Are you mistaking Trump's present civil action for a hypothetical future criminal indictment? I have no idea if he's committed a crime or not. I'm not an expert the American criminal code but plenty who are think he's in a sticky spot. The comparative silence from the usual people who speak publicly in his defence is a further sign of that. Currently the FBI only think they have probable cause he committed a crime, which is clearly short of beyond reasonable doubt. Personally, I don't think prosecuting him makes much sense and I've already said I think it would be good for America if Biden put an end to this by pardoning Trump.
Sarah Palin loses Alaska special election to Democrat Mary Peltola Wasn't Palin, pretty much, 'anointed' to take over from Doug Young?
Biden waivered Trump's executive privileges without a process. That was unprecedented. Next Republican President can do the same with Biden and Obama and the FBI can pop around to fish for documents.
Excellent. So you accept there is no reason for Trump to prove anything regarding the documents, because all he is doing is maintaining they are his to keep. So why did you even bring up classification of the documents in the first place? Oh yes. Because you were conflating the two cases, and are now complaining because I am responding to you doing so.
Bloody hell, I forgot what hard work responding to you can be. The classified documents thing is mainly a political issue. That's the lens I'm talking about it through. I've said all along I'm not reaching a view on whether it's criminal. His alleged failure to follow the rules and look after them may or may not be a criminal offence but it certainly shows he's not fit to govern. And a massive hypocrite to boot. That's what I (and many many other people here and elsewhere) are getting at. No amount of legal filings can make that go away.
Finally all you low information libtard woke cucks can learn the truth. The best ever film ever made ever will finally be dropping. Starring Laurence "Yes He does 'That Walk' In This Too" Fox:
Trump admits he had the documents as long people understand that he didn't spread them out on the floor, as shown in the FBI photo. Obviously people thinking that he is messy is a step too far....
I can't speak for others but I took it as read they'd been laid out for the purposes of photographing them.
You should go back and read your posts then, and imagine what impression they might give a neutral observer. Even the post above treats Trump guilty by unproven claim (not fit to govern). It certainly shows nothing at the moment, and, given the FBI's dreadful history of literally making up s**t about him (Russia, PeePee, Strzyk, etc.) I don't see why they should be trusted on this. Their very behaviour in the raid has placed a question mark over their actions and findings, even making a window display of highest secrecy documents to photograph, yes photograph top secret documents, and then publish on the web to show how irresponsible Trump is. I hope the officers involved all have their homes raided to ensure none of Melania's underware has found its way into their trophy rooms. Knowing that Dems don't give a damn about Joe Biden's involvement in Hunter's Chinese, Ukrainian and Russian business deals, including open boasting about bribery to remove a state official who was investigating a company Hunter was working for, makes it easy to dismiss your claims as questionable. If this thing goes the same way as all the other "Gotcha Trump" moments, he has nothing to worry about. You are already making the excuses. You don't think he'll be indicted, but still, the unproven accusations are so egregious that he should never be allowed to run for office again. Pathetic. They need to indict him. They need to push this as far as they can, or they will/should not be taken seriously again. If we get to eight years and nothing sticks to him, he might just make 47.
No. She had destroyed all records of them and trashed the servers on which they existed, after they had been hacked by a foreign power. The FBI confirmed it, but decided "no reasonable prosecuter" would pursue the case. So not just Trumpian rumour. That's OK for you though? The Dems were outraged when an unverified picture of a piece of paper being flushed down a toilet, allegedly in the White House, was given as proof of Trump's unfitness for office a few weeks back. And no one was surprised. Because that is how open a secret their TDS has become. Makes no odds to me, but I do wonder what you guys think when you look yourselves in the mirror.
So it turns out that the brains Trust on here doesn't understand that management of the documents is a key issue regarding the case against Trump. And none of you will even be slightly embarrassed by that. Note. Just to point out to UEA that I am talking about the case against Trump here, which should save a few posts.
Just a joke about spreading digital information out on a floor. Think about it, doesn’t make sense does it? What whimsy, how we laugh.
Of course they were. Any sane person would have realised that. Trump would have been better off not even referencing it. He has now admitted that these documents were in his possession and he knew about them, despite his lawyers denying he still had classified documents after the initial documents were recovered in January. And Trump himself saying in Spring 2022 that he had returned all documents and telling his lawyers he didn't want to discuss it anymore. Apparently his passports were also found in the same location which is why they were initially taken as evidence that Trump was aware that these documents were still in his possession. Any claim that he didn't know that the documents were there is now totally null and void. That means he lied when he said he didn't have anymore documents or he was being deliberately obstructive...or both.
Another to the ever growing list of lies told by Trump. With the sheer amount of nonsense he spouts it's amazing anyone actually believes anything he says.
