Question for my conservative friends here.

[Godboy]

Where you got it completely wrong is that the person with "legal custody" can determine who can have "physical custody". No different than a parent dropping their child off at daycare, thus granting them "physical custody"

But the person with "legal custody" determines who shall have "physical custody" and the National Archives with "legal custody" also took "physical custody" of all records.

To draw an analogy, Trump taking physical custody of his presidential records would have been no different than Trump taking physical custody of his daughter Tiffany Trump after the divorce.

Obamas records werent sent to NARA after HE left office. They sat in a furniture store for YEARS.

 

[miketx]

Person, needs to be agency or department.

No one yet, has produced any document or has had a witness state, that they refused President Trump, physical custody of said documents on the day of or even shortly after President Trump left office.

Dang, you sound like you're with trump everywhere he goes!

 

[Sixties Fan]

It's a disgusting quote from another poster. I put it out there for all to see, the same way the camps were documented so we will never forget.

I see. It was not clear to me. Thanks.

 

[elektra]

That's a case where two people shared legal custody.
In this case the National Archives had sole legal custody. And the posessor of legal custody gets to determine physical custody. Which the National Archives determined to be the National Archives.

And you do know, that there is no document or statement from the National Archives, establishing the intent to take physical custody of these documents, when the Government packed and shipped these boxes of documents for President Trump.

 

[cnm]

We dont try people who take documents. That precedent was set by Hillary Clinton very recently even. Why is Trump suddenly being charged for it?

Apparently you try people who won't return documents.

 

[Sixties Fan]

The good "Father O'blivion" is playing a game of gotcha with this thread, but refuses to acknowledge the obvious unequal and unfair application of the the law as pertaining to Trump v Biden.

Father is doing no such thing.

In Trump's case Jack Smith interviewed many Trump staff and lawyers and got photos, documents, emails, text to prove Trump's intent with the documents he should have returned, just as he returned the first 15 boxes in January of 2022.

WIth Biden, there are nothing but allegations, many coming from three years ago from Giuliani, where there is no evidence AT ALL to indict or do anything else with. There is no truth to it.


The Grand Jury from Florida indicted Trump based on evidence, nothing else.


It is up to the prosecutors to prove that Trump did what he did, took what he took when the trial starts.


All of it with a Jury of people who live in Florida.

 

[meaner gene]

Where you get this wrong, is that "legal custody", and "physical custody" are determined in Family Courts, under family law, determined by judges.

We are talking about presidential records, not children. The courts make the determination for presidential records, and that's what the indictment is all about.

 

[Godboy]

Apparently you try people who won't return documents.

Hillary wasnt tried when she didnt return the documents. In fact, she destroyed all the evidence.

 

[Godboy]

Father is doing no such thing.

In Trump's case Jack Smith interviewed many Trump staff and lawyers and got photos, documents, emails, text to prove Trump's intent with the documents he should have returned, just as he returned the first 15 boxes in January of 2022.

WIth Biden, there are nothing but allegations, many coming from three years ago from Giuliani, where there is no evidence AT ALL to indict or do anything else with. There is no truth to it.


The Grand Jury from Florida indicted Trump based on evidence, nothing else.


It is up to the prosecutors to prove that Trump did what he did, took what he took when the trial starts.


All of it with a Jury of people who live in Florida.

Youre doing the same thing as Father.

 

[meaner gene]

No one yet, has produced any document or has had a witness state, that they refused President Trump, physical custody of said documents on the day of or even shortly after President Trump left office.

The National Archives sent Trump a request for him to turn over Physical Custody of ALL presidential records in his possession. That was in early 2021.
Later the National Archives served Trump a subpoena for ALL presidential records in 2022.

That makes it clear that the National Archives wanted physical possession of the presidential records they had "legal custody" of.

 

[Godboy]

The National Archives sent Trump a request for him to turn over Physical Custody of ALL presidential records in his possession. That was in early 2021.
Later the National Archives served Trump a subpoena for ALL presidential records in 2022.

That makes it clear that the National Archives wanted physical possession of the presidential records they had "legal custody" of.

