The FBI only seized 102 documents in the Mar-a-Lago raid

[Skylar]

So in other words, you can't prove that they weren't declassified by Trump at some point in time.

You have no case.

Laughing.....Trump admits they weren't declassified. You simply refuse to look at the indictment.

But hey......you should Email Jack Smith and tell him you're going to ignore the evidence...and thus it doesn't exist. I'm sure he'll drop all charges.

 

[Skylar]

If Trump is lucky, he might even get to share a cell with Hillary, for all that mishandling of classified material she was found guilty of.

And when was Hillary found guilty of mishandling classified documents?

Because I'm pretty sure you're hallucinating again.

 

[Billiejeens]

If Trump is lucky, he might even get to share a cell with Hillary, for all that mishandling of classified material she was found guilty of.

Democrats are not subject to penalties for breaking US law.

That's just what we call a fact.

 

[iku]

So in other words, you can't prove that they weren't declassified by Trump at some point in time.

You have no case.

If you read the article, to declassify takes Executive orders and extensive consultation with executive branch agencies.
Do we have any records of this? If the answer is no, then you know the answer.
No offense, you really are ignorant.

 

[Skylar]

If you read the article, to declassify takes Executive orders and extensive consultation with executive branch agencies.
Do we have any records of this? If the answer is no, then you know the answer.
No offense, you really are ignorant.

You don't even need to go that far. Trump admitted, on tape, that he was in possession of classified docs.

If there was a blanket declassification order that 'automatically' declassified documents he took....that's impossible.

If Trump made up the 'blanket declassification order' to try and justify its crimes........then Trump's admission fits perfectly.

There's a reason that Trump's lawyers have NEVER argued Trump's 'automatic declassification order' in court.

Once again, Trump says one thing in public. And his lawyers argue another in court.

 

[konradv]

Seriously? After 50 years having taken countless secret documents with ABSOLUTELY NO AUTHORIZATION EVER to do so, Biden actually allowed the FBI to come and take them when they decided they wanted to get Trump on his LEGALLY HELD papers and didn't want no one else holding any Trump could use as a legal defense?

Never mind many were stored in an office OWNED BY THE RED CHINESE.

Never mind that normally, people go to jail for a year just for having ONE document.

THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE US CODE for basing the punishment on how much you cooperate once found guilty of illegally having them!!!

What you mention are technical violations vs Trump’s willful attempts to hide documents he knew very well he wasn’t allowed to possess. Sorry, what Biden did was nowhere near the same as Trump’s crimes.

 

[konradv]

He took them illegally.

If you rob a bank, you don’t get to just give the money back to avoid jail time!

Geez, you folks can’t really believe this , can you?

Then explain to me why Trump wasn’t indicted for any of the documents he returned before the Mar-a-Lago raid.

 

[toobfreak]

What you mention are technical violations

No such thing as "technical violations." US Code is quite specific and clear.

Trump’s willful attempts

Willful? You've nothing to base that on. You are stating INTENT with no evidence.

what Biden did was nowhere near the same as Trump’s crimes.

No, far worse, as Trump HAD CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO TAKE THEM in the first place. SENATOR and VP BIDEN HAD NONE. ZERO. ZIP. That supersedes all other considerations.

 

[Skylar]

Then explain to me why Trump wasn’t indicted for any of the documents he returned before the Mar-a-Lago raid.

That's kind of a head shot to the 'double standard' argument, isn't it

 

[konradv]

No such thing as "technical violations." US Code is quite specific and clear.


Willful? You've nothing to base that on. You are stating INTENT with no evidence.


No, far worse, as Trump HAD CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO TAKE THEM in the first place. SENATOR and VP BIDEN HAD NONE. ZERO. ZIP. That supersedes all other considerations.

He will have evert opportunity to tell that to the court, but I’ll wager that Jack Smith has a better grasp of the law than you or Trump.

 

[Skylar]

He will have evert opportunity to tell that to the court, but I’ll wager that Jack Smith has a better grasp of the law than you or Trump.

Yeah, but Freak is from the Judge Dredd school of pseudo-legal dipshittery, insisting that the law is bound to whatever he makes up.

It means that every time that courts follow the *actual* law rather than what Freak made up, he has to invent another conspiracy.

 

[Winco]

So in other words, you can't prove that they weren't declassified by Trump at some point in time.

That's ^^^^ NOT how it works simp.

Team tump has to prove they were declassified.
Pretty difficult when trump already admitted, on tape, that he didn't declassify the documents.

What are you smoking dude.
Are you smoking Nostra ?

 

[JGalt]

That's ^^^^ NOT how it works simp.

Team tump has to prove they were declassified.
Pretty difficult when trump already admitted, on tape, that he didn't declassify the documents.

What are you smoking dude.
Are you smoking Nostra ?

And he's already admitted on tape that he did declassify them. Trump was the Chief Executive Officer at the time so if he says "They've been declassified", they've been declassified.

Now you'd better get to work on your next big Trump "bombshell". This one's already starting to fizzle and sputter.

 

[HeyNorm]

Then explain to me why Trump wasn’t indicted for any of the documents he returned before the Mar-a-Lago raid.

 

[toobfreak]

He will have evert opportunity to tell that to the court, but I’ll wager that Jack Smith has a better grasp of the law than you or Trump.

I have no doubt of that, but just maybe Mr. Smith will learn the difference between an application of justice and the weaponization of the law against targeted citizens by the State.

 

[Skylar]

Then explain to me why Trump wasn’t indicted for any of the documents he returned before the Mar-a-Lago raid.

Actually, its conservatives that are demanding a double standard.

Trump wasn't charged for ONE of the documents he returned.

Yet they want Biden charged for EVERY document he returned.

 

[konradv]

I have no doubt of that, but just maybe Mr. Smith will learn the difference between an application of justice and the weaponization of the law against targeted citizens by the State.

Jack Smith isn’t under indictment. Targeting of American citizens won’t be a thing. This will only be about Trump and what he’s accused of. If he wants to bring up other issues, he’s going to have to sue.

 

[toobfreak]

Jack Smith isn’t under indictment.

That wasn't my point.

Targeting of American citizens won’t be a thing.

It already IS a thing. Are you blind?

This will only be about Trump and what he’s accused of.

For now.

 

[surada]

So he was indicted for having boxes with no classified documents?

All the documents belong to NARA including the top secret and classified documents.

 

[ReinyDays]

Your story is changing. You claimed the military tracks their every move, now you are saying they don't know where they are.

Figure out which side of the fence you want to play on and get back to me.

LIAR ... I said the military tracks every DOCUMENT ... foolish strawmaner ... page-counted and signed when it leaves an office, page-counted and signed for when it arrives ...

God know the hours, days and weeks I spend counting fucking key cards ... (all TS, nothing SCI) ...