# No Special Master As DOJ Drops Bombshell 40 Page Ruling Obstruction By Trump Team



## skews13

Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.


The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.









						Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
					

In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.




					apple.news


----------



## rightwinger

Maybe they should have checked Trumps office before they declared they had no classified information


----------



## skews13

rightwinger said:


> Maybe they should have checked Trumps office before they declared they had no classified information



To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.

One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.

I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?


----------



## Seymour Flops

They've got him this time, alright!


----------



## rightwinger

skews13 said:


> To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.
> 
> One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.
> 
> I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?


Hope she had Top Secret Clearance


----------



## Seymour Flops

skews13 said:


> Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing.


A "container?"

Like a Tupperware container?

Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"

It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.


----------



## Death Angel

And then he destroyed 30,000 emails!


----------



## 1srelluc

Death Angel said:


> And then he destroyed 30,000 emails!


With a cloth!


----------



## petro




----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.


If it was “a safe” they would have said safe


----------



## skews13

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.



One of the important details is that these documents were found not in the storage room... but in a desk in Donald Trump's office,"


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.



According to Trump his safe was empty so that could not be it.


----------



## citygator

Nothing was in the safe. In fact the confidential files were poorly secured. 

But it’s ok because they were: stored safely, not really there, planted, and oh yea, declassified when Trump wiggled his nose like Elizabeth Montgomery in Bewitched.


----------



## shockedcanadian

I'm not a legal expert, but I still don't understand why they would reject a Special Master to catalog what has been taken, regardless of Trumps actions.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> They've got him this time, alright!



Does it not bother you even a tiny bit that he had classified documents just laying around his house? 

Even if it was not illegal, is is still the right thing to do?


----------



## Golfing Gator

shockedcanadian said:


> I'm not a legal expert, but I still don't understand why they would reject a Special Master to catalog what has been taken, regardless of Trumps actions.



Because they have already gone though the documents, a Special Master now would really serve no purpose.   It is nothing but a delaying action by Trump, something he is rather well known for


----------



## occupied

shockedcanadian said:


> I'm not a legal expert, but I still don't understand why they would reject a Special Master to catalog what has been taken, regardless of Trumps actions.


I'm just guessing here but the few who know all the details of this case are not inclined to give him any special favors because Russian agents have already infiltrated Mar-a-lago and obtained copies of all of it.


----------



## Marener

This filing refutes so much of the right wing narrative about this whole fiasco. 

When Jay Bratt went down to the storage locker on June 3rd, he was forbidden from looking through any of the boxes. 

So whoever says that Trump was cooperating and willing to give them whatever they want can go fuck themselves.


----------



## candycorn

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


The Framed TIME magazine cover of the blob is the real find.  What an insecure loser.


----------



## Cellblock2429

skews13 said:


> To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.
> 
> One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.
> 
> I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?


/----/ OK, Trump just strolled into the vault when the guards were on a potty break. and grabbed up some classified documents and stuffed them into his pants. Yeah, sure Spanky.


----------



## Golfing Gator

candycorn said:


> The Framed TIME magazine cover of the blob is the real find.  What an insecure loser.



You know they added that to the picture on purpose just to poke at Trump!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ OK, Trump just strolled into the vault when the guards were on a potty break. and grabbed up some classified documents and stuffed them into his pants. Yeah, sure Spanky.



What vault?  There was not vault at MLG and there were not guards watching the classified documents.


----------



## Marener

Cellblock2429 said:


> /----/ OK, Trump just strolled into the vault when the guards were on a potty break. and grabbed up some classified documents and stuffed them into his pants. Yeah, sure Spanky.


Nope. Trump was often briefed with the assistance of classified documents. Reports indicate he would often grab some of them and retain them. This comes from a named source as well, John Bolton, who was present for at least some of these briefings. 

It seems he developed a little cache of these documents that he took with him on his way out. 









						‘It worried people all the time': How Trump’s handling of secret documents led to the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago search
					

Trump’s cavalier approach to sensitive documents, and his lack of preparation to depart the White House, landed him in an FBI investigation, sources say.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## Moonglow

Trump insisted he sign a bill for harder sentencing for people who mishandle secret papers of the govt.


----------



## skews13

Trump insisted he sign a bill for harder sentencing for people who mishandle secret papers of the govt.

That is a problem for him isn’t it?


----------



## Maxdeath

I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents. 
The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

citygator said:


> Nothing was in the safe. In fact the confidential files were poorly secured.
> 
> But it’s ok because they were: stored safely, not really there, planted, and oh yea, declassified when Trump wiggled his nose like Elizabeth Montgomery in Bewitched.


God, you're cute when you're being all pop-cultish.


----------



## citygator

OhPleaseJustQuit said:


> God, you're cute when you're being all pop-cultish.


Was hard finding a reference old enough for this board to get but I watch Bewitched reruns in the late 80’s in the morning before school.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Maxdeath said:


> I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing



I love how many on the right were all it an utter disgrace for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an perfectly fine for Trump to have classified documents.
The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.

And what do you know? They found more.




You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Marener said:


> Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.
> 
> And what do you know? They found more.
> 
> 
> You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.



Hillary destroyed/wiped her servers so that we could never know what was on them.

What she did is just as wrong as what Trump has done. 

To dismiss one and not the other removes your credibility.


----------



## Oddball

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


You fucking ignoramus  fruitcakes do realize that everything that becomes declassified is still "marked" with its original classification, right?


----------



## skews13

Marener said:


> Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.
> 
> And what do you know? They found more.
> View attachment 689541
> 
> You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.



There is no Hillary did it Defense. That’s an illusion that only exists in their minds.

There is no privilege Defense either. Trump has no privilege of any kind. He’s just another guy on the street that broke the law.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.
> 
> And what do you know? They found more.
> View attachment 689541
> 
> You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.


Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors, her documents were hacked and stolen by the Chicoms and Russians, among others.

Nope, nothing like it at all....Not even close.


----------



## citygator

Oddball said:


> Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors, her documents were hacked and stolen by the Chicoms and Russians, among others.
> 
> Nope, nothing like it at all....Not even close.


Where is the picture of piles of top secret documents thrown on the floor at Hilary’s house?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Oddball said:


> You fucking ignoramus fruitcakes do realize that everything that becomes declassified is still "marked" with its classification, right?



Damn, are you really this fucking stupid? 

Do you really think the do not indicate in the document that it is no longer classified?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Oddball said:


> Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors



But they were not, thus the problem.


----------



## theHawk

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


And yet they still can’t prove any of that material is classified. President Trump declassified everything be took.  Old cover sheets don’t make a document classified.


----------



## Marener

skews13 said:


> There is no Hillary did it Defense. That’s an illusion that only exists in their minds.
> 
> There is no privilege Defense either. Trump has no privilege of any kind. He’s just another guy on the street that broke the law.


Trump is claiming executive privilege from the executive branch. It's mind bogglingly stupid.


----------



## citygator

theHawk said:


> And yet they still can’t prove any of that material is classified. President Trump declassified everything be took.  Old cover sheets don’t make a document classified.


If Trump shot someone on 5th avenue and told you that she died of a heart attack before the bullet got to her you’d believe it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

theHawk said:


> President Trump declassified everything be took.



Can anyone prove this?


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors, her documents were hacked and stolen by the Chicoms and Russians, among others.
> 
> Nope, nothing like it at all....Not even close.


The documents in Trump's basement were no more secure than Clinton's emails. 

No evidence exists that either were compromised, but that's really not the point. 

Trump had no authorization to store classified information in his house.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> The documents in Trump's basement were no more secure than Clinton's emails.


Horseshit.


Marener said:


> No evidence exists that either were compromised, but that's really not the point.


More horseshit.....There's ample evidence the servers were hacked.


Marener said:


> Trump had no authorization to store classified information in his house.


Again, everything declassified is still "marked" with its original classification...Is comprehension of the English language that difficult?


----------



## Oddball

citygator said:


> Where is the picture of piles of top secret documents thrown on the floor at Hilary’s house?


Don't  need them....Comey told us all about it.


----------



## two_iron

It's too bad President Trump didn't know someone that could have declassified those documents.

Ya know, I think the shit-eating rodents got him this time. Something about the 3,612th time... I was dreading it.

YOU.STUPID.FUCKING.SHEEP*™*

DJT is playing 4D chess while you slimy fucks are playing "wrong hole!" with each other. Enjoy the game.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

In a related development, the Department of foxes just released a bombshell 40-page ruling on the perplexing mystery regarding the missing chickens.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> Horseshit.
> 
> More horseshit.....There's ample evidence the servers were hacked.
> 
> Again everything declassified is still "marked" with its original classification...Is comprehension of the English language that difficult?


There's no evidence that the server was hacked. 









						FBI: No evidence Clinton server hacked despite Trump tweet
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI said Wednesday that it has no evidence Hillary Clinton's private email server was compromised even though President Donald Trump tweeted a news report that alleged the Chinese had hacked it. Trump tweeted Tuesday evening about a report in the conservative Daily Caller...




					apnews.com
				




Look, it makes no sense to say that Trump had his documents secure but he also had them declassified.

If they're declassified, then the information is now publicly available, meaning that Trump has opened the door to anyone getting to see them without regard to protecting national security. So it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether they were locked up with secret service or whatever. If they're declassified, they're not secrets anymore.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Does it not bother you even a tiny bit that he had classified documents just laying around his house?
> 
> Even if it was not illegal, is is still the right thing to do?


They were declassified and the FBI had approved the storage already.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> There's no evidence that the server was hacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI: No evidence Clinton server hacked despite Trump tweet
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI said Wednesday that it has no evidence Hillary Clinton's private email server was compromised even though President Donald Trump tweeted a news report that alleged the Chinese had hacked it. Trump tweeted Tuesday evening about a report in the conservative Daily Caller...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, it makes no sense to say that Trump had his documents secure but he also had them declassified.
> 
> If they're declassified, then the information is now publicly available, meaning that Trump has opened the door to anyone getting to see them without regard to protecting national security. So it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether they were locked up with secret service or whatever. If they're declassified, they're not secrets anymore.


Trump declassified the documents themselves. Declassified documents can still have sensitive information. The FBI approved the way Trump was storing them and made suggestions for improvements that were followed.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> They were declassified and the FBI had approved the storage already.



No, they really were not.  If they were then the FBI would not have needed to approve the storage.

And they were not being stored where the FBI approved them to be stored, which is why they searched the house.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Trump declassified the documents themselves



And you have some evidence of this?


----------



## Maxdeath

Golfing Gator said:


> I love how many on the right were all it an utter disgrace for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an perfectly fine for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


Funny thing about me. I believe in equal use of the law.
If John Doe spends jail time for a DUI then Pelosi should also.
At the time I advocated for Hillary to be punished for her handling of classified material. And had the FBI done so then I would be arguing for Trump to be punished in the same fashion. But the FBI said no. So I now argue that Trump should be treated the same. Even though he held a higher office. 
unlike you I believe inequal justice. Not looking at who I like or dislike.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> They were declassified and the FBI had approved the storage already.


They did no such thing.

The FBI was not allowed to inspect any boxes in the storage locker. The FBI said lock this up and don't touch it. It's preserving evidence, not approving their storage.


----------



## Oddball

two_iron said:


> It's too bad President Trump didn't know someone that could have declassified those documents.
> 
> Ya know, I think the shit-eating rodents got him this time. Something about the 3,612th time... I was dreading it.
> 
> YOU.STUPID.FUCKING.SHEEP*™*
> 
> DJT is playing 4D chess while you slimy fucks are playing "wrong hole!" with each other. Enjoy the game.


No....SERIOUSLY!.....They're _*finally*_  going to kick the football this time!


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> There's no evidence that the server was hacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI: No evidence Clinton server hacked despite Trump tweet
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI said Wednesday that it has no evidence Hillary Clinton's private email server was compromised even though President Donald Trump tweeted a news report that alleged the Chinese had hacked it. Trump tweeted Tuesday evening about a report in the conservative Daily Caller...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, it makes no sense to say that Trump had his documents secure but he also had them declassified.
> 
> If they're declassified, then the information is now publicly available, meaning that Trump has opened the door to anyone getting to see them without regard to protecting national security. So it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether they were locked up with secret service or whatever. If they're declassified, they're not secrets anymore.


You believe the AP.....ROFLMFAO!


----------



## Golfing Gator

Maxdeath said:


> Funny thing about me. I believe in equal use of the law.
> If John Doe spends jail time for a DUI then Pelosi should also.
> At the time I advocated for Hillary to be punished for her handling of classified material. And had the FBI done so then I would be arguing for Trump to be punished in the same fashion. But the FBI said no. So I now argue that Trump should be treated the same. Even though he held a higher office.
> unlike you I believe inequal justice. Not looking at who I like or dislike.



I too agree Hillary should be in jail for what she did, but I disagree that because she did not nobody else can ever be punished.

You are like the guy after a cop pulls them over that points to a different car and says "they were speeding too, why did you stop me?"


----------



## Maxdeath

Marener said:


> Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.
> 
> And what do you know? They found more.
> View attachment 689541
> 
> You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.


Unlike you I do not make excuses for anyone. Though I do have to ask did Hillary not claim that she had no classified emails? Did the FBI not find she did? Did she not have 30,000 emails removed that were under subpoena? Do you have any proof that Trump destroyed any documents?
At the time I argued that Hillary should have been prosecuted. Had she been I would be arguing that Trump should be. But since the FBI gave her a pass under the idea of equal justice they should do the same to Trump. He even held a higher office


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> You believe the AP.....ROFLMFAO!


You can whine about the server all you want. If you are worried that Clinton risked national security by having her server, why don't you care that Trump did more than risk national security by DECLASSIFYING tons of national security documents?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> No, they really were not.  If they were then the FBI would not have needed to approve the storage.
> 
> And they were not being stored where the FBI approved them to be stored, which is why they searched the house.


You're just parroting lies at this point. The FBI has known the documents were there since Trump left office and they've inspected the storage several times.

You demean yourself when you pretend you don't know why the Democratic activistsvrunning the DOJ did this right before an election.


----------



## Maxdeath

Golfing Gator said:


> I too agree Hillary should be in jail for what she did, but I disagree that because she did not nobody else can ever be punished.
> 
> You are like the guy after a cop pulls them over that points to a different car and says "they were speeding too, why did you stop me?"


No you are just trying to deflect. Look up the word justic.


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> Unlike you I do not make excuses for anyone. Though I do have to ask did Hillary not claim that she had no classified emails? Did the FBI not find she did? Did she not have 30,000 emails removed that were under subpoena? Do you have any proof that Trump destroyed any documents?
> At the time I argued that Hillary should have been prosecuted. Had she been I would be arguing that Trump should be. But since the FBI gave her a pass under the idea of equal justice they should do the same to Trump. He even held a higher office


Nothing on Clinton's server was marked classified. They were emails her and her staff were writing back and forth. Only when the emails went to a lawyer, did the government decide they should be classified. 

She did not have 30,000 emails removed under subpoena. One of her staff members deleted the emails after the subpoena. The staff member told the DoJ that they were not instructed to delete the emails after the subpoena. Clinton complied with the subpoena. 

Trump cannot claim that he didn't know the documents were classified. They have massive red lettering saying so.

Trump cannot claim he complied with the subpoena. The FBI found classified documents in his freaking desk. 

There are very important differences. Equal justice only applies to equal circumstances. That just doesn't exist here.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Maxdeath said:


> No you are just trying to deflect. Look up the word justic.



Nope, I been 100% consistent on both Hillary and Trump.

And, I cannot find that word in my dictionary.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> You can whine about the server all you want. If you are worried that Clinton risked national security by having her server, why don't you care that Trump did more than risk national security by DECLASSIFYING tons of national security documents?


Fucking dope....









						FBI: An Account on Clinton’s Private Email Server Was Hacked
					

An unidentified hacker compromised the email of a Bill Clinton staffer.




					foreignpolicy.com
				












						FBI Hints That Hillary Clinton’s Private Server Got Hacked
					

Whatever secrets Hillary Clinton had on her email system, they’re now possibly in the hands of hackers, FBI director Jim Comey said in an extraordinary press conference.



					www.thedailybeast.com
				












						Hacker ‘Guccifer’: I Got Inside Hillary Clinton’s Server
					

The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton’s private email address is making a bombshell new claim -- that he also gained access to the for




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Y
> 
> You demean yourself when you pretend you don't know why the Democratic activistsvrunning the DOJ did this right before an election.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.