I don't have massive knowledge of the US legal system, but is there a possibility that any of Trump's various legal "difficulties" could ultimately end up in the Supreme Court? If so, that could result in an existential crisis for the American justice system.....
This is actually a bigger event than people realise. Not only did Palin lose a seat that has been Republican since 1973, but the Democrat won in a ranked choice ballot that included two GOP candidates. Peltola ran off two GOP candidates in a seat the GOP have held for nearly five decades.
It would only end up in the Supreme court under appeal. I would encourage the DOJ to take him to court to stop the BS grand standing. If he is guilty of something, prosecute him, stop using this persecution for political gain. But even UEA seems to think that won't happen. The US is a joke right nos, with both sides contributing.
Thank heavans someone is awake in this case, unlike those on this forum that think the DOJ is the judge and juror. The Judge addressed the DOJ's assertion that the documents are Classified by responding that they are marked classified, but are not necessarily classified. Just a little reminder that there are a few things the DOJ needs to prove due to that little thing called a presumption of innocence. I hope that doesn't pour too much cold water over Democrat's frantic hard ons, or deflate the 'ardour' of those on this forum. Is there a clue there as to why the Dems may not indict Trump? Get on with it. Take him to the cleaners. If he has done something, send him down.
Yes. But it's a political forum and your comment gave me the opportunity to make an ironic joke about what Dems think is whimsy compared to what they think is criminal. I'm not sure that you were funnier than I was. I thought the bit about the evidence for Trump toileting documents was hilarious. Had me flushed anyway. Besides, most men know that digital data on the internet can lead to plenty of 'information' being spread out on the floor.
And just a little reminder in turn that there's no guilt or innocence at stake in the current legal proceedings and as Trump is the one bringing the DOJ to court it doesn't need to prove anything. The Judge also threw a few pointed questions to Trump's legal team too, as typically happens in a hearing of that sort. She'd already tipped her hand a few days ago of course, so the outcome is pretty inevitable, but whether anything she orders will survive an appeal will certainly be interesting to see. Basically the judge is being asked to go so far off the reservation I expect this will end up before the Supreme Court in time, as there's almost no existing law that supports Trump's position.
Excellent. So we can agree that everything on here so far has been speculative BS of no consequence, as I have been attempting to point out and highlight all along. Though I would suggest that as Trump is asking for the documents back, there may be some expectation that the DOJ will have to prove he has no right to them. You know. Just making assumptions.
Do you also agree that if the Judge is going to allow the DOJ to keep the documents, they will have to PROVE that the documents remain classified, and not the privileged possession of the President? Just like the Content of Clinton’s sock drawer.
Trump promises to pardon Capitol rioters and says he is financially supporting some of them. At least one of those statements I don’t believe. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/01/donald-trump-pardons-january-6-us-capitol-attack
Funny. But that headline is actually a straight up lie, and you can prove it to yourself by watching the interview. I saw a 30 second clip. I didn't read the article itself. But I will bet the Grauniad even quote the words that prove themselves liars. Enjoy your spoonfed dollops of BS. They are the reward for blind faith and embracing TDS.
Awww. Come on UEA. You have been very vociferous about the DOJ not having to justify themselves here or prove their claims, the least you could do is point out where I got it wrong. Or acknowledge that they do have some burden of proof, if they are to retain the documents.
I don’t agree with that, no. And I hope you got some sleep last night given your evident and bizarre impatience for that answer. Oh and I'm off to Rotherham in a bit so doubt I'll be back in this section today, so no need to waste your time on long replies or more 'aww come on UEA' type stuff. Up the 'orns!
Hope you enjoyed the game. Sorry for the impatience. You had already replied without comment to the post in which I first raised the point. I would be interested to know, given Trump is asking for the documents back, why you believe the DOJ won't have to make some representation to confirm that the documents are classified. Frankly, it would appear to be law 101 that if one person claims something, and the other side chooses not to make their case, that by default claimant would have their case upheld. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you are having another of your "EU had the right to interfere in the referendum" moments. Which is a little unfair, given the accusations you keep making about me being unreasonable. But then, I forgot how much hard work it is having a discussion with you. But as people can see, it is not me that is hiding from anything, or saying things I am not prepared to back up. As you know. If you treat me with respect, you will get respect back. That is not happening here with you.
Mad Twitter thread where US folk claim ‘the left’ (not publishers of dictionaries for example) have changed the meaning of the word ‘fascist’ in dictionaries to mean the far right. Because it’s never had that connotation has it? https://twitter.com/slewza/status/1565401414490357760?s=21&t=wB24vOVyvFk3tpclDbjLFw