Yeah, but they didnt make that demand of Obama who had dozens of truckloads of his documents sent to a furniture store.

 

[cnm]

Hillary wasnt tried when she didnt return the documents. In fact, she destroyed all the evidence.

I can see I wasn't exact enough. My bad.

A years long inquiry by the State Department into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server found that while it increased the risk of compromising classified information, “there was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”​

​

The indictment against Mr. Trump, by contrast, accuses him of not only mishandling sensitive national security documents found at his Mar-a-Lago club, but also willfully obstructing the government’s efforts to retrieve them. He has been charged with 37 criminal counts related to issues including withholding national defense information and concealing possession of classified documents.​

Hillary Clinton’s Emails: A Nation Struggles to Unsubscribe (Published 2023)

As Donald Trump made history by becoming the first former president to face federal charges, many Republicans tried to change the subject by renewing an eight-year-old controversy.

www.nytimes.com

​

 

[meaner gene]

Hillary wasnt tried when she didnt return the documents. In fact, she destroyed all the evidence.

Hillary didn't have any "documents" as in physical objects. She was in possession of documents in alternative media format (e-mails). And her (technically her lawyers) destruction (DOD compliant erasure) of the e-mails, cleared her from 18 usc 1924.

 

[Mac-7]

I can see I wasn't exact enough. My bad.

A years long inquiry by the State Department into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server found that while it increased the risk of compromising classified information, “there was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”​

​

The indictment against Mr. Trump, by contrast, accuses him of not only mishandling sensitive national security documents found at his Mar-a-Lago club, but also willfully obstructing the government’s efforts to retrieve them. He has been charged with 37 criminal counts related to issues including withholding national defense information and concealing possession of classified documents.​

Hillary Clinton’s Emails: A Nation Struggles to Unsubscribe (Published 2023)

As Donald Trump made history by becoming the first former president to face federal charges, many Republicans tried to change the subject by renewing an eight-year-old controversy.

www.nytimes.com

​

So you pronounce hillary not guilty due to stupidity?

 

[bripat9643]

If Trump is found guilty in the documents case with Cannon presiding, will you agree the government proved its case and Trump deserves the punishment meted out?

Before the obvious question is asked, yes I will believe the government did not prove its case if he is acquitted with Cannon presiding..

No.

 

[cnm]

Yeah, but they didnt make that demand of Obama who had dozens of truckloads of his documents sent to a furniture store.

You guys just can't help yourselves.

When President Obama left office in 2017, NARA took physical and legal custody of the records of his administration in accordance with the Presidential Records Act. NARA made arrangements to move the roughly 30 million pages of paper Presidential records of the Obama administration to a federally acquired, modified, and secured temporary facility that NARA leased in Hoffman Estates, IL, which meets NARA’s requirements for records storage and security. NARA moved the records to Hoffman Estates because of the intention of President Obama to build a Presidential Library in the Chicago area.​

Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Presidential Records and the Presidential Records Act

Recent media reports have generated a large number of queries about Presidential records and the Presidential Records Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 2201-2209. The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration...

www.archives.gov

​

 

[bripat9643]

Hillary didn't have any "documents" as in physical objects. She was in possession of documents in alternative media format (e-mails). And her (technically her lawyers) destruction (DOD compliant erasure) of the e-mails, cleared her from 18 usc 1924.

Having electronic copies of classified documents is a crime, dumbass. Hillary was cleared of of nothing except having a conscience.

 

[cnm]

So you pronounce hillary not guilty due to stupidity?

Not my decision.

 

[cnm]

Having electronic copies of classified documents is a crime, dumbass.

How can one have copies if they are deleted?

 

[elektra]

I can see I wasn't exact enough. My bad.

A years long inquiry by the State Department into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server found that while it increased the risk of compromising classified information, “there was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”​

Hillary Clinton had a computer server, in her bathroom. That in fact is a crime and is persuasive evidence of deliberate mishandling of classified information.

The Espionage Act in no way applies to Trump and the documents he possessed.

If you like, feel free to tell us which law was broke, dont paraphrase the law for us, as you have already, simply give us the code, numbers, of the law.