Idiot. 









						Eric Trump says safe breached by FBI in Mar-a-Lago search was empty
					

Eric Trump said his father, Donald Trump, had nothing in a safe they claim the FBI breached as part of a raid of the former president's Mar-a-Largo resort on Monday.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com


----------



## Maxdeath

Golfing Gator said:


> Nope, I been 100% consistent on both Hillary and Trump.
> 
> And, I cannot find that word in my dictionary.


No you are advocating for Trump to be treated differently. But that is your problem not mine. 
Lol. Funny. But then you never really had much.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> Fucking dope....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI: An Account on Clinton’s Private Email Server Was Hacked
> 
> 
> An unidentified hacker compromised the email of a Bill Clinton staffer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> foreignpolicy.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI Hints That Hillary Clinton’s Private Server Got Hacked
> 
> 
> Whatever secrets Hillary Clinton had on her email system, they’re now possibly in the hands of hackers, FBI director Jim Comey said in an extraordinary press conference.
> 
> 
> 
> www.thedailybeast.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hacker ‘Guccifer’: I Got Inside Hillary Clinton’s Server
> 
> 
> The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton’s private email address is making a bombshell new claim -- that he also gained access to the for
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com


First link was a break into an account that had nothing to do with any government employee.

Second link say that the FBI "hints" but specifically says there's no evidence it was hacked.

Third link is from a hacker who claimed he got in but had ZERO evidence to support it.

Strike three loser. 

You're also trying to avoid the fact that declassifying tons of classified national security information is way more damaging that Clinton's server which has no evidence of being hacked.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Maxdeath said:


> No you are advocating for Trump to be treated differently. But that is your problem not mine.
> Lol. Funny. But then you never really had much.



No, I am advocating for the law to be followed.  You do not want it to be followed because it was not the last time I should have been.

That is a childish position to hold.


----------



## Maxdeath

Marener said:


> Nothing on Clinton's server was marked classified. They were emails her and her staff were writing back and forth. Only when the emails went to a lawyer, did the government decide they should be classified.
> 
> She did not have 30,000 emails removed under subpoena. One of her staff members deleted the emails after the subpoena. The staff member told the DoJ that they were not instructed to delete the emails after the subpoena. Clinton complied with the subpoena.
> 
> Trump cannot claim that he didn't know the documents were classified. They have massive red lettering saying so.
> 
> Trump cannot claim he complied with the subpoena. The FBI found classified documents in his freaking desk.
> 
> There are very important differences. Equal justice only applies to equal circumstances. That just doesn't exist here.


First off it was not a staff member that deleted them it was a person that was hired to do so. 
they found emails on Werner’s computer sent to her aid that were not on the server. 
They were not suddenly listed as classified they were classified when they were sent. 
But thank you for playing.


----------



## Maxdeath

Golfing Gator said:


> No, I am advocating for the law to be followed.  You do not want it to be followed because it was not the last time I should have been.
> 
> That is a childish position to hold.


You are making less sense.


----------



## Faun

Maxdeath said:


> I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


----------



## Golfing Gator

Maxdeath said:


> You are making less sense.



Of course I am, I am not worshiping your god along with you.

Your argument is childish, "well that person did not get charged so we cannot charge anyone ever again"


----------



## Faun

Oddball said:


> You fucking ignoramus  fruitcakes do realize that everything that becomes declassified is still "marked" with its original classification, right?
> 
> View attachment 689542



Yes, along with the marking of (U) or unclassified.


----------



## Faun

Oddball said:


> Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors, her documents were hacked and stolen by the Chicoms and Russians, among others.
> 
> Nope, nothing like it at all....Not even close.



Her server was not hacked.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.


----------



## John09

Seymour Flops said:


> You're just parroting lies at this point. The FBI has known the documents were there since Trump left office and they've inspected the storage several times.


When the FBI went to Mar-a-Lago in June, his lawyer did not allow the FBI to open boxes that they wanted to, and signed a document claiming no other classified documents were left there.


----------



## John09

Faun said:


> Yes, along with the marking of (U) or unclassified.


And the documents did not have the Confidential etc. headers that one sees so conspicuously in the pic of documents found at MAL by the FBI.


----------



## skews13

The


Oddball said:


> Don't  need them....Comey told us all about it.


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> First off it was not a staff member that deleted them it was a person that was hired to do so.
> they found emails on Werner’s computer sent to her aid that were not on the server.
> They were not suddenly listed as classified they were classified when they were sent.
> But thank you for playing.


Yes. A staff member. It was the staff member who was paid to maintain the server. 

Yes, they were told to delete the server but it was way before the subpoena and after Clinton’s lawyer searched for her emails. 

Yes, some work emails were deleted. It’s not unusual that sometimes people delete emails. I’m under no illusion that some presidential records were likewise destroyed during the transition. 

Classified information doesn’t magically generate classified markings. A lawyer looked at them later and said they were classified. When Clinton sent them, there was no indication they were actually classified. 

You can’t say Clinton didn’t comply with the subpoena. The facts don’t back this up. 

There are massive differences here.


----------



## postman

Oddball said:


> You fucking ignoramus  fruitcakes do realize that everything that becomes declassified is still "marked" with its original classification, right?



Yes and No.  the original classification is crossed out, and the new classification or declassification is stamped next to it, along with the authority under which the change was made.


----------



## jbrownson0831

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Your apple news has a worm in it.


----------



## Oddball

Faun said:


> Her server was not hacked.
> 
> Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.


I just posted links which show it was, dope.


----------



## jbrownson0831

skews13 said:


> There is no Hillary did it Defense. That’s an illusion that only exists in their minds.
> 
> There is no privilege Defense either. Trump has no privilege of any kind. He’s just another guy on the street that broke the law.


Wrong as usual.


----------



## Faun

Oddball said:


> I just posted links which show it was, dope.



LOL

You mean the link that said Hillary wasn't hacked?

Or you mean the link that said her server could have been hacked but that there's no evidence it was?

Or did you mean the link where Guccifer 2.0 bragged about hacking her server but couldn't offer any evidence he really had. He couldn't even produce a single email to support his claim.


----------



## Marener

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> You mean the link that said Hillary wasn't hacked?
> 
> Or you mean the link that said her server could have been hacked but that there's no evidence it was?
> 
> Or did you mean the link where Guccifer 2.0 bragged about hacking her server but couldn't offer any evidence he really had. He couldn't even produce a single email to support his claim.


It was actually Guccifer 1.0 who claimed to hack her server. No evidence it ever happened like you said.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> You can whine about the server all you want. If you are worried that Clinton risked national security by having her server, why don't you care that Trump did more than risk national security by DECLASSIFYING tons of national security documents?


Now that's an actual argument based on the true facts. I can work with that, unlike all these baseless assumptions and made up facts.

Maybe Trump used bad judgement in exercising his constitutional powers over classification. There's a remedy since hes the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee: don't vote for him.

Meanwhile, the president continues to have sole authority over classification. That president is named Joe Biden. He can reclassify every document that Trump possessed at Mar a Lago. I'm surprised he hasn't done that.


----------



## BackAgain

When a top secret set of papers is first MARKED as classified, it gets so marked and those cool file folder covers are used. 

In this case, when the President declassified them, those markings and cool file folder covers didn’t magically get changed. That doesn’t determine if they were still classified, though. What does is the Presidential direction that they are now declassified.

The DOJ is blowing smoke.


----------



## Indeependent

BackAgain said:


> When a top secret set of papers is first MARKED as classified, it gets so marked and those cool file folder covers are used.
> 
> In this case, when the President declassified them, those markings and cool file folder covers didn’t magically get changed. That doesn’t determine f they were still classified, though. What does is the Presidential direction that they are now declassified.
> 
> The DOJ is blowing smoke.


It requires an attention span so Liberals won’t watch it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Now that's an actual argument based on the true facts. I can work with that, unlike all these baseless assumptions and made up facts.
> 
> Maybe Trump used bad judgement in exercising his constitutional powers over classification. There's a remedy since hes the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee: don't vote for him.
> 
> Meanwhile, the president continues to have sole authority over classification. That president is named Joe Biden. He can reclassify every document that Trump possessed at Mar a Lago. I'm surprised he hasn't done that.



There was no list/inventory of what was there prior to the FBI search.  Hard to reclassify what you do not know exist.


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Cover sheets?  When were these added?


----------



## Rye Catcher

Maxdeath said:


> I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


Wrong.  trump is corrupt, is now and has been all of his life.


----------



## Maxdeath

Faun said:


>


Lol. Take it on the road. Your act is funny


----------



## CrusaderFrank

skews13 said:


> One of the important details is that these documents were found not in the storage room... but in a desk in Donald Trump's office,"
> 
> View attachment 689524



It's so easy for anyone to walk into that office too, amiright???


----------



## Indeependent

Rye Catcher said:


> Wrong.  trump is corrupt, is now and has been all of his life.


Trump must be damn clever to get away with all that corruption!


----------



## Maxdeath

Golfing Gator said:


> Of course I am, I am not worshiping your god along with you.
> 
> Your argument is childish, "well that person did not get charged so we cannot charge anyone ever again"


Lol. First off you make a false assumption that I like Trump.
Second yes he was a very slightly better choice then the last two democrat choices. 
Third I realize that equal under the law is a rather hard concept for most to understand


----------



## Indeependent

Maxdeath said:


> Lol. First off you make a false assumption that I like Trump.
> Second yes he was a very slightly better choice then the last two democrat choices.
> Third I realize that equal under the law is a rather hard concept for most to understand


Trump’s an Alpha.
GG’s an Alpha.
Alphas hate other Alphas.


----------



## theHawk

citygator said:


> If Trump shot someone on 5th avenue and told you that she died of a heart attack before the bullet got to her you’d believe it.


Sure, because “citygator” says so.


----------



## Maxdeath

Marener said:


> Yes. A staff member. It was the staff member who was paid to maintain the server.
> 
> Yes, they were told to delete the server but it was way before the subpoena and after Clinton’s lawyer searched for her emails.
> 
> Yes, some work emails were deleted. It’s not unusual that sometimes people delete emails. I’m under no illusion that some presidential records were likewise destroyed during the transition.
> 
> Classified information doesn’t magically generate classified markings. A lawyer looked at them later and said they were classified. When Clinton sent them, there was no indication they were actually classified.
> 
> You can’t say Clinton didn’t comply with the subpoena. The facts don’t back this up.
> 
> There are massive differences here.


Lol. Okay I am done playing to your partisan misinformation.
But you are free to try and convince other leftists that you understand


----------



## Indeependent

citygator said:


> If Trump shot someone on 5th avenue and told you that she died of a heart attack before the bullet got to her you’d believe it.


Elaborate where you part with Democrats.


----------



## theHawk

Golfing Gator said:


> Can anyone prove this?


He said so, and he was the ultimate declassifying authority.


----------



## Maxdeath

Rye Catcher said:


> Wrong.  trump is corrupt, is now and has been all of his life.


I am not saying he was not. I am saying equal justice under the law. A concept that is hard to understand for most because they want feelings to be a part of everything.


----------



## Faun

Maxdeath said:


> Lol. Take it on the road. Your act is funny



No problem, keep crying whataboutisms as the evidence against Trump mounts.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Maxdeath said:


> Unlike you I do not make excuses for anyone. Though I do have to ask did Hillary not claim that she had no classified emails? Did the FBI not find she did? Did she not have 30,000 emails removed that were under subpoena? Do you have any proof that Trump destroyed any documents?
> At the time I argued that Hillary should have been prosecuted. Had she been I would be arguing that Trump should be. But since the FBI gave her a pass under the idea of equal justice they should do the same to Trump. He even held a higher office



This link is a fact, and HRC was not found to have committed ANY WRONG DOING.  READ THE LINK, THE EMAILS WERE INCLUDED WITHIN THE COMMITTEE ALONG WITH BENGHAZI.


----------



## SavannahMann

shockedcanadian said:


> I'm not a legal expert, but I still don't understand why they would reject a Special Master to catalog what has been taken, regardless of Trumps actions.



A Special Master would be silly. 

First finding one with Top Secret Clearance would be tricky. Then we aren’t talking about a Civil Case. And Attorney Client Privilege doesn’t extend to criminal actions. You can’t plan a robbery with your attorney and claim it is privileged. 

So unless there is a Memo from the lawyer discussing how to hide the documents from the FBI none of it is relevant.


----------



## Golfing Gator

theHawk said:


> He said so,



Did he say so before he was out of office?  

Can you provide some evidence he said so before Jan 20, 2021?


----------



## Maxdeath

Indeependent said:


> Trump’s an Alpha.
> GG’s an Alpha.
> Alphas hate other Alphas.


I really do not think he is an alpha anything but he likes to pretend that he understands things then gets stuck on trying to defend something


----------



## SavannahMann

BackAgain said:


> When a top secret set of papers is first MARKED as classified, it gets so marked and those cool file folder covers are used.
> 
> In this case, when the President declassified them, those markings and cool file folder covers didn’t magically get changed. That doesn’t determine f they were still classified, though. What does is the Presidential direction that they are now declassified.
> 
> The DOJ is blowing smoke.



When something is declassified it is released to the Public. All Trump has to do is show where he released the documents to the public right?


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> Lol. Okay I am done playing to your partisan misinformation.
> But you are free to try and convince other leftists that you understand


What misinformation did I post?


----------



## Maxdeath

Rye Catcher said:


> This link is a fact, and HRC was not found to have committed ANY WRONG DOING.  READ THE LINK, THE EMAILS WERE INCLUDED WITHIN THE COMMITTEE ALONG WITH BENGHAZI.


So the FBI lied when they claimed they found classified email chains?


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> Trump’s an Alpha.
> GG’s an Alpha.
> Alphas hate other Alphas.


What the hell is an alpha?


----------



## okfine

rightwinger said:


> Maybe they should have checked Trumps office before they declared they had no classified information


The FBI found his passports in his desk drawer along with other documents. The FBI was in the right to seize them. They were returned to the fat man.

"The agency said the former president's claim the FBI agents had improperly taken three of his passports while looking for sensitive material removed from the White House at his Florida home is 'incorrect,'" reported Ewan Palmer. "The Department of Justice explained that the passports were seized by the FBI as they were held in a desk drawer in Trump's office which also included classified documents, and therefore within the scope of the search warrant and relevant to the investigation."









						DOJ reveals why FBI seized Trump's passports — and how it incriminates him further
					

Two weeks ago, former President Donald Trump angrily accused FBI agents of confiscating his passports while executing the search at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida. "Wow! In the raid by the FBI of Mar-a-Lago, they stole my three Passports (one expired), along with everything else,"...




					www.rawstory.com


----------



## schmidlap

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


An indicator of the consequence of revelations concerning Trump's having absconded with classified government documents for unknown reasons and his lying about having returned them all to the National Archives in the interest of national security is the marked diminution of howls of protest and vindictive threats of partisan reprisals by spineless politicians desperate to kowtow to the suspect, although the cult's death threats to government cabinet members, judges, and law enforcement officers may persist.

Strutting one's Trump Toady _bona fides _on ideological entertainment media is an effective means of rabble-rousing, but America _is_ committed to being a nation of laws and not of men where no one is above the law and justice, ultimately, prevails.

If Trump's lawyers can contrive a credible defense for why he absconded with classified government documents for unknown reasons and lied about having returned them all to the National Archives in the interest of national security, they will have ample opportunity to do so.


----------



## theHawk

Golfing Gator said:


> Did he say so before he was out of office?
> 
> Can you provide some evidence he said so before Jan 20, 2021?


Why would I need to prove it? You need to prove he didn’t. It’s not on us to jump through hoops to disprove your imagined crimes.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> What the hell is an alpha?


Arrogant loud mouth.
I agree with Trump’s policies but he needs to state his platform and stop attacking others.


----------



## Riff Raff




----------



## Rogue AI

If Skews is making predictions, you can bet the exact opposite is the reality.  Liberal panic is funny.


----------



## Golfing Gator

theHawk said:


> Why would I need to prove it? You need to prove he didn’t.



No, he needs to prove he did.  The only known fact right now is that he had documents that were marked as classified in his possession.   It is now on him to show they were not indeed classified.

This is not unlike my fight with the IRS.  The IRS said I did not file my taxes in specific years, even though one of those years they cashed my check I sent with it.   Once they made this claim against my I then have to prove they are incorrect.  It is bullshit, but it is the way things are.


----------



## BackAgain

SavannahMann said:


> When something is declassified it is released to the Public. All Trump has to do is show where he released the documents to the public right?


Wrong. He unilaterally can declare a classified document “declassified,” and this imposes on him no duty to release anything.


----------



## MarathonMike

The goldfish are very excited over this latest batch of Trump flakes. Gobble Gobble Yum Yum!!


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Now that's an actual argument based on the true facts. I can work with that, unlike all these baseless assumptions and made up facts.
> 
> Maybe Trump used bad judgement in exercising his constitutional powers over classification. There's a remedy since hes the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee: don't vote for him.
> 
> Meanwhile, the president continues to have sole authority over classification. That president is named Joe Biden. He can reclassify every document that Trump possessed at Mar a Lago. I'm surprised he hasn't done that.


Maybe Trump didn't actually declassify anything. As far as I'm aware, Trump has not stated to anyone in the government that he has declassified anything. 

It doesn't make sense that Trump would declassify things in secret. There are consequences to actually declassifying information. That information now becomes public. How is the government supposed to let the public know that they can access information if the government does not know it's declassified? Furthermore, how is the Biden administration supposed to consider whether they should "reclassify" information without knowing what was declassified in the first place?

I do not put much weight in Trump saying on social media he declassified information without some actual substance to it, especially when this claim only exists on social media where it means basically nothing.

In the last point, as others have pointed out, whether Trump "declassified" or not isn't totally relevant. The documents did not belong in Trump's closet. He did not have the right to retain them. He obstructed the investigation to try to recover them. These are all problems for him regardless of whether they're classified or declassified.


----------



## SavannahMann

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. He unilaterally can declare a classified document “declassified,” and this imposes on him no duty to release anything.



Ok. Let’s back up. The Government Of, By, and For, the people can’t restrict information except as part of the classification system. Every Memo. Every finding. Every decision is part of the Public Record. 

You can, under the Freedom of Information act get to look at everything but personnel files. Private information on personnel is still private. 

But everything else is. When something is declassified it is released. See the Navy releasing information on the USS Scorpion. 

Other than Ways or Means the information is released. 

There is no such thing as Unclassified but still restricted from the public. 

The thing is this. Trump had to tell someone it is declassified.


----------



## SavannahMann

Seymour Flops said:


> Now that's an actual argument based on the true facts. I can work with that, unlike all these baseless assumptions and made up facts.
> 
> Maybe Trump used bad judgement in exercising his constitutional powers over classification. There's a remedy since hes the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee: don't vote for him.
> 
> Meanwhile, the president continues to have sole authority over classification. That president is named Joe Biden. He can reclassify every document that Trump possessed at Mar a Lago. I'm surprised he hasn't done that.



Maybe it was “automatically” reclassified. You know. The way it was automatically declassified.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> There was no list/inventory of what was there prior to the FBI search.  Hard to reclassify what you do not know exist.


Grammar isn’t your strong suit. 

No inventory needed. The stuff that is classified is logged internally. The folks in charge of the classified materials should know which (allegedly) “classified”documents are “missing” and who had them last. 

It may be that some of the individual agents didn’t know that they had gotten declassified.  That’s ok. The FBI — institutionally — damn well knew that the President had already said that he had declassified them. The DOJ even admitted as much in court pleadings.


----------



## citygator

Indeependent said:


> Elaborate where you part with Democrats.



- Too slow on immigration proposals
- Needs to continue to condemn police violence but also reaffirm support for law enforcement. 
- I didn’t support the Kavanaugh approach


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> Arrogant loud mouth.
> I agree with Trump’s policies but he needs to state his platform and stop attacking others.


Oh. Just call him an arrogant loudmouth. Calling him an alpha feels laudatory.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> There was no list/inventory of what was there prior to the FBI search.  Hard to reclassify what you do not know exist.


Yes I can see How that would be a brain teaser for a Democrat. Yep, a real unsolvable puzzle.

But to a normal person it's a piece of cake. Since classification markings don't magicly disappear when a document is declassified, the human kiddie loofah can just announce that all documents are now reclassified to the highest level marking on them.

He could have done that without the raid, in fact. But we know that national security was not at all the purpose of the raid.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes I can see How that would be a brain teaser for a Democrat. Yep, a real unsolvable puzzle.
> 
> But to a normal person it's a piece of cake. Since classification markings don't magicly disappear when a document is declassified, the human kiddie loofah can just announce that all documents are now reclassified to the highest level marking on them.
> 
> He could have done that without the raid, in fact. But we know that national security was not at all the purpose of the raid.



Why would anyone have to reclassify a classified document not marked as unclassified?


----------



## skews13

T


theHawk said:


> Why would I need to prove it? You need to prove he didn’t. It’s not on us to jump through hoops to disprove your imagined crimes.


he crimes have been proven. The only thing that is left to decide is when the indictments take place.


----------



## Maxdeath

Marener said:


> What misinformation did I post





Marener said:


> What misinformation did I post?











						The FBI Files on Clinton's Emails - FactCheck.org
					

The FBI's summary of its investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contradicted some of her past statements about her use of a private email system for government business.




					www.factcheck.org
				



Do not read this if you do not want to understand the true story and want to keep your partisan view of everything


----------



## Marener

BackAgain said:


> The FBI — institutionally — damn well knew that the President had already said that he had declassified them.


Tell me when Trump informed anyone that the documents in Mar a Lago had been declassified.


----------



## theHawk

skews13 said:


> T
> 
> he crimes have been proven. The only thing that is left to decide is when the indictments take place.


So what’s the hold up?


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> The stuff that is classified is logged internally. The folks in charge of the classified materials should know which (allegedly) “classified”documents are “missing” and who had them last.



Then those same folks would have the paperwork showing they are no longer classified.   Has anyone seen it?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Did he say so before he was out of office?
> 
> Can you provide some evidence he said so before Jan 20, 2021?


What happened to that country where the buden of proof was on the prosecutors?


----------



## Seymour Flops

SavannahMann said:


> Maybe it was “automatically” reclassified. You know. The way it was automatically declassified.


If Biden says so you're right.

That's that pesky constitution for you.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

I’m still trying to figure out why it took over a year to even consider this investigation.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> What happened to that country where the buden of proof was on the prosecutors?



They have the proof. They have classified documents which are not marked up as unclassified.


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> The FBI Files on Clinton's Emails - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> The FBI's summary of its investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contradicted some of her past statements about her use of a private email system for government business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do not read this if you do not want to understand the true story and want to keep your partisan view of everything


I don't know if you read it or not, but the FactCheck article is exactly consistent with what I was saying about the deletion of the emails.

The employee for Platte River Networks is the one that deleted the emails AFTER the subpoena. Clinton did tell them to delete the emails, but she did not do so when the emails were under subpoena. 

From the article:
In December 2014, after the work-related emails were preserved, Mills told Platte River Networks – which at the time was managing Clinton’s private server – that Clinton “decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days.” Mills instructed the PRN employee — who was not identified — “to modify the e-mail retention policy” on Clinton’s server “to reflect this change,” the FBI said.

But the PRN employee mistakenly did not make the retention-policy change and did not delete the old emails until sometime between March 25 and March 31, even though Mills had sent PRN an email on March 9 that mentioned the committee’s request to preserve emails.

The PRN employee who deleted the emails was a recipient of Mills’ message. However, the employee told the FBI that “he had an ‘oh shit’ moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server containing Clinton’s e-mails.”

Mills and Kendall had a conference call with PRN on March 31, 2015, the last day of the time frame given for when the deletions occurred. The FBI doesn’t know what was said at that meeting. The PRN employee responsible for deleting the emails was advised by his lawyer not to discuss his conversation with Kendall based on attorney-client privilege, the FBI said.

Clinton told the FBI that she was not aware that they were deleted in late March 2015. (See pages 17-19 for the FBI’s notes on the deleted emails.) The FBI did not say when Clinton learned when the emails had been deleted.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> What happened to that country where the buden of proof was on the prosecutors?


It would seem that claiming that the documents were delcassified would be something of an affirmative defense.

Meaning Trump has to prove it's the case in order for him to be off the hook.

Either way, the Biden administration doesn't seem to believe the documents are actually declassified and is treating them as if they are and always have been classified.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Then those same folks would have the paperwork showing they are no longer classified.   Has anyone seen it?


Link to the regulation or law requiring paperwork for the president to classify or reclassify documents?

Remember, it must take precedence over the US Constitution.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Then those same folks would have the paperwork showing they are no longer classified.   Has anyone seen it?


You once again assume too much. 

You assume the declassification had then  gotten noted.


----------



## bravoactual

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



I read the Associated Press article on this and this a Holy Shit Moment.

The demand for a Special Master has blown back big time.  The D.O.J. has been reviewing documents and it is clear the Traitor illegally handled and/or maintained classified documents.


----------



## bravoactual

Seymour Flops said:


> Link to the regulation or law requiring paperwork for the president to classify or reclassify documents?
> 
> Remember, it must take precedence over the US Constitution.



No, the Security of the Country takes precedence.  Illegally handling Classified Material is a threat to the Nation's Safety.  The Freedom of Speech is no way threatened, nor is what happened at Shit-A-Lago is NOT Freedom of Speech Issue.


----------



## Delldude

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Looking dire.....from your article:



> “government records were *likely* concealed and removed … and that efforts were *likely* taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.”


Donald J Trump 'likely' committed obstruction of justice? Prove intent.


> The filing, for instance, says that when FBI agents and Jay Bratt, the chief of the counterintelligence and export control section at the Justice Department, met with Trump’s two representatives in early June, “the former *President’s counsel explicitly prohibited government personnel from opening or looking inside any of the boxes that remained in the storage room, giving no opportunity for the government to confirm that no documents with classification markings remained.”*


4th amendment anyone?

Now DOJ is saying 'trust us'....no special master required.


----------



## Delldude

bravoactual said:


> I read the Associated Press article on this and this a Holy Shit Moment.
> 
> The demand for a Special Master has blown back big time.  The D.O.J. has been reviewing documents and it is clear the Traitor illegally handled and/or maintained classified documents.


DOJ saying 'trust us'......LOL


----------



## skews13

Maxdeath said:


> The FBI Files on Clinton's Emails - FactCheck.org
> 
> 
> The FBI's summary of its investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton contradicted some of her past statements about her use of a private email system for government business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.factcheck.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do not read this if you do not want to understand the true story and want to keep your partisan view of everything



Yeah. Let’s review the facts.

The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a *blatant double standard* by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an election. Those statements have allowed Clinton's opponents to smear her, but leave her little of substance to rebut. However, the FBI refused to discuss investigations of Donald Trump's shady connections to Russia saying that it's too close to an election.

Now the New York Times is *reporting* that the FBI's inquiry into the Clinton Foundation was built on discredited reporting by a well-known anti-Clinton hack. The Times writes that the FBI's case:



> “had not developed much evidence and was based mostly on information that had surfaced in news stories and the book ‘Clinton Cash,’ according to several law enforcement officials briefed on the case."


Some background is required on the book that the FBI has apparently embraced as the cornerstone of their inquisition. _Clinton Cash_ was published last year as an attempt to connect donations to the Clinton Foundation with the personal finances of the Clintons. The book was harshly criticized for containing *numerous factual errors* and failing to document its thesis.

For instance, the book alleged that Clinton played a _"central role"_ in approving the sale of a uranium company. It further alleged that she did so in return for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, the records show that Clinton didn't weigh in on the matter at all. What's more, the sale required the approval of nine different federal agencies, so Clinton's participation would have had minimal impact. The book's author later admitted in an ABC News interview that he had no evidence to substantiate his charge. That's just one of many examples of the author's dishonesty.

And speaking of the author, he is a long-time Republican activist named Peter Schweizer. His resume boasts stints with Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and George W. Bush. He has a *history* of making false allegations that often require retractions. One of his previous books was saddled with this audacious and absurd title: _"Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic And Envious, Whine Less...And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals."_And...inhale.

Schweizer may seem like a peculiar choice for the FBI to hinge their case on. But wait up - it gets worse. Schweizer is also the president of a conservative _"think"_ tank called the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). The GAI conducts studies that have about the same low level of credibility as Schweizer's books. It's purpose is to stream their poorly-sourced, partisan propaganda into the media. The chairman and founder of GAI is Stephen Bannon. Bannon is currently on leave from his job as chairman of Breitbart News so that he can run Donald Trump's campaign for president.

So in summary, the FBI is basing their Clinton case on a widely debunked book, written by a disreputable Clinton foe, whose boss is a right-wing propagandist, and the CEO of Trump's campaign. You may want to go back and read that sentence again slowly. It describes a severely maladjusted law enforcement agency that is improperly politicizing its work.

And if that weren't enough, recall that the Times also mentioned news reports as among the FBI's sources. Presumably they are referring to reports like the *hour-long special* Fox News did on Schweizer's book. It's one thing when dimwitted wingnuts fall for malarkey from people like Schweizer and Fox News. But it's much more depressing - and dangerous - when the FBI does it.









						BUSTED: Trump's Campaign Boss Tied To FBI's Review Of The Clinton Foundation
					

The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a blatant double standard by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an...




					www.dailykos.com


----------



## Maxdeath

Marener said:


> I don't know if you read it or not, but the FactCheck article is exactly consistent with what I was saying about the deletion of the emails.
> 
> The employee for Platte River Networks is the one that deleted the emails AFTER the subpoena. Clinton did tell them to delete the emails, but she did not do so when the emails were under subpoena.
> 
> From the article:
> In December 2014, after the work-related emails were preserved, Mills told Platte River Networks – which at the time was managing Clinton’s private server – that Clinton “decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days.” Mills instructed the PRN employee — who was not identified — “to modify the e-mail retention policy” on Clinton’s server “to reflect this change,” the FBI said.
> 
> But the PRN employee mistakenly did not make the retention-policy change and did not delete the old emails until sometime between March 25 and March 31, even though Mills had sent PRN an email on March 9 that mentioned the committee’s request to preserve emails.
> 
> The PRN employee who deleted the emails was a recipient of Mills’ message. However, the employee told the FBI that “he had an ‘oh shit’ moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server containing Clinton’s e-mails.”
> 
> Mills and Kendall had a conference call with PRN on March 31, 2015, the last day of the time frame given for when the deletions occurred. The FBI doesn’t know what was said at that meeting. The PRN employee responsible for deleting the emails was advised by his lawyer not to discuss his conversation with Kendall based on attorney-client privilege, the FBI said.
> 
> Clinton told the FBI that she was not aware that they were deleted in late March 2015. (See pages 17-19 for the FBI’s notes on the deleted emails.) The FBI did not say when Clinton learned when the emails had been deleted.


Boy you sure changed your story but that is fine. Pretend all you want.


----------



## Delldude

bravoactual said:


> No, the Security of the Country takes precedence.  Illegally handling Classified Material is a threat to the Nation's Safety.  The Freedom of Speech is no way threatend, nor is what happened at Shit-A-Lago Freedom of Speech Issue.


Illegally handling classified material? You mean, like Hillary?


----------



## EvilCat Breath

Marener said:


> Trump got his subpoena for all the marked classified documents. He had his lawyers "search" and hand them over, signing a statement that they had done so.
> 
> And what do you know? They found more.
> View attachment 689541
> 
> You can't make an excuse that Hillary did this. She didn't. Not even close.


When we're these covers added?  Are the covers just there or do they actually cover something?  I see they also seized the ultra top secret Time magazine cover.  Where was this photo taken?


----------



## jbrownson0831

skews13 said:


> T
> 
> he crimes have been proven. The only thing that is left to decide is when the indictments take place.


As usual in your brainless rants, you are wrong.  No crime has ever been proven against Trump, unlike your Dimmer masters.


----------



## BackAgain

*THREAD ADVISORY*:  

*The thread headline is misleading and wrong.* 

The court *hasn’t* ruled on the request for a special master. The DOJ  has merely filed some papers in opposition.


----------



## Delldude

BackAgain said:


> *THREAD ADVISORY*:
> 
> *The thread headline is misleading and wrong.*
> 
> The court *hasn’t* ruled on the request for a special master. The DOJ  has merely filed some papers in opposition.


You don't trust the DOJ?


----------



## jbrownson0831

skews13 said:


> Yeah. Let’s review the facts.
> 
> The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a *blatant double standard* by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an election. Those statements have allowed Clinton's opponents to smear her, but leave her little of substance to rebut. However, the FBI refused to discuss investigations of Donald Trump's shady connections to Russia saying that it's too close to an election.
> 
> Now the New York Times is *reporting* that the FBI's inquiry into the Clinton Foundation was built on discredited reporting by a well-known anti-Clinton hack. The Times writes that the FBI's case:
> 
> 
> Some background is required on the book that the FBI has apparently embraced as the cornerstone of their inquisition. _Clinton Cash_ was published last year as an attempt to connect donations to the Clinton Foundation with the personal finances of the Clintons. The book was harshly criticized for containing *numerous factual errors* and failing to document its thesis.
> 
> For instance, the book alleged that Clinton played a _"central role"_ in approving the sale of a uranium company. It further alleged that she did so in return for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, the records show that Clinton didn't weigh in on the matter at all. What's more, the sale required the approval of nine different federal agencies, so Clinton's participation would have had minimal impact. The book's author later admitted in an ABC News interview that he had no evidence to substantiate his charge. That's just one of many examples of the author's dishonesty.
> 
> And speaking of the author, he is a long-time Republican activist named Peter Schweizer. His resume boasts stints with Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and George W. Bush. He has a *history* of making false allegations that often require retractions. One of his previous books was saddled with this audacious and absurd title: _"Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic And Envious, Whine Less...And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals."_And...inhale.
> 
> Schweizer may seem like a peculiar choice for the FBI to hinge their case on. But wait up - it gets worse. Schweizer is also the president of a conservative _"think"_ tank called the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). The GAI conducts studies that have about the same low level of credibility as Schweizer's books. It's purpose is to stream their poorly-sourced, partisan propaganda into the media. The chairman and founder of GAI is Stephen Bannon. Bannon is currently on leave from his job as chairman of Breitbart News so that he can run Donald Trump's campaign for president.
> 
> So in summary, the FBI is basing their Clinton case on a widely debunked book, written by a disreputable Clinton foe, whose boss is a right-wing propagandist, and the CEO of Trump's campaign. You may want to go back and read that sentence again slowly. It describes a severely maladjusted law enforcement agency that is improperly politicizing its work.
> 
> And if that weren't enough, recall that the Times also mentioned news reports as among the FBI's sources. Presumably they are referring to reports like the *hour-long special* Fox News did on Schweizer's book. It's one thing when dimwitted wingnuts fall for malarkey from people like Schweizer and Fox News. But it's much more depressing - and dangerous - when the FBI does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUSTED: Trump's Campaign Boss Tied To FBI's Review Of The Clinton Foundation
> 
> 
> The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a blatant double standard by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailykos.com


And again, the proven criminal gets a bye as your blatant TDS makes you forget about who should actually be in jail.


----------



## BackAgain

Delldude said:


> You don't trust the DOJ?


Not much — anymore.


----------



## Delldude

skews13 said:


> Yeah. Let’s review the facts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUSTED: Trump's Campaign Boss Tied To FBI's Review Of The Clinton Foundation
> 
> 
> The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a blatant double standard by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailykos.com


Dude....Daily Kos source after attempting to use FactCheck.org?


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> You once again assume too much.
> 
> You assume the declassification had then  gotten noted.



If it didn't, then it never happened.


----------



## Delldude

BackAgain said:


> Not much — anymore.


That was my first impression when the  DOJ came out and media was crowing a special master wasn't needed.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Link to the regulation or law requiring paperwork for the president to classify or reclassify documents?
> 
> Remember, it must take precedence over the US Constitution.



Can you first show me in the US Constitution where it talks about classified documents?


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> If it didn't, then it never happened.


Nonsense. Unsupported belief by you stated as if it were factual or even correct. It isn’t. 

Instead, at the very moment the President says a classified document is declassified, it is. Yep. Even before the markings get changed.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Nonsense. Unsupported belief by you stated as if it were factual or even correct. It isn’t.
> 
> Instead, at the very moment the President says a classified document is declassified, it is. Yep. Even before the markings get changed.



There has to be some record of it.   There are multiple copies of almost every classified document, you cannot just declassify one of them.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> It would seem that claiming that the documents were delcassified would be something of an affirmative defense.
> 
> Meaning Trump has to prove it's the case in order for him to be off the hook.


I'm again impressed that you offer a real argument. Golfing Gator this is how you yourself used to debate before Trump Derangement got the better of you. I hope you'll snap out of it soon.

Two answers:  

1) Trump would not have to prove he declassified the documents. He would only need to raise reasonable doubt that they were still classified.

2) that assumes there would ever be a trial. I doubt the DOJ wants a trial. They're not that stupid. I believe that their goal is for Garland to pull a well-timed Comey on Trump by announcing announcing no prosecution after a lengthy recitation of his supposed crimes. That way they can assassinate his character without his having a chance to defend himself.

It was foul when Comey did that to Hillary and Trump was right to fire him for it.


Marener said:


> Either way, the Biden administration doesn't seem to believe the documents are actually declassified and is treating them as if they are and always have been classified.


That's their position but I doubt it is what they believe. To a lawyer, that isn't lying, its advocating.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> There has to be some record of it.   There are multiple copies of almost every classified document, you cannot just declassify one of them.


No. There doesn’t “have” to be a record of it. And you have no idea if there are multiple copies or not.  Further, if you declassify a classified document, then any copy is also declassified despite the fact that it may not be known to others. 

If you limited your commentary to the contention that it’s a sloppy way of proceeding, I agree. But the fact that it wasn’t done in an orderly and logical manner *doesn’t* imply that it wasn’t done in the first place.


----------



## Oddball

skews13 said:


> Yeah. Let’s review the facts.
> 
> The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a *blatant double standard* by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an election. Those statements have allowed Clinton's opponents to smear her, but leave her little of substance to rebut. However, the FBI refused to discuss investigations of Donald Trump's shady connections to Russia saying that it's too close to an election.
> 
> Now the New York Times is *reporting* that the FBI's inquiry into the Clinton Foundation was built on discredited reporting by a well-known anti-Clinton hack. The Times writes that the FBI's case:
> 
> 
> Some background is required on the book that the FBI has apparently embraced as the cornerstone of their inquisition. _Clinton Cash_ was published last year as an attempt to connect donations to the Clinton Foundation with the personal finances of the Clintons. The book was harshly criticized for containing *numerous factual errors* and failing to document its thesis.
> 
> For instance, the book alleged that Clinton played a _"central role"_ in approving the sale of a uranium company. It further alleged that she did so in return for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. In fact, the records show that Clinton didn't weigh in on the matter at all. What's more, the sale required the approval of nine different federal agencies, so Clinton's participation would have had minimal impact. The book's author later admitted in an ABC News interview that he had no evidence to substantiate his charge. That's just one of many examples of the author's dishonesty.
> 
> And speaking of the author, he is a long-time Republican activist named Peter Schweizer. His resume boasts stints with Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and George W. Bush. He has a *history* of making false allegations that often require retractions. One of his previous books was saddled with this audacious and absurd title: _"Makers and Takers: Why Conservatives Work Harder, Feel Happier, Have Closer Families, Take Fewer Drugs, Give More Generously, Value Honesty More, Are Less Materialistic And Envious, Whine Less...And Even Hug Their Children More Than Liberals."_And...inhale.
> 
> Schweizer may seem like a peculiar choice for the FBI to hinge their case on. But wait up - it gets worse. Schweizer is also the president of a conservative _"think"_ tank called the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). The GAI conducts studies that have about the same low level of credibility as Schweizer's books. It's purpose is to stream their poorly-sourced, partisan propaganda into the media. The chairman and founder of GAI is Stephen Bannon. Bannon is currently on leave from his job as chairman of Breitbart News so that he can run Donald Trump's campaign for president.
> 
> So in summary, the FBI is basing their Clinton case on a widely debunked book, written by a disreputable Clinton foe, whose boss is a right-wing propagandist, and the CEO of Trump's campaign. You may want to go back and read that sentence again slowly. It describes a severely maladjusted law enforcement agency that is improperly politicizing its work.
> 
> And if that weren't enough, recall that the Times also mentioned news reports as among the FBI's sources. Presumably they are referring to reports like the *hour-long special* Fox News did on Schweizer's book. It's one thing when dimwitted wingnuts fall for malarkey from people like Schweizer and Fox News. But it's much more depressing - and dangerous - when the FBI does it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUSTED: Trump's Campaign Boss Tied To FBI's Review Of The Clinton Foundation
> 
> 
> The FBI has come under sustained and deserved criticism for the past week due to public pronouncements regarding Hillary Clinton. They demonstrated a blatant double standard by releasing vague but damaging statements about Clinton a few days before an...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailykos.com


Daily Kooks and factcheck.org....The daily double of disinformation douchebaggery.

Holy fuck, is this shit beyond agitprop!


----------



## mamooth

It's fascinating, in that the Trump cultists all actually believe that if they just repeat their crazy talk enough times, it will magically become true. Sadly for them, that's not how reality works.

They've literally made being a Trump cultist their entire identity. If they have to admit that they were played for fools, that the liberals have been right about every single thing all along -- as clearly is the case -- then a large part them dies inside.

That's why they fight reality with the fervor of someone whose life is at stake. Their chosen deviant life as a MAGA cult loon _is_ at stake. Without the cult, they're just a pack of sad losers. They've chosen happy delusion over cruel reality, and they will fight for their happy delusions.


----------



## Marener

Maxdeath said:


> Boy you sure changed your story but that is fine. Pretend all you want.


I dare you to find anything that I changed about my story.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. He unilaterally can declare a classified document “declassified,” and this imposes on him no duty to release anything.


Seems the AG believes differently.  

The issues are complicated, and that is why this situation is even more so.  

Below is a link that will confuse most if not all of us:





__





						Loading…
					





					uscode.house.gov


----------



## The Duke

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Yeah! You really got him now!


----------



## BackAgain

mamooth said:


> It's fascinating, in that the Trump cultists all actually believe that if they just repeat their crazy talk enough times, it will magically become true. Sadly for them, that's not how reality works.
> 
> They've literally made being a Trump cultist their entire identity. If they have to admit that they were played for fools, that the liberals have been right about every single thing all along -- as clearly is the case -- then a large part them dies inside.
> 
> That's why they fight reality with the fervor of someone whose life is at stake. Their chosen deviant life as a MAGA cult loon _is_ at stake. Without the cult, they're just a pack of sad losers. They've chosen happy delusion over cruel reality, and they will fight for their happy delusions.




Manboob still thinks he has something of value to contribute.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Seems the AG believes differently.
> 
> The issues are complicated, and that is why this situation is even more so.
> 
> Below is a link that will confuse most if not all of us:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loading…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> uscode.house.gov


That act cannot defeat the claim that the President has the unilateral authority to declassify a classified document. What the AG allegedly “believes” has literally nothing at all to do with it.


----------



## mamooth

BackAgain said:


> Manboob still thinks he has something of value to contribute.



Cult boi, have any of your weepy conspiracy theories ever worked out?

No? Not even once? Your record of failure is still perfect and unblemished? Well, how about that.

Yet still you persist. That's some remarkable cult devotion.

Now, run back to your masters, drop to your knees, lick their boots, thank them for lying to you, and beg for new lies. You know, your usual thing.


----------



## rightwinger

theHawk said:


> Why would I need to prove it? You need to prove he didn’t. It’s not on us to jump through hoops to disprove your imagined crimes.


You can bet your ass The Justice Department can and will prove the classification of those documents


----------



## BackAgain

mamooth said:


> Cult boi, have any of your weepy conspiracy theories ever worked out?



Manboob, you are the cultist. I don’t engage in conspiracy theories. I for 2 in your first sentence. Typical. 


mamooth said:


> No? Not even once? Your record of failure is still perfect and unblemished? Well, how about that.


You’re babbling at this point. So, for you, manboob, snafu. 👍


mamooth said:


> Yet still you persist. That's some remarkable cult devotion.


Nope. Again. I haven’t ever begun. You’re projecting again, manboob. 


mamooth said:


> Now, run back to your masters, drop to your knees, lick their boots, thank them for lying to you, and beg for new lies. You know, your usual thing.


More projection. And while your going down on Brandon, again, tossing his salad just the way he likes it, remember to compliment his leg hair.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> That act cannot defeat the claim that the President has the unilateral authority to declassify a classified document. What the AG allegedly “believes” has literally nothing at all to do with it.


And then?

Trump does not just declare……This document is no longer classified!

There must be official follow up declassifying not only the document but the information on it 

Anyone with a document containing that now declassified information must be officially notified


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> No. There doesn’t “have” to be a record of it. And you have no idea if there are multiple copies or not.  Further, if you declassify a classified document, then any copy is also declassified despite the fact that it may not be known to others.
> 
> If you limited your commentary to the contention that it’s a sloppy way of proceeding, I agree. But the fact that it wasn’t done in an orderly and logical manner *doesn’t* imply that it wasn’t done in the first place.



Yes, there has to be some record of it.  If not then what is the point even?   How is anyone supposed to know if something is declassified or not?

I spent many a year working with classified document, to include being a Secondary Control Point Custodian for the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing.  I know the rules and the procedures.   The president is not above the law, he is not a god.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> If you limited your commentary to the contention that it’s a sloppy way of proceeding, I agree. But the fact that it wasn’t done in an orderly and logical manner *doesn’t* imply that it wasn’t done in the first place.



We have no way of knowing it if were done in the first place or not, which is the problem.


----------



## bodecea

Maxdeath said:


> I love how many on the left were all it was perfectly fine for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an utter disgrace for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


I love how many on the Right want us to forget that the fat former guy had FOUR YEARS to do something about Hillary and her e-mails and did nothing.


----------



## bodecea

Oddball said:


> You fucking ignoramus  fruitcakes do realize that everything that becomes declassified is still "marked" with its original classification, right?
> 
> View attachment 689542


No it is not.


----------



## The Irish Ram

rightwinger said:


> If it was “a safe” they would have said safe


Except when they lie...


----------



## bodecea

Oddball said:


> Instead ho having them secured by Secured Service behind locked doors, her documents were hacked and stolen by the Chicoms and Russians, among others.
> 
> Nope, nothing like it at all....Not even close.


So you are admitting that the fat former guy's Administration was derelict in it's duty to investigate Hillary and charge her.


----------



## bodecea

theHawk said:


> And yet they still can’t prove any of that material is classified. President Trump declassified everything be took.  Old cover sheets don’t make a document classified.


Defend the orange traitor at all costs.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> And then?


It’s declassified. 


rightwinger said:


> Trump does not just declare……This document is no longer classified!


Sure he does. Or, at least that’s what he did. I’m sure your objection is duly noted … somewhere.   


rightwinger said:


> There must be official follow up declassifying not only the document but the information on it


So you think. But, try to follow along here: you’re wrong. 


rightwinger said:


> Anyone with a document containing that now declassified information must be officially notified


So our maintain. But your notion doesn’t make it a fact. 

Once again for you libtard cultists;  if you were to limit your commentary to saying how it should be done, you’d have a point. But you seem to instead imagine that your baseless declarations somehow convert what Trump did into something he couldn’t do. You remain wrong. 

What he did was Sloppy practice. That I grant. But so what?  He still did it.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> We have no way of knowing it if were done in the first place or not, which is the problem.


Wrong. You CHOOSE not to believe it. And I understand that. But your disbelief doesn’t control. The stuff was declassified, there *is* evidence for that assertion, and it *was* claimed long before the raid.


----------



## bodecea

two_iron said:


> It's too bad President Trump didn't know someone that could have declassified those documents.
> 
> Ya know, I think the shit-eating rodents got him this time. Something about the 3,612th time... I was dreading it.
> 
> YOU.STUPID.FUCKING.SHEEP*™*
> 
> DJT is playing 4D chess while you slimy fucks are playing "wrong hole!" with each other. Enjoy the game.


5th Ave. Syndrome.


----------



## bodecea

BackAgain said:


> It’s declassified.
> 
> Sure he does. Or, at least that’s what he did. I’m sure your objection is duly noted … somewhere.
> 
> So you think. But, try to follow along here: you’re wrong.
> 
> So our maintain. But your notion doesn’t make it a fact.
> 
> Once again for you libtard cultists;  if you were to limit your commentary to saying how it should be done, you’d have a point. But you seem to instead imagine that your baseless declarations somehow convert what Trump did into something he couldn’t do. You remain wrong.
> 
> What he did was Sloppy practice. That I grant. But so what?  He still did it.


More 5th Ave Syndrome


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> The stuff was declassified, there *is* evidence for that assertion,



Can you provide that evidence?



BackAgain said:


> and it *was* claimed long before the raid.



But was it claimed prior to leaving the White House?


----------



## Seymour Flops

bravoactual said:


> No, the Security of the Country takes precedence.  Illegally handling Classified Material is a threat to the Nation's Safety.  The Freedom of Speech is no way threatend, nor is what happened at Shit-A-Lago Freedom of Speech Issue.


The USSC disagrees with you.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, there has to be some record of it.


Nope. It just has to have been declassified. And there is evidence of that which was known to the FBI and the DOJ long before the raid. 


Golfing Gator said:


> If not then what is the point even?


To declassify it. 


Golfing Gator said:


> How is anyone supposed to know if something is declassified or not?


Normally?  Or just in this instance?  Normally, you’d be right. That’s why ordinarily there is a procedure for noting such declassification. But in this case, the President made his determination.  That’s what’s controlling. Who cares if you know it or not?


Golfing Gator said:


> I spent many a year working with classified document, to include being a Secondary Control Point Custodian for the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing.  I know the rules and the procedures.   The president is not above the law, he is not a god.


I’m happy for you. But you’re still ignorant. He need not be above the law. When the President declassifies a document, it’s declassified. The rest is ministerial. He can issue or cause to be issued specific procedures in the normal course of business for such things. Those are for his subordinates. He remains free and authorized to declassify such documents as he sees fit regardless of such procedure.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Can you provide that evidence?


I did previously. Kash Patel said so. And the DOJ acknowledged as much before the raid.


Golfing Gator said:


> But was it claimed prior to leaving the White House?


Irrelevant. What is relevant was the declassification before his term ended.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Can you first show me in the US Constitution where it talks about classified documents?


It was the USSC who said it.

Navy vs. Egan (1988)


----------



## Marener

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. He unilaterally can declare a classified document “declassified,” and this imposes on him no duty to release anything.


If the information is “declassified” then the government (which Trump was in charge of) had a duty to release that information to the public under the law.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> I did previously. Kash Patel said so. And the DOJ acknowledged as much before re raid.



He did not say so till after the search.  He spoke of a policy that nobody else in the White House knew about and that did not become public till after the search.  



BackAgain said:


> What is relevant was the declassification before his term ended.



That is the claim, to which there is no evidence...thus the quandary we are now in.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> It was the USSC who said it.
> 
> Navy vs. Egan (1988)



Thanks!


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> When a top secret set of papers is first MARKED as classified, it gets so marked and those cool file folder covers are used.
> 
> In this case, when the President declassified them, those markings and cool file folder covers didn’t magically get changed. That doesn’t determine if they were still classified, though. What does is the Presidential direction that they are now declassified.
> 
> The DOJ is blowing smoke.



Actually NO.  they don't become declassified until they're marked declassified.

It's like a birth certificate.  Until the bureau of vital records gets the certificate of live birth from the hospital (or midwife, etc) the birth isn't official. It's not official until a birth certificate is issued.









						Certificate of Live Birth vs. Birth Certificate | Outline, Differences & Uses - Video & Lesson Transcript | Study.com
					

Discover the differences between a certificate of live birth and a birth certificate. Learn whether or not a hospital birth certificate is a legal...




					study.com


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. You CHOOSE not to believe it. And I understand that. But your disbelief doesn’t control. The stuff was declassified, there *is* evidence for that assertion, and it *was* claimed long before the raid.



This is where the problem begins.  Trump said that documents removed from the Oval Office to the White House residence, were automatically declassified.  (assume this is true)

Trump also did this, in order to catch up on work (aka homework) of things he didn't finish.

*Here's the problem*

The documents Trump took back to the residence, were because he didn't have time to read them in the oval office.  And taking them to the residence, means *he declassified documents he never even read, or even knew about.*

Trump having a policy of declassification of documents BEFORE he even reads them can't be a legal policy.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> It’s declassified.
> 
> Sure he does. Or, at least that’s what he did. I’m sure your objection is duly noted … somewhere.
> 
> So you think. But, try to follow along here: you’re wrong.
> 
> So our maintain. But your notion doesn’t make it a fact.
> 
> Once again for you libtard cultists;  if you were to limit your commentary to saying how it should be done, you’d have a point. But you seem to instead imagine that your baseless declarations somehow convert what Trump did into something he couldn’t do. You remain wrong.
> 
> What he did was Sloppy practice. That I grant. But so what?  He still did it.


You show no understanding of how our Classification system works
It is a detailed process to classify and declassify information. 
It is the informations that is Classified, not the document.

For Trump to declassify information from Top Secret to unclassified is unprecedented and cannot be done lightly

It has Nationwide security implications


----------



## toobfreak

skews13 said:


> Trump team may have hidden, moved​


Hey Dodo, MAY have moved, hidden?  You mean they don't even know for sure and couldn't tell?



skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret”


Seems rather odd doesn't it that the FBI should stop to lay out all these important top secret documents on Trump's bedroom floor to take a picture of them?  Ever see that done before?  How did these agents have the necessary clearance to see and photograph top secrets?  Seems rather staged and contrived to me.



skews13 said:


> Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing.


Trump must have left them there while out of town, eh?  Too bad, there was no one else in the house to tell us what really happened!  The way handled, the FBI could have brought a half-eaten Entenmanns coffee cake there and said Donald stole that too.



skews13 said:


> A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.


Do you have a high resolution blow up that we can all see?



skews13 said:


> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.


So then either the stuff wasn't there or the FBI needs to talk to this custodian.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> If the information is “declassified” then the government (which Trump was in charge of) had a duty to release that information to the public under the law.


In one of the frequent congressional grillingss of Rod Rosenstein he was asked whether he would release Russia investigation documents if the president declassified them and ordered their release. 

He said there still would be law enforcement concerns and would not commit to following the president's directive.

Trump should have fired him that afternoon


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> I'm again impressed that you offer a real argument. Golfing Gator this is how you yourself used to debate before Trump Derangement got the better of you. I hope you'll snap out of it soon.
> 
> Two answers:
> 
> 1) Trump would not have to prove he declassified the documents. He would only need to raise reasonable doubt that they were still classified.
> 
> 2) that assumes there would ever be a trial. I doubt the DOJ wants a trial. They're not that stupid. I believe that their goal is for Garland to pull a well-timed Comey on Trump by announcing announcing no prosecution after a lengthy recitation of his supposed crimes. That way they can assassinate his character without his having a chance to defend himself.
> 
> It was foul when Comey did that to Hillary and Trump was right to fire him for it.
> 
> That's their position but I doubt it is what they believe. To a lawyer, that isn't lying, its advocating.


I don't know if reasonable doubt can be reached merely by Trump saying he did so. I don't think it's particularly reasonable to think that he actually wanted all those documents he had squirreled away to become public information, which is what declassification would actually mean. These were top secret government documents including human sources and spy satellite data. Disclosure of the information in these documents (which seems most likely to be contemporary information, not historical) would be basically unprecedented. Doing so without notification of anyone until after the raid seems a little too convenient to be true.

The DoJ filing last night indicates Trump and his lawyers did not tell anyone that these were declassified documents. Not when they sent them to NARA. Not when Jay Bratt picked them up in June. As far as I can tell, Trump has not submitted to any actual authority that these documents were at all declassified.

But as others have pointed out, even if we accept they were declassified, that still does not get Trump out of trouble. The laws that the DoJ cited as justification for the search do not require classified data. Trump still was given a subpoena for all documents bearing classified markings and failed to produce all these documents. That's a pretty significant legal problem.


----------



## Marener

toobfreak said:


> So then either the stuff wasn't there or the FBI needs to talk to this custodian.


That would be Christina Bobb, Trump's lawyer.

Trump's lawyers are going to need lawyers.


----------



## Seymour Flops

rightwinger said:


> You show no understanding of how our Classification system works
> It is a detailed process to classify and declassify information.
> It is the informations that is Classified, not the document.
> 
> For Trump to declassify information from Top Secret to unclassified is unprecedented and cannot be done lightly
> 
> It has Nationwide security implications


Just show us the process in the law or the regulations.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> He did not say so till after the search.


*Wrong*. He said it back in May. And the DOJ acknowledged having heard that contention in their application for the search warrant. I’ve previously listed proof of both of those points. 


Golfing Gator said:


> He spoke of a policy that nobody else in the White House knew about


You don’t know who else knew of it. 


Golfing Gator said:


> and that did not become public till after the search.


Again, you’re  are clearly wrong. Even the DOJ told the judge about it before getting the search warrant signed. 


Golfing Gator said:


> That is the claim, to which there is no evidence...thus the quandary we are now in.


Wrong again. You don’t care for the FACT that evidence existed prior to the raid. You may disbelieve Patel. But your assertions are nevertheless demonstrably false.  Again.


----------



## HaShev

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


So basically the DOJ claims itself left documents there making themselves guilty of the fake charges they are displacing .  BECAUSE THEY HAD EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO RETRIEVE THE DOCUMENTS WHEN THEY WERE THERE, their leaving them makes them guilty-oops.
Ironically the President can leave them in his offices as his privilege, but the DOJ can not
The only obstruction is the DOJ and certain specific bad actors in the FBI covering their hide for their crimes in burying the Joe and Hunter Biden corruption and treason case.
The DOJ and those criminal elements in the FBI used intimidation in retaliation of pursuits on Hunter which will lead to Joe, which is the clear definition of obstruction.   
This will just bring more people who left corrupt fascist run countries, over to the party to make sure they don't have to go through that again.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Actually NO.  they done become declassified until they're marked declassified.


English ain’t your strong suit, Skippy. Neither are the pesky facts. They are declassified the instant the President declassifies them. Period. 


postman said:


> It's like a birth certificate.  Until the bureau of vital records gets the certificate of live birth from the hospital (or midwife, etc) the birth isn't official. It's not official until a birth certificate is issued.


With or without a birth certificate, the fact of a child’s birth still exists. The child still exists.


----------



## postman

rightwinger said:


> For Trump to declassify information from Top Secret to unclassified is unprecedented and cannot be done lightly
> 
> It has Nationwide security implications


Trumps automatic declassification policy.  That all classified material removed from the Oval Office and taken to the White House residence, was automatically declassified.

*Which would include the "biscut" with the nuclear launch codes *the president keeps on his person, and which there is a copy of in the nuclear "football"

Such a policy can't be a legal policy.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> Just show us the process in the law or the regulations.


How about in supreme court decisions?  That say that presidential authority doesn't become official until the ministerial acts needed to carry it out have been completed.

In the case of classified documents this would mean somebody stamping the documents "declassified".


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> English ain’t your strong suit, Skippy. Neither are the pesky facts. They are declassified the instant the President declassifies them. Period.



Didn't I tell you to read Marbury v Madison.

The supreme court said NO to presidential acts being instantaneous.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Didn't I tell you to read Marbury v Madison.
> 
> The supreme court said NO to presidential acts being instantaneous.


I may have read that before you were even born, you little retard. Unlike you, I understand it.

And that’s *not* the holding of Marbury, anyway. See?  You don’t understand it.


----------



## Meathead

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


You need a better source. WaPo is like HuffPo.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> In one of the frequent congressional grillingss of Rod Rosenstein he was asked whether he would release Russia investigation documents if the president declassified them and ordered their release.
> 
> He said there still would be law enforcement concerns and would not commit to following the president's directive.
> 
> Trump should have fired him that afternoon


There are other relevant privacy laws that the president cannot waive a magic wand with.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> And that’s *not* the holding of Marburg, anyway. See?  You don’t understand it.



It's Marbury, you ignorant twerp.

And it was the finding.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> It's Marbury, you ignorant twerp.
> 
> And it was the finding.


Happy you caught a typo. The point still stands, you retard. And that was *not* the holding.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Oh. Just call him an arrogant loudmouth. Calling him an alpha feels laudatory.


He, like you, is an Alpha, pure and simple.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Happy you caught a typo. The point still stands, you retard. And that was *not* the holding.











						Marbury v. Madison
					

Marbury v. Madison (1803) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that established for the first time that federal courts had the power to overturn an act of




					www.history.com
				




Maybe you should actually read it.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

skews13 said:


> One of the important details is that these documents were found not in the storage room... but in a desk in Donald Trump's office,"
> 
> View attachment 689524


With his passports. Per the filing.


----------



## Marener

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> With his passports. Per the filing.


Which explains why they took his passports and again demonstrates that the right wing talking points on this episode were bullshit.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead 

The source is rhe DOJ filing, released last night.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Marener said:


> Which explains why they took his passports and again demonstrates that the right wing talking points on this episode were bullshit.


Correct. As explicitly authorized by the warrant, as quoted verbatim in this filing.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

We can tell by the Trumper outbursts that they see the writing on the wall.


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Meathead
> 
> The source is rhe DOJ filing, released last night.


Worse yet. Given the recent history of the DOJ and FBI, wtf would anyone believe anything from them.?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Also worth noting:

Bobby and Corcoran just became subjects of this investigation and are now likely to be called as witnesses. 

Looks like the clown car Trump legal team just got a bit lighter.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead said:


> Worse yet. Given the recent history of the DOJ and FBI, wtf would anyone believe anything from them..


Well, some idiots believe everything Trump says. So we know they will believe anything...

Know anyone like that?


----------



## Oddball

bodecea said:


> No it is not.


Yes it is, Butch.....I was T-Sec with SAC and saw plenty of subsequently unclassified material.


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> What vault?  There was not vault at MLG and there were not guards watching the classified documents.


But then you are saying Obama inviting what he called a Russian spy (Kislyak)into the WH 24 times with papers lying around is the same violation, but in the case of Obama he used that spy in order to do things that got Nixon in trouble=spying on political rivals, and even further he used Kislyak to interfere and manipulate elections and commit treason.
This is why Obama quickly hid and sealed his WH logs in archives when it was being outted who was on his logs (murderers and spys).
Those logs and his docs are in violation of your own standards-oops.
Do yourself a favor and research the "DEADLINE" date the FBI was required by the courts to be Handing over the Hunder Biden Files and then look at the date of the raid "Surprise"!
This is about intimidation on the part of the Biden administration to back off the Bidens corruption cases=obstruction is by the DOJ and certain specific under investigation FBI bad actors sitting on the case.
This is why judiciary committee members were also politically hit=intimidation=obstruction look it up if you don't know what obstruction is.
This is the fascist behavior you support, yet you argue to grant people fleeing countries with such behavior and corruption sanctuary makes you a giant hypocrit and the types they are fleeing from.   YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES AND WHAT YOU'VE BECOME.


----------



## Oddball

bodecea said:


> Defend the orange traitor at all costs.


Defend the poilce state at all costs.....You fucking scum have become everything that you claimed to hate 30 years ago.


----------



## Oddball

HaShev said:


> This is the fascist behavior you support, yet you argue to grant people fleeing countries with such behavior and corruption sanctuary makes you a giant hypocrit and the types they are fleeing from.   YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES AND WHAT YOU'VE BECOME.


And he claims to be a "libertarian" no less.


----------



## Oddball

mamooth said:


> It's fascinating, in that the Trump cultists all actually believe that if they just repeat their crazy talk enough times, it will magically become true. Sadly for them, that's not how reality works.


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Well, some idiots believe everything Trump says. So we know they will believe anything...
> 
> Know anyone like that?


Comey, McCabe, Strozk, his tramp and Garland. How sleazy can you get?


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Marbury v. Madison
> 
> 
> Marbury v. Madison (1803) was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that established for the first time that federal courts had the power to overturn an act of
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.history.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you should actually read it.


I did. You definitely need to learn how to comprehend.


----------



## bodecea

Golfing Gator said:


> Can you provide that evidence?
> 
> 
> 
> But was it claimed prior to leaving the White House?


He's MAGA-lying.  None of the found materials had been declassified.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead said:


> Comey, McCabe, Strozk, his tramp and Garland. How sleazy can you get?


Your whataboutism won't help you or Trump.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> Defend the poilce state at all costs.....You fucking scum have become everything that you claimed to hate 30 years ago.


I thought it was the right that always defended the police?

Here, the FBI gave Trump every opportunity to work with them. They failed to do so. The FBI discovered evidence that Trump was retaining documents. Therefore, they got a search warrant. 

That's not a police state. Search warrants are so fundamental to the function of a liberal democracy that the constitution specifically mentions them.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> With or without a birth certificate, the fact of a child’s birth still exists. The child still exists.



The child may exist, but as a non-official entity.  Without a birth certificate they can't get a job, or register to vote, or get a passport.


----------



## HaShev

Oddball said:


> And he claims to be a "libertarian" no less.


Oh then I assumed in parts wrong, but that just makes their hypocracy worse.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> The child may exist, but as a non-official entity.  Without a birth certificate they can't get a job, or register to vote, or get a passport.


No. It’s official alright. It just isn’t yet entered in some bureaucratic maze. 

And your “point” remains pointless l, you oblio.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> I did. You definitely need to learn how to comprehend.


The president nominated, the senate confirmed, the paperwork was even completed, but never delivered.

That made the presidents act of nominating William Marbury moot, because the ministerial acts were not completed.


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> But then you are saying Obama inviting what he called a Russian spy (Kislyak)into the WH 24 times with papers lying around is the same violation, but in the case of Obama he used that spy in order to do things that got Nixon in trouble=spying on political rivals, and even further he used Kislyak to interfere and manipulate elections and commit treason.
> This is why Obama quickly hid and sealed his WH logs in archives when it was being outted who was on his logs (murderers and spys).
> Those logs and his docs are in violation of your own standards-oops.
> Do yourself a favor and research the "DEADLINE" date the FBI was required by the courts to be Handing over the Hunder Biden Files and then look at the date of the raid "Surprise"!
> This is about intimidation on the part of the Biden administration to back off the Bidens corruption cases=obstruction is by the DOJ and certain specific under investigation FBI bad actors sitting on the case.
> This is why judiciary committee members were also politically hit=intimidation=obstruction look it up if you don't know what obstruction is.
> This is the fascist behavior you support, yet you argue to grant people fleeing countries with such behavior and corruption sanctuary makes you a giant hypocrit and the types they are fleeing from.   YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES AND WHAT YOU'VE BECOME.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> No. It’s official alright. It just isn’t yet entered in some bureaucratic maze.
> 
> And your “point” remains pointless l, you oblio.


If the paperwork isn't completed (ministerial act) the wishes of the president become MOOT.

If presidential proclamations were enacted instantaneously, William Marbury would be Judge William Marbury.


----------



## HaShev

bodecea said:


> He's MAGA-lying.  None of the found materials had been declassified.


It's automaric when the GSA transports them, otherwise Obama and Bush would be raided.
The deal with Hillary was she did not have presidential privileges and she left it easily accessible by foreign actors connected to servers online.  Even if she only placed docs on a non connected computer, she had no rights to certain stuff nor kept it safe with Anthony Weiner having access, thus his Pakistani Girlfriend and Clinton assistant who is known to have donated to deemed terrorist activist orgs.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> The president nominated, the senate confirmed, the paperwork was even completed, but never delivered.


Zzz


postman said:


> That made the presidents act of nominating William Marbury moot, because the ministerial acts were not completed.


It made the Marbury claim something which the Court didn’t choose to recognize.  But that was Marbury’s claim. It wasn’t the President’s. 

By the way, on a slight side note, do you have any understanding at all of why Marbury v. Madison which officially established our American notion of “judicial review” is often *criticized* as a legal decision?  

Anyway, it doesn’t matter. The fact is:  it does *not* stand for the proposition you mistakenly believe it stands for. 😎


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> View attachment 689619


I rest my case, you don't care about equal justice, nor democracy, nor are you a good "libertarian" -look up the definition


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> It's automaric when the GSA transports them,



GSA would not transport them without a full inventory.  Has anyone seen such a thing, or even heard of one?


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> If the paperwork isn't completed (ministerial act) the wishes of the president become MOOT.


Nope. That’s *not* the holding of Marbury v. Madison. 


postman said:


> If presidential proclamations were enacted instantaneously, William Marbury would be Judge William Marbury.


Presidential “proclamations” were not there  even the thing at issue. And they aren’t here, either.


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> I rest my case, you don't care about equal justice, nor democracy, nor are you a good "libertarian" -look up the definition


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> It's automaric when the GSA transports them, otherwise Obama and Bush would be raided.


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Your whataboutism won't help you or Trump.


You asked a very stupid question. Suck it up buttercup.


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> It's automaric when the GSA transports them, otherwise Obama and Bush would be raided.



Neither Obama nor Bush, took shit to their house.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Zzz
> 
> It made the Marbury claim something which the Court didn’t choose to recognize.  But that was Marbury’s claim. It wasn’t the President’s.


_On the day before Adams’ term ended, he nominated 42 men to serve as justices of the peace, 

 After the Senate approved his choices the next day, Marshall was assigned to finalize the paperwork and deliver the commissions. It was a lot of work and he didn’t get to four of them, including one belonging to a Virginia politician named William Marbury.

When Jefferson took over the White House, he was irked by Adams’ last-second attempt to pack the federal courts with political allies. He told his own Secretary of State, James Madison, to withhold the four undelivered commissions._

No commission (paperwork) no judgeship, no matter what Adams said or did.  Adams making Marbury a judge had no force of law until the ministerial acts were completed.

That's what the supreme court ruled.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Nope. That’s *not* the holding of Marbury v. Madison.
> 
> Presidential “proclamations” were not there  even the thing at issue. And they aren’t here, either.


Proclamations, nominations, any presidential action.
Not in force until the ministerial acts put it into force.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> That act cannot defeat the claim that the President has the unilateral authority to declassify a classified document. What the AG allegedly “believes” has literally nothing at all to do with it.


Separation of Powers, trump is not a King or God.  He's a former President and has no powers now, and a very few as expressed in Art II.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> I did previously. Kash Patel said so. And the DOJ acknowledged as much before the raid.
> 
> Irrelevant. What is relevant was the declassification before his term ended.


Neither you nor trump have provided evidence to support this silly claim.  Read the link above, and the takeaway is *classified documents are the property of the United States*.  trump is not now and not then the owner of these boxes.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> _On the day before Adams’ term ended, he nominated 42 men to serve as justices of the peace, _
> 
> _After the Senate approved his choices the next day, Marshall was assigned to finalize the paperwork and deliver the commissions. It was a lot of work and he didn’t get to four of them, including one belonging to a Virginia politician named William Marbury.
> 
> When Jefferson took over the White House, he was irked by Adams’ last-second attempt to pack the federal courts with political allies. He told his own Secretary of State, James Madison, to withhold the four undelivered commissions._
> 
> No commission (paperwork) no judgeship, no matter what Adams said or did.  Adams making Marbury a judge had no force of law until the ministerial acts were completed.
> 
> That's what the supreme court ruled.


Yea. I know. Undelivered (but required delivery) of the paperwork led the court to fuck over Marbury.  

No such imposition of any duty exists on the President to engage in ministerial acts for his determination to declassify the classified documents he possesses.  He says it. It’s so. Marbury doesn’t even *address* that matter.


----------



## postman

Rye Catcher said:


> Separation of Powers, trump is not a King or God.  He's a former President and has no powers now, and a very few as expressed in Art II.


Plus the acts of the president don't become official until those under him carry out the ministerial acts that complete the process.

So Trumps order to declassify doesn't take effect until the originating agency formally declassifies the documents.  Which would involve stamping all copies under it's control with "declassified", and notifying agencies with copies to do the same.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Neither you nor trump have provided evidence to support this silly claim.



Yes. I did.  


Rye Catcher said:


> Read the link above, and the takeaway is *classified documents are the property of the United States*.


Nope. Once the president has declassified them, they aren’t classified anymore. And the documents are the property of the United States with or without regard to their status as being classified. 


Rye Catcher said:


> trump is not now and not then the owner of these boxes.


I agree. He is not the owner. But then again, I never said he was. 

But feel free to continue arguing things I haven’t discussed. 😂


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> View attachment 689623


That wasn't a whatabout, that was an example that Presidents "always" had priveleges, which is why I also used Hillary as an example, stating the obvious, she was not a president and thus had no priveleges.   It's a valid argument to use Hillary, because the claim is that Trump won't be allowed to run aka to use this to subvert their political rival, yet Hillary was allowed to run, so Hillary makes the best case argument that this is indeed a political witch hunt used to try an keep Trump from running, which will put a damper in all their lawless acts.   They comitted a lot of serious crimes, and are like animals cornered, they have nothing to lose which is why the brazen unecessary raid.=they don't care what it looks like, they are already knee deep in criminal behavior.
Your ad hominem argument of Whataboutism is therefore invalid and blatantly tactical repeating what the media tells you to reply when cornered in arguments about these issues.  That is why they also tactically always deflect and displace for that strategy to always say WHATBOUTISM instead of "oh well you got me there" *LOL*


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> No such imposition of any duty exists on the President to engage in ministerial acts for his determination to declassify the classified documents he possesses.  He says it. It’s so. Marbury doesn’t even *address* that matter.


We're talking a constitutional power of the president, and the court said they're not carried out, until the ministerial acts are completed.

The same thing holds for the presidents absolute power to pardon.  Until the pardon is delivered like the commissions, the pardon is NULL.

If presidential acts like declassifying were instantaneous, why would his constitutional acts have requirements his executive acts did not have.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead said:


> You asked a very stupid question. Suck it up buttercup.


Have your whiny little baby fit. It just shows us you see the writing on the wall.


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


>


I don't think you get it, the GSA would be violating the law, and the DOJ would be raiding the GSA personnel who boxed and transported such doccuments, unless unless it was ok to do so-oops


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

postman said:


> We're talking a constitutional power of the president, and the court said they're not carried out, until the ministerial acts are completed.
> 
> The same thing holds for the presidents absolute power to pardon.  Until the pardon is delivered like the commissions, the pardon is NULL.
> 
> If presidential acts like declassifying were instantaneous, why would his constitutional acts have requirements his executive acts did not have.


So wait,the Facebook educated dildo hasn't outsmarted career lawyers and judges? No way!


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> We're talking a constitutional power of the president, and the court said they're not carried out, until the ministerial acts are completed.


Which you are straining to apply to the declassification of classified materials. And there ain’t no working analog. 😂


postman said:


> The same thing holds for the president absolute power to pardon.  Until the pardon is delivered like the commissions, the pardon is NULL.


First, it’s not an absolute power. Secondly, it isn’t null. It just isn’t formally entered and able to be recognized until it’s filed. 


postman said:


> If presidential acts like declassifying were instantaneous, why would his constitutional acts have requirements his executive acts did not have.


It’s not an act. If he declassifies a classified document in his possession, it is declassified. The FBI DOESN’T necessarily know it, at that moment, but it’s status is still declassified. 

It is perfectly ok with me that you disagree. 😂


----------



## postman

HaShev said:


> I don't think you get it, the GSA would be violating the law, and the DOJ would be raiding the GSA personnel who boxed and transported such doccuments, unless unless it was ok to do so-oops


Wrong.

No more than if you mailed a letter containing illegal drugs, or other contraband, the Post Office would not be violating the law by delivering them.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> Yes. I did.
> 
> Nope. Once the president has declassified them, they aren’t classified anymore. And the documents are the property of the United States with or without regard to their status as being classified.
> 
> I agree. He is not the owner. But then again, I never said he was.
> 
> But feel free to continue arguing things I haven’t discussed. 😂



Utter nonsense,  *Welshy*. If the president doesn't inform anyone he declassified a document, how does anyone know it's been declassified?


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> I don't think you get it, the GSA would be violating the law, and the DOJ would be raiding the GSA personnel who boxed and transported such doccuments, unless unless it was ok to do so-oops View attachment 689638



way too many words to be a useful meme


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Have your whiny little baby fit. It just shows us you see the writing on the wall.


I try to avoid talking trash. I am not always successful.


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> I don't think you get it, the GSA would be violating the law, and the DOJ would be raiding the GSA personnel who boxed and transported such doccuments, unless unless it was ok to do so-oops View attachment 689638



It's not illegal to move classified documents out of the White House.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Secondly, it isn’t null. *It just isn’t formally entered and able to be recognized until it’s filed. *


And this wouldn't equally apply to declassification?
Not able to be recognized.


BackAgain said:


> It’s not an act. If he declassifies a classified document in his possession, it is declassified.


It's still a presidential act, like pardoning, or nominating judges, or any of his other executive powers under the constitution.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


What kind of shit is the FBI making up, now?


----------



## postman

Faun said:


> Utter nonsense,  *Welshy*. If the president doesn't inform anyone he declassified a document, how does anyone know it's been declassified?


If the president pardons somebody, but doesn't tell anyone, that person was never pardoned.
If the president nominates somebody to be a judge, but doesn't tell anyone, that person never becomes a judge.

How is the act of declassification any different?

For presidential acts to become official, he has to notify the people who actually to the ministerial acts to make them official.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> What kind of shit is the FBI making up, now?



And now we have come full circle, every other tactic tried by Trump and his followers have failed...so now they are recycling the old ones


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> I don't know if reasonable doubt can be reached merely by Trump saying he did so. I don't think it's particularly reasonable to think that he actually wanted all those documents he had squirreled away to become public information, which is what declassification would actually mean.


Not at all. Declassified doesn't mean the documents must be released to the public. It means that after that there's no crime of mishandling classified if you take them home. Not even if the DOJ has selected a man and then desperately searched for a crime to pin on him.


Marener said:


> These were top secret government documents including human sources and spy satellite data. Disclosure of the information in these documents (which seems most likely to be contemporary information, not historical) would be basically unprecedented.


Who was it disclosed to and when?


Marener said:


> Doing so without notification of anyone until after the raid seems a little too convenient to be true.
> 
> The DoJ filing last night indicates Trump and his lawyers did not tell anyone that these were declassified documents. Not when they sent them to NARA. Not when Jay Bratt picked them up in June. As far as I can tell, Trump has not submitted to any actual authority that these documents were at all declassified.


Trump WAS the sole authority when he declassified them. Even if he never told a soul, which I doubt, the legal presumption would be that he intended to declassify them rather than violate laws about handling classified material.


Marener said:


> But as others have pointed out, even if we accept they were declassified, that still does not get Trump out of trouble. The laws that the DoJ cited as justification for the search do not require classified data. Trump still was given a subpoena for all documents bearing classified markings and failed to produce all these documents. That's a pretty significant legal problem.


I'd need to see the subpoena to judge that. I think proving intent, and getting indictments, given the Hillary doctrines, will be impossible.


Marener said:


> There are other relevant privacy laws that the president cannot waive a magic wand with.


Just so. That's why he could declassify documents never intended for release to the public.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> And this wouldn't equally apply to declassification?
> Not able to be recognized.
> 
> It's still a presidential act, like pardoning, or nominating judges, or any of his other executive powers under the constitution.


You’re entitled to believe whatever you wish. But nothing in Marbury addresses this. Nothing.


----------



## postman

Faun said:


> It's not illegal to move classified documents out of the White House.


Actually the GSA would be in trouble, if they had been informed that the boxes they never saw the contents of, in fact contained classified materials.

They would then have to treat them differently than boxes with Melania's  shoes.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> Not at all. Declassified doesn't mean the documents must be released to the public.



Actually it does.  Any record in the hands of the government that isn't classified, or constitute private information like HIPPA or Privacy Act documents, have to be disclosed to anyone who asks for them.

FOIA.

(with limited executive work product, ongoing investigation etc exceptions)


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> You’re entitled to believe whatever you wish. But nothing in Marbury addresses this. Nothing.


Marbury said it ain't official till the paperwork to make it official is done. 

Trump would need somebody to carry out the paperwork to declassify the materials, before it's official.


----------



## WEATHER53

Seymour Flops said:


> They've got him this time, alright!


They got him big time for doing what they have concocted into a crime.  They are playing “what if” again in yet another salacious  attempt to prevent a person they know will beat them from even appearing on the ballot


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Yes. I did.
> 
> Nope. Once the president has declassified them, they aren’t classified anymore. And the documents are the property of the United States with or without regard to their status as being classified.
> 
> I agree. He is not the owner. But then again, I never said he was.
> 
> But feel free to continue arguing things I haven’t discussed. 😂


Try to keep some common sense, along with the law.  Read the link above, the one you seem to mock and didn't comprehend.

As to the common sense, all of the classified documents and especially Top Secret and above cannot be declassified to the Public.  Nor can any other document, or the record or testimony under oath in a criminal grand jury.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Show us the FBI's evidence.  Let's see it.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Marbury said it ain't official till the paperwork to make it official is done.
> 
> Trump would need somebody to carry out the paperwork to declassify the materials, before it's official.


You may keep repeating your misguided and ignorant belief.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Not at all. Declassified doesn't mean the documents must be released to the public. It means that after that there's no crime of mishandling classified if you take them home. Not even if the DOJ has selected a man and then desperately searched for a crime to pin on him.


Yes, it does. Declassified documents must be disclosed at the request of people due to a little law called the Freedom of Information Act.


Seymour Flops said:


> Who was it disclosed to and when?


It would be disclosed if they were declassified. If you asked the government to provide you a copy of any of them, they would be required legally to turn them over to you.


Seymour Flops said:


> Trump WAS the sole authority when he declassified them. Even if he never told a soul, which I doubt, the legal presumption would be that he intended to declassify them rather than violate laws about handling classified material.


I don't know. This idea that Trump can declassify something without telling anyone seems to be legally shaky. Trump also had the ability to pardon anyone, even preemptively. Take a hypothetical, Guy Reffitt was a Capitol Rioter and sentenced to 7 years. What if Trump came out and said he pardoned Reffitt and just didn't tell anyone. Do you think the court would take that seriously? I doubt it.

I don't think there is any legal presumption that these documents are declassified. It's like finding a gun. It's loaded until proven otherwise. Those documents are classified until proven otherwise.


Seymour Flops said:


> I'd need to see the subpoena to judge that. I think proving intent, and getting an inductments, given the Hillary doctrines will be impossible


Good news. The subpoena was just revealed in the latest DoJ filing. It's on page 47.




__





						DocumentCloud
					






					www.documentcloud.org
				




Proving intent is not impossible. For starters, some of these documents were found in one of Trump's drawers in his office next to his passport. Many of them were found in the storage room which their lawyers said they searched thoroughly. It's not just one page. It's hundreds of them. They have bright cover sheets that are hard to miss. This is far different than Clinton.


Seymour Flops said:


> Just so. That's why he could declassify documents never intended for release to the public.


I think those same privacy laws would prevent Trump from having those documents in his closet too.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> You may keep repeating your misguided and ignorant belief.


Name any other power of the presidency that propagates instantaneously.

The president as commander in chief, can't even order a nuclear strike, until other ministerial acts are carried out.


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> way too many words to be a useful meme


Caught you again, ad hominems, excuses, avoidance.....none of these replies adresses your shame NORMAL HUMAN BEINGS FEEL.
I rest my case, the media programed & made you guys sociopaths.


----------



## HaShev

postman said:


> Wrong.
> 
> No more than if you mailed a letter containing illegal drugs, or other contraband, the Post Office would not be violating the law by delivering them.


The post office asks you if there is flamables explosives etc, they will not box up something illegal,  the GSA is not allowed to box up and deliver unlawful docs in the same manner.
And your comment about the Post office is flawed, they too have corrupt employees, years ago one which found it amusing to remove a
 Jewish Exponant paper from my father's envelope and replace it with Nazis literature.
There goes your Post office would not do anything illegal analogy.  There's bad actors everywhere, and itcs just a coincidence they all connect back to Biden's associates.


----------



## Golfing Gator

HaShev said:


> Caught you again, ad hominems, excuses, avoidance.....none of these replies adresses your shane NORMAL HUMAN BEINGS FEEL.
> I rest my case, the media programed & made you guys sociopaths.



can you tell us more about this shane you feel and why you think it is normal?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Show us the FBI's evidence.  Let's see it.



Did you see all those documents with classified markings?


----------



## Lastamender

shockedcanadian said:


> I'm not a legal expert, but I still don't understand why they would reject a Special Master to catalog what has been taken, regardless of Trumps actions.


Because the fix is in just like the 2020 election.


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> It's not illegal to move classified documents out of the White House.


Documents they don't want moved are recollected same day as viewed.
Once again all presidents hold classified docs, and explain how a coctail napkin and Ivanas underware drawer is classified?


----------



## Lastamender

Golfing Gator said:


> can you tell us more about this shane you feel and why you think it is normal?






A pretty good movie.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Name any other power of the presidency that propagates instantaneously.
> 
> The president as commander in chief, can't even order a nuclear strike, until other ministerial acts are carried out.


You simply don’t understand the case law. It’s ok.


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> Did you see all those documents with classified markings?


Did you see Biden taking a picture with classified documents on his desk placed(uploaded) online discernable by sophisticated high resolution technology?


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> Documents they don't want moved are recollected same day as viewed.
> Once again all presidents hold classified docs, and explain how a coctail napkin and Ivanas underware drawer is classified?
> View attachment 689657



And classified documents they do want moved remain classified unless specifically designated as unclassified.


----------



## HaShev

Golfing Gator said:


> Did you see all those documents with classified markings?


No, because we are Not allowed to ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, which brings us to the informant was not allowed to know this stuff unless he broke a few laws, oops!
CAPT OBVIOUS SAY HI!


----------



## Rambunctious

Obstruction?... what did Trump do bleach bit the files?....


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> And classified documents they do want moved remain classified unless specifically designated as unclassified.


Then you better raid Obama and Biden's house then, oops!   Argument failure, based on your news source not the law.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Obstruction?... what did Trump do bleach bit the files?....


He got a subpoena for any document with classified markings. He accepted the subpoena. He searched his house and turned over documents and claimed that was everything he had.

Then the FBI raided his house and found out pretty quickly he had a bunch more documents that he should have turned over. 

So not only did he fail to comply with the subpoena. He lied to the DoJ when he said he complied.


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> Then you better raid Obama and Biden's house then, oops!   Argument failure, based on your news source not the law.



Why Obama? He turned everything over to the NARA when he left office. And Biden is president. He's allowed to be in possession of presidential records; classified of not.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> He got a subpoena for any document with classified markings. He accepted the subpoena. He searched his house and turned over documents and claimed that was everything he had.
> 
> Then the FBI raided his house and found out pretty quickly he had a bunch more documents that he should have turned over.
> 
> So not only did he fail to comply with the subpoena. He lied to the DoJ when he said he complied.


His lawyers claimed that was all he had... an oversight... happens all the time..... this is just a distraction so the media doesn't have to cover Hunter....
But it will not work...


----------



## BackAgain

Let’s say that Congress passes a law by a slim majority in both houses which the President considers both very stupid and dangerous.  Accordingly, as he promised he would, he issues his veto. Upon signing that veto statement, it is all over. The act fails to become a law. 

Sure, he has to send the veto message back to Congress, but regardless, the act is not a law. 

Now, let’s switch over to his role as Commander in Chief. He and his staff recognize a regional threat. War has not been declared, but he still has the authority to deploy one of our Fleets to that area. Now, he gives that very order to the Chairman if the joint chiefs. Guess what. His say so is all it takes. 

Or, maybe he is fed up with obstruction from a subordinate, say a cabinet member. He tells the cabinet member, “you're fired.”  Guess what. That cabinet member is done. He will likely be escorted to his office, permitted with supervision to pack his personal stuff and he will be escorted out the door. There may be additional paperwork.  No worries. But until those papers are filed, the cabinet official is still out of the job.


----------



## Rambunctious

The DOJ uses the word _likely_ about a dozen times in their news release today... sounds like the _maybe_ bunch we have here....


----------



## Rambunctious

Improper storage of classified documents happens all the time... 
This is a joke....


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> His lawyers claimed that was all he had... an oversight... happens all the time..... this is just a distraction so the media doesn't have to cover Hunter....
> But it will not work...


Hmmm, an oversight, huh? 

They found over 100 documents, mostly in the store room that the lawyers said they "thoroughly" searched. It also is the storeroom that they refused to let the FBI look through when they came to meet Trump's lawyers voluntarily on June 3rd. And it's not like these documents are inconspicuous. They have these bright yellow and red cover sheets that scream classified information. 

I think these lawyers are going to have a hard time saying it's just an oopsie.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Hmmm, an oversight, huh?
> 
> They found over 100 documents, mostly in the store room that the lawyers said they "thoroughly" searched. It also is the storeroom that they refused to let the FBI look through when they came to meet Trump's lawyers voluntarily on June 3rd. And it's not like these documents are inconspicuous. They have these bright yellow and red cover sheets that scream classified information.
> 
> I think these lawyers are going to have a hard time saying it's just an oopsie.


Bullshit where did you get that?.... LOL


----------



## Rambunctious

The DOJ is in the CYA mode.... unreal they take documents dump them on the floor and took pictures of them????
Most agents on the scene don't even have the classification level to view them....


----------



## Marener

BackAgain said:


> Let’s say that Congress passes a law by a slim majority in both houses which the President considers both very stupid and dangerous.  Accordingly, as he promised he would, he issues his veto. Upon signing that veto statement, it is all over. The act fails to become a law.
> 
> Sure, he has to send the veto message back to Congress, but regardless, the act is not a law.
> 
> Now, let’s switch over to his role as Commander in Chief. He and his staff recognize a regional threat. War has not been declared, but he still has the authority to deploy one of our Fleets to that area. Now, he gives that very order to the Chairman if the joint chiefs. Guess what. His say so is all it takes.
> 
> Or, maybe he is fed up with obstruction from a subordinate, say a cabinet member. He tells the cabinet member, “you're fired.”  Guess what. That cabinet member is done. He will likely be escorted to his office, permitted with supervision to pack his personal stuff and he will be escorted out the door. There may be additional paperwork.  No worries. But until those papers are filed, the cabinet official is still out of the job.


In all these circumstances, the president has communicated his order to subordinates who carry out the order that also generates records.

The veto is a signature, a written record.

Orders to the fleet are written records.

Firing a cabinet member produces a record.

There are no records demonstrating these documents are declassified. None. The excuse people are making is that Trump doesn't even have to tell anyone he declassified the records. That seems especially sketchy. I don't think we'd accept any other executive action to be enacted just by thinking it.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Bullshit where did you get that?.... LOL


Read the DoJ court filing from last night. Roughly page 12 (although I strongly recommend you read the whole thing)





__





						DocumentCloud
					






					www.documentcloud.org


----------



## Stann

skews13 said:


> Trump insisted he sign a bill for harder sentencing for people who mishandle secret papers of the govt.
> 
> That is a problem for him isn’t it?


How ironic, some people say trump is brilliant; I say he's a brilliant fool.


----------



## Rambunctious

Trump says any classified documents left at Mar A Lago have been declassified... now what?....


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Read the DoJ court filing from last night. Roughly page 12 (although I strongly recommend you read the whole thing)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DocumentCloud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.documentcloud.org


I did and its full of words like Likely and possibly....


----------



## Stann

Marener said:


> In all these circumstances, the president has communicated his order to subordinates who carry out the order that also generates records.
> 
> The veto is a signature, a written record.
> 
> Orders to the fleet are written records.
> 
> Firing a cabinet member produces a record.
> 
> There are no records demonstrating these documents are declassified. None. The excuse people are making is that Trump doesn't even have to tell anyone he declassified the records. That seems especially sketchy. I don't think we'd accept any other executive action to be enacted just by thinking it.


More lies from trump, what else could you expect from him.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> I did and its full of words like Likely and possibly....


Of the Seized Evidence, thirteen boxes or containers contained documents with classification markings, and in all, over one hundred unique documents with classification markings—that is, more than twice the amount produced on June 3, 2022, in response to the grand jury subpoena—were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. See, e.g., Attachment F (redacted FBI photograph of certain documents and classified cover sheets recovered from a container in the “45 office”). The classification levels ranged from CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET information, and certain documents included additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution. In some instances, even the FBI counterintelligence personnel and DOJ attorneys conducting the review required additional clearances before they were permitted to review certain documents. Notwithstanding counsel’s representation on June 3, 2022, that materials from the White House were only located in the Storage Room, classified documents were found in both the Storage Room and in the former President’s office.

No likely or possibly. It's exactly as I described which you said was "bullshit".


----------



## excalibur

They were declassified per EOs issued by GW Bush and Øbama. 

Every time a President removes classified documents from the White House those are automatically declassified per those EOs.

The DoJ is now rogue.


----------



## Marener

excalibur said:


> Every time a President removes classified documents from the White House those are automatically declassified per those EOs.


They're not. The EOs say nothing about that. 

I sure hope this is just trolling.


----------



## excalibur

* Obama’s executive order no. 13526, issued in 2009, laid out the stringent process all federal officials and agencies needed to follow for declassification but explicitly exempted the sitting president and vice president from having to follow those procedures.

There is also an executive order by George W. Bush in 2003 that covers it.*​






__





						Donald Trump Had a Standing Order for Declassification of Docs
					

Oops! Sorry, leftoids.    Donald Trump had a “standing order” that the documents at Mar-A-Lago were to be considered declassified, according to a statement the former president’s office provided to Just the News on Friday.  “The very fact that these documents were present at Mar-a-Lago means...



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## two_iron

I'm old enough to remember the stuttering fuck divulging classified documents to the camera.

*YOU* have a bowel movement *BEFORE* you are trotted out to the camera. *YOU* mumble incoherently and *YOU* struggle with the English language until *YOU* hear snickering and laughter. *YOU* slink back to your hole and *YOU* do not attempt to answer any questions.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Of the Seized Evidence, thirteen boxes or containers contained documents with classification markings, and in all, over one hundred unique documents with classification markings—that is, more than twice the amount produced on June 3, 2022, in response to the grand jury subpoena—were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. See, e.g., Attachment F (redacted FBI photograph of certain documents and classified cover sheets recovered from a container in the “45 office”). The classification levels ranged from CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET information, and certain documents included additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution. In some instances, even the FBI counterintelligence personnel and DOJ attorneys conducting the review required additional clearances before they were permitted to review certain documents. Notwithstanding counsel’s representation on June 3, 2022, that materials from the White House were only located in the Storage Room, classified documents were found in both the Storage Room and in the former President’s office.
> 
> No likely or possibly. It's exactly as I described which you said was "bullshit".


It is BS this entire thing is BS.... nothing is going to come from this... Trump will not be prosecuted or taken to jail and he will be able to seek office again if he chooses... meanwhile Joe is dividing the nation and ruining our economy and letting China kill our kids and elderly with a bio weapon and drugs... and you are stuck on this....
Says more about you than Trump....


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> It is BS this entire thing is BS.... nothing is going to come from this... Trump will not be prosecuted or taken to jail and he will be able to seek office again if he chooses... meanwhile Joe is dividing the nation and ruining our economy and letting China kill our kids and elderly with a bio weapon and drugs... and you are stuck on this....
> Says more about you than Trump....


Trump won't run again. He's not stupid.


----------



## Marener

excalibur said:


> ​​* Obama’s executive order no. 13526, issued in 2009, laid out the stringent process all federal officials and agencies needed to follow for declassification but explicitly exempted the sitting president and vice president from having to follow those procedures.*​​*There is also an executive order by George W. Bush in 2003 that covers it.*​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Donald Trump Had a Standing Order for Declassification of Docs
> 
> 
> Oops! Sorry, leftoids.    Donald Trump had a “standing order” that the documents at Mar-A-Lago were to be considered declassified, according to a statement the former president’s office provided to Just the News on Friday.  “The very fact that these documents were present at Mar-a-Lago means...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com


Cool. Where's the part about stuff "automatically" being declassified?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> You know they added that to the picture on purpose just to poke at Trump!


The entire thing is to poke at Trump.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Trump won't run again. He's not stupid.


Don't be so sure he may have to in order to stop the witch hunt because the left isn't going to stop coming after him....
In the end it may be TDSers that end up pushing him into the race...


----------



## iceberg

Marener said:


> There's no evidence that the server was hacked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI: No evidence Clinton server hacked despite Trump tweet
> 
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI said Wednesday that it has no evidence Hillary Clinton's private email server was compromised even though President Donald Trump tweeted a news report that alleged the Chinese had hacked it. Trump tweeted Tuesday evening about a report in the conservative Daily Caller...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look, it makes no sense to say that Trump had his documents secure but he also had them declassified.
> 
> If they're declassified, then the information is now publicly available, meaning that Trump has opened the door to anyone getting to see them without regard to protecting national security. So it makes NO DIFFERENCE whether they were locked up with secret service or whatever. If they're declassified, they're not secrets anymore.


Then why did the DOJ tell him to simply secure them better back in June?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Rambunctious said:


> Trump says any classified documents left at Mar A Lago have been declassified... now what?....


Now everyone laughs at his childish lie. What else?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

iceberg said:


> Then why did the DOJ tell him to simply secure them better back in June?


Because they were told none of those docs were classified. As you can find by actually reading the document that is the thread topic.


----------



## Stann

Rambunctious said:


> Trump says any classified documents left at Mar A Lago have been declassified... now what?....


If he's not lying that's fine. But there has to be a paper trail of anything that was declassified, if there isn't a paper trail it was not declassified. Someone just saying it was be classified does not mean it's been declassified, especially considering this source. We're talking about the biggest liar in the world.


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> Then why did the DOJ tell him to simply secure them better back in June?


Secure what exactly?

The DoJ was told that all documents with classified markings had been turned over to them. The lawyers for Trump signed a statement indicating that was true and forbid the DoJ lawyers from looking in any of the boxes in the basement. If the Trump lawyers had told the truth, there wouldn't have been any classified documents in there. Maybe Bratt was already suspicious they weren't being truthful. 

As far as I'm aware, the DoJ told them to lock the room in an effort to preserve evidence. It wasn't them requesting a bigger lock because that's how they said it should be stored. They said close the room, don't touch anything in it until further notice.


----------



## Stann

Rambunctious said:


> Don't be so sure he may have to in order to stop the witch hunt because the left isn't going to stop coming after him....
> In the end it may be TDSers that end up pushing him into the race...


When a criminal continues to get away with all his crimes, it doesn't set a good example especially if that person was supposed to be a leader leader.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Don't be so sure he may have to in order to stop the witch hunt because the left isn't going to stop coming after him....
> In the end it may be TDSers that end up pushing him into the race...


Yes. The American public definitely want to elect someone so that they can weasel out of a federal investigation.

Great plan.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Marener said:


> As far as I'm aware, the DoJ told them to lock the room in an effort to preserve evidence.


And possible unclassified presidential records.


----------



## excalibur

Marener said:


> Cool. Where's the part about stuff "automatically" being declassified?




Right here.

​*Sec. 3.5.*_ Mandatory Declassification Review._​​(a) *Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all information classified under this order or predecessor orders shall be subject to a review for declassification* by the originating agency if:​​...​​(b) *Information originated by the incumbent President* or the incumbent Vice President; the incumbent President’s White House Staff or the incumbent Vice President’s Staff; committees, commissions, or boards appointed by the incumbent President; or other entities within the Executive Office of the President that solely advise and assist the incumbent President i*s exempted from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.*​


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Then why did the DOJ tell him to simply secure them better back in June?



according to the DOJ, because he was not upfront about what he had.


----------



## Lastamender

Faun said:


> And classified documents they do want moved remain classified unless specifically designated as unclassified.


Who are they?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> according to the DOJ, because he was not upfront about what he had.


Uh huh.

This is the same DOJ who lied to FISA isn't it?

When to you stop believing them?

Now not up front? Then take them back. To know he want up front they had to see them. Why did they leave them there is a huge issue?


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Uh huh.
> 
> This is the same DOJ who lied to FISA isn't it?
> 
> When to you stop believing them?
> 
> Now not up front? Then take them back. To know he want up front they had to see them. Why did they leave them there is a huge issue?



Did I say I believed them. 

It is a quandary, two sides that are famous for lying, both telling a different story. 

Normally the truth lies some where in the middle.


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> Uh huh.
> 
> This is the same DOJ who lied to FISA isn't it?
> 
> When to you stop believing them?
> 
> Now not up front? Then take them back. To know he want up front they had to see them. Why did they leave them there is a huge issue?


When the DoJ went to Mar a Lago in June to collect any documents labeled classified, they were not allowed to go through Trump's boxes. 

The idea that the DoJ "left" anything at Mar a Lago is false. They had no legal authority to take anything that Trump and his lawyers didn't hand over to them. They had no legal authority to go looking for anything without permission.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Did I say I believed them.
> 
> It is a quandary, two sides that are famous for lying, both telling a different story.
> 
> Normally the truth lies some where in the middle.


Sorry. When an arresting party has lied and shown bias, they should be removed from any further activity in the topic or person

Period.


----------



## bravoactual

Stann said:


> If he's not lying that's fine. But there has to be a paper trail of anything that was declassified, if there isn't a paper trail it was not declassified. Someone just saying it was be classified does not mean it's been declassified, especially considering this source. We're talking about the biggest liar in the world.



What documents were declassified and when were they declassified?

What Agency/Agencies were involved in the declassified and at which site were the declassifed materials held when they were declassified?

Prior to declassification, how was the material stored?

Which Agency/Agencies were responsible transporting the material to be declassifed?

How was the material to be declassified transported and when?

These just a few of the questions the Traitor and his cabal must answer.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Golfing Gator said:


> Normally the truth lies some where in the middle.


In court filings of factual information made under penalty of perjury and then some?

Uh, no.


----------



## Batcat

Seymour Flops said:


> They've got him this time, alright!


So Trump gets prosecuted and Hillary waltzes away scot-free even though her server was hacked by the Chinese and other nations.  I won’t even bother to mention Hunter Biden.









						BREAKING: Sources Claim Hillary's Server HACKED By FIVE Foreign Countries
					

Bret Baier dropped a bombshell on Fox tonight. Sources are predicting INDICTMENT... and investigations (plural) that will continue even if Hillary were elected.




					clashdaily.com


----------



## Likkmee

But but but


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> So Trump gets prosecuted and Hillary waltzes away scot-free even though her server was hacked by the Chinese and other nations


Maybe you'd have a point if Hillary had these hanging at her house:


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Sorry. When an arresting party has lied and shown bias, they should be removed from any further activity in the topic or person
> 
> Period.



Nobody has been arrested and the other party lies just as much if not more.


----------



## Marener

Golfing Gator said:


> Nobody has been arrested and the other party lies just as much if not more.


Basically they're saying that the DoJ is no longer able to do anything to Trump because of the Carter Page FISA warrant.

And that, well, that's just really stupid.


----------



## Marener

excalibur said:


> Right here.
> 
> ​*Sec. 3.5.*_ Mandatory Declassification Review._​​(a) *Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, all information classified under this order or predecessor orders shall be subject to a review for declassification* by the originating agency if:​​...​​(b) *Information originated by the incumbent President* or the incumbent Vice President; the incumbent President’s White House Staff or the incumbent Vice President’s Staff; committees, commissions, or boards appointed by the incumbent President; or other entities within the Executive Office of the President that solely advise and assist the incumbent President i*s exempted from the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section.*​


Nothing in there say anything about the information being declassified when it leaves. If anything, it's saying that information from the former president is not subject to declassification review, making it immune to declassification through normal means. 

You really don't know what you're looking at.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Nothing in there say anything about the information being declassified when it leaves. If anything, it's saying that information from the former president is not subject to declassification review, making it immune to declassification through normal means.
> 
> You really don't know what you're looking at.


Neither do you; nothing new.


----------



## Care4all

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.



FYI
If you've seen the picture of the classified documents spread out, on the floor, right lower area of the pic, there is a white container holding magazine covers and other personal mementos of former president Trump....the classified documents were found mixed in containers like the one with magazine covers photographed, some in with his passports as well....

They were not in a safe or any place safe, they were mixed in with containers of his personal stuff, from what has been reported about the classified files he brought to his office.


----------



## Batcat

Golfing Gator said:


> Does it not bother you even a tiny bit that he had classified documents just laying around his house?
> 
> Even if it was not illegal, is is still the right thing to do?


What bothers a lot of people in our nation is that Hillary who had classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured server waltzes away scot-free while Trump will likely be prosecuted. To top the mess off, Hillary‘s servers were hacked.









						China Hacked Clinton’s Email Server, Congressman Confirms - AMAC - The Association of Mature American Citizens
					

The U.S. intelligence community established that China hacked Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized email server when she served




					amac.us
				




If Trump was negligently handling classified information, he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. It is not real complicated — the law should apply equally to all. 

The natives are becoming restless.


----------



## Care4all

I didn't think he'd be charged for taking all the presidential records if they got them all back....

But....

I think I'm going to have to change my mind....based on all that has since come forward....with the classified top secret documents from the SCIF, and trump and team lying to the investigators about returning the national security and top secret documents via a sworn affidavit after the last grand jury subpoena ordering Trump's return of the govt documents, and his carelessness in maintaining such obviously important documents.....even our beloved  first president George Washington would be charged with obstruction.....for what Trump has done, at the very very minimum....imo!!!!!!


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> So Trump gets prosecuted and Hillary waltzes away scot-free even though her server was hacked by the Chinese and other nations.


A lie that you literally regurgitated from a Trump tweet. How embarrassing for you.


----------



## Stann

iceberg said:


> Sorry. When an arresting party has lied and shown bias, they should be removed from any further activity in the topic or person
> 
> Period.


Then Trump should never be allowed to be president or hold any other public office ever again.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Nobody has been arrested and the other party lies just as much if not more.


Lol n shit. 

This is horseshit.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Rambunctious said:


> Trump says any classified documents left at Mar A Lago have been declassified... now what?....


And yet directed his counsel to submit a sworn statement that he did, in fact, have classified documents and was handing them over to comply with a subpoena. 17 months after he says he declassified them.

Good luck with that.


----------



## Rust_Cohle

skews13 said:


> To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.
> 
> One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.
> 
> I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Nobody has been arrested and the other party lies just as much if not more.


Now, so Biden lies. Can we lie and make up shit to arrest him now? 

Is this what we are reduced to?


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> Why Obama? He turned everything over to the NARA when he left office. And Biden is president. He's allowed to be in possession of presidential records; classified of not.


Actually he "obstructed justice" when it was pointed out about his WH logs revealed that it was him using Russian agents to interefere and manipulate elections, that's when he quickly took public property and hid them in his archives.  You see THEY ALWAYS protect their crimes by created false narratives that their rival is doing what they are doing, so to protect themselves from later prosecution, I believe the parrots in this room called that strategy Whataboutism.
I know this because I was the first to break the Obama spygate scandal before Greg Jarretts Book.  You can search and date my comments on these archives here.  Not just hide his WH logs, but also sent Kislyak and the others back to Russia, so they can never testify.


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And yet directed his counsel to submit a sworn statement that he did, in fact, have classified documents and was handing them over to comply with a subpoena. 17 months after he says he declassified them.
> 
> Good luck with that.


Makes no sense. Is there something wrong with you?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead said:


> Makes no sense. Is there something wrong with you?


No, you just got too rabid to understand simple English sentences again. Good luck next time.


----------



## Stann

Rambunctious said:


> I did and its full of words like Likely and possibly....


That's because they're smarter than trump, they aren't going to make accusations unless they have proof to back them up.  Now they have plenty of proof. So let's see what happens next. Trump keeps pleading the fifth, which he himself said only criminals do. And now he wants a special master which is how true of his conspirators got away with their crimes. He also wanted the whole thing revealed so he could intimidate the witnesses as he has done in the past. Everybody's catching on to just how trump works and they're making sure he doesn't corrupt the justice process again. There's a very definite criminal pattern at work here. There's no denying that anymore. I consider donald trump worse than Benedict Arnold. During the civil war up to 30% of the population felt some allegiance to the British crown. With Trump it's all about ego, both men overestimated their value to the nation, they both felt betrayed in some way. It's sad but true.


----------



## HaShev

Meathead said:


> Makes no sense. Is there something wrong with you?





Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And yet directed his counsel to submit a sworn statement that he did, in fact, have classified documents and was handing them over to comply with a subpoena. 17 months after he says he declassified them.
> 
> Good luck with that.


1) because they wanted them , because something was happening under Biden's watch a typical leak and they needed a scapegoat to blame.
2)you just admitted Trump complied-oops!


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, you just got too rabid to understand simple English sentences again. Good luck next time.


Sorry, what's too "rabid". My simple understanding of English means that I have "too' much rabies.?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

HaShev said:


> 1) because they wanted them , because something was happening under Biden's watch a typical leak and they needed a scapegoat to blame.
> 2)you just admitted Trump complied-oops!


No I didn't. In fact, we know it was a lie. When he directed a sworn statement that he was turning over classified documents and no more of them were located at Mar a Lago that was a lie. Thus the obstruction of Justice allegations in the filing. Damn son, Trump has turned your brains to mush.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Meathead said:


> Sorry, what's too "rabid". My simple understanding of English means that I have "too' much rabies.?


How frustrating for you. I can't dumb it down any further for you, sorry.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Batcat said:


> If Trump was negligently handling classified information, he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. It is not real complicated — the law should apply equally to all.



I agree 100%.

I have said a 100 or more times on here that I think Hillary should be in jail.  IF I had done what she did, I would still be in jail


----------



## Meathead

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> How frustrating for you. I can't dumb it down any further for you, sorry.


You haven't failed yet. Go for it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Now, so Biden lies. Can we lie and make up shit to arrest him now?
> 
> Is this what we are reduced to?



Trump has not been arrested and I doubt there will be any criminal charges.

But if they are, they will not be for lying.


----------



## Golfing Gator

iceberg said:


> Lol n shit.
> 
> This is horseshit.



you are not exactly an unbiased source.


----------



## Batcat

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> A lie that you literally regurgitated from a Trump tweet. How embarrassing for you.


The fact remains there is a disparity of justice in our nation that will cause manor problems soon if not corrected. 

No, I didn’t get my info from a Trump tweet. Trump is now a politician. I don’t believe anything a politician says. 









						Hacker ‘Guccifer’: I Got Inside Hillary Clinton’s Server
					

The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton’s private email address is making a bombshell new claim -- that he also gained access to the for




					www.nbcnews.com
				




_The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton’s private email address is making a bombshell new claim — that he also gained access to the former Secretary of State’s “completely unsecured” server.

“It was like an open orchid on the Internet,” Marcel Lehel Lazar, who uses the devilish handle Guccifer, told NBC News in an exclusive interview from a prison in Bucharest. “There were hundreds of folders.”

Lazar was extradited last month from Romania to the United States to face charges he hacked political elites, including Gen. Colin Powell, a member of the Bush family, and former Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal._









						Hillary Clinton's Private Email Server Was Hacked by "Foreign Entity"
					

The code embedded in the server generated an instant “courtesy copy” for nearly all of her emails and forwarded them to a company in Virginia.




					www.mintpressnews.com
				




_Chinese-owned firm with operations in Washington D.C. hacked Hillary Clinton’s private server “*throughout her term as secretary of state and obtained nearly all her emails*,” reports the Daily Caller‘s Richard Pollock.




			The Chinese firm *obtained Clinton’s emails in real time* as she sent and received communications and documents through her personal server, according to the sources, who said the hacking was Cconducted as part of an intelligence operation.
*The Chinese wrote code that was embedded in the server*, which was kept in Clinton’s residence in upstate New York. *The code generated an instant “courtesy copy” for nearly all of her emails and forwarded them to the Chinese company*, according to the sources.” –Daily Caller

Click to expand...

During a July 12 House Committee on the Judiciary hearing, Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert (R) disclosed that the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found that virtually all of Clinton’s emails from her homebrew server were funneled to a “foreign entity.” Gohmert did not reveal the entity’s identity – however he said it wasn’t Russia.

A government staff official briefed on the ICIG’s findings told the Daily Caller that the Chinese firm which hacked Clinton’s emails *operates in Washington’s northern Virginia suburbs, *and that it was not a technology firm – but a “front group” for the Chinese government._









						FBI files: There were multiple hacking attempts on Hillary's unsecured email server
					

FBI documents show there were multiple hacking attempts on Hillary Clinton's private, unsecured email servers, which she used as Secretary of State.




					www.bizpacreview.com
				




***snip***

_IT guy: I destroyed Hillary’s phones with a hammer
According to Justin Cooper’s notes, Hillary’s server rooms were often left totally unsecured. This left them vulnerable to hacking from enemies of the United States who want to access the nation’s top secrets on the U.S. Secretary of State’s home servers.

Months later, Justin Cooper emailed Hillary, alerting her to the ongoing dangers of her unsecured, private email servers after several more hacking attempts were made.

Cooper wrote to Clinton, “It is a constant fight to keep up with the security measures and unfortunately, we keep seeing reminders of why we need to.”

In a previous FBI report, Cooper admