! He's just a lawyer who got whooped over the Presidential Records Act. Besides, Whoopie Goldberg and Joy Behar agree Trump is guilty.

 

[Rambunctious]

It wasn't all that long ago where if this prosecutor Jack Smith asshole came into a courtroom trying to prosecute a former president and candidate for office over documents would be disbarred.... and never heard from again...

 

[MAGA Macho Man]

It wasn't all that long ago where if this prosecutor Jack Smith asshole came into a courtroom trying to prosecute a former president and candidate for office over documents would be disbarred.... and never heard from again...

That much is true.

 

[excalibur]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

And the DOJ backed Clinton in that case.

In defending NARA, the Justice Department argued that NARA doesn’t have “a duty to engage in a never-ending search for potential presidential records” that weren’t provided to NARA by the president at the end of his term.

Nor, the department asserted, does the Presidential Records Act require NARA to appropriate potential presidential records forcibly. The government’s position was that Congress had decided that the president and the president alone decides what is a presidential record and what isn’t. He may take with him whatever records he chooses at the end of his term.

 

[Cougarbear]

Equal treatment under the law... it is of the upmost importance to the constitution and the nation.... so many lawyers and justices don't follow that rule today and its destroying the people's faith in our system of justice... and if you libs think that's okay you are crazy...

The reason they think it's okay is because they have taken on the communist way of doing politics. Their actions are following Putin and XI. Jail their political opponents. They don't care.

 

[BackAgain]

Has anyone yet figured out what the thread headline has to do with the OP?

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Sock drawer ruling....

Plaintiff Judicial Watch, Inc. brings this action against defendant National Archives and Records Administration (“NARA”) under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 5 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. Plaintiff asks the Court to declare audiotapes created by former President William Jefferson Clinton and historian Taylor Branch during the Clinton administration to be “Presidential records” under the Presidential Records Act (“PRA”), 44 U.S.C. § 2203(f), and to order defendant “to assume custody and control” of them and deposit them in the Clinton Presidential Library. Plaintiff *290 contends that defendant has acted arbitrarily and capriciously under the APA by failing to exercise control over the audiotapes and by not making them available in response to a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request. Defendant has moved to dismiss [Dkt. # 6] under Fed.R.Civ.P.12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff's claim is not redressable. NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as “Presidential records,” NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them. In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff's alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff's characterization of the materials. Since plaintiff is completely unable to identify anything the Court could order the agency to do that the agency has any power, much less, a mandatory duty, to do, the case must be dismissed.

https://tmsnrt.rs/3N6L4xQ

Plaintiff contends that its factual allegations about the nature and substance of the audiotapes clearly establishes them to be Presidential records, regardless of how they were treated by President Clinton. Pl.'s Opp. at 12–13. The Court is not so sure. 9 But even if the Court were inclined to agree with plaintiff's reassessment of President Clinton's decision, it would not alter the conclusion that the injury cannot be redressed: the PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President.

 

[dudmuck]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Who is he? He is Socks, a black-and-white stray cat who reportedly jumped into the arms of Chelsea Clinton as she was leaving her piano teacher’s home in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1991.
Although he had freely roamed the property of the governor’s mansion, Socks was mostly confined to the inside of the White House for safety’s sake. He was a frequent visitor to the Oval Office, however, where he enjoyed sitting on the president’s shoulders.
Hillary Clinton often took Socks along with her to visit children or senior citizens in local hospitals and to other events in Washington, D.C.
He traveled in style in his own carrying case that was emblazoned with the presidential seal. At the events, he would sit on the first lady’s lap, seeming to enjoy the attention

 

[kyzr]

1. Trump is risking dying in prison based on Fitton's theory that the Clinton sock drawer tapes applies to the classified material he took to MAL.

2. Did NARA send the FBI to MAL to sieze Trump's property, or did a court? Were Trump's constitutional rights trampled on?
The Court will grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) because plaintiff's claim is not redressable. NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as “Presidential records,” NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right, duty, or means to seize control of them. In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff's alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff's characterization of the materials. Since plaintiff is completely unable to identify anything the Court could order the agency to do that the agency has any power, much less, a mandatory duty, to do, the case must be dismissed.

3. Trump is playing with fire, very dumb idea.

 

[SaxonJackson]

Just a thought, but wouldn't Donny be better off with Lawyers known for the cases they won, not the cases they lost? Not that I care. Just sayin...

Hindsight is 20/20. Learning from past mistakes is sometimes better than learning from our successes. A wise man will learn from both.

 

[mak2]

Equal treatment under the law... it is of the upmost importance to the constitution and the nation.... so many lawyers and justices don't follow that rule today and its destroying the people's faith in our system of justice... and if you libs think that's okay you are crazy...

There are probably 100's of thousands unsolved murders in the US right now. So the next murder the police nab, should we just let him go? Cause you now, lots of people do not get prosecuted.

 

[Rambunctious]

There are probably 100's of thousands unsolved murders in the US right now. So the next murder the police nab, should we just let him go? Cause you now, lots of people do not get prosecuted.

Drugs are a very bad thing....

 

[Billo_Really]

This guy destroys the media's narrative. Trump will win this case.

Lawyer Who Lost Clinton "Socks Case" in 2012 Defends President Trump's Actions | The Gateway Pundit | by Brian Lupo

President Trump’s 14th Amendment rights are being trampled on. No, we’re not talking about the “insurrection” clause that the highly-partisan “Jan 6 Committee” of Pelosi’s 116th Congress likes to tout as an inhibition against President Trump being able to seek re-election, even though no Jan 6...

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Will you dumbass Trumpy's stop spewing this bullshit Presidential Records Act nonsense? It does not allow an ex-President to hold on to classified military documents. Jesus ******* Christ! Catch the clue, assholes, Trump is a piece of shit! And a vote for Trump, is a vote against the United States.

 

[mak2]

Will you dumbass Trumpy's stop spewing this bullshit Presidential Records Act nonsense? It does not allow an ex-President to hold on to classified military documents. Jesus ******* Christ! Catch the clue, assholes, Trump is a piece of shit! And a vote for Trump, is a vote against the United States.

Perhaps not how I would have put it, but your point is correct.

 

[Billo_Really]

Perhaps not how I would have put it, but your point is correct.

I know, I am a little rough around the edges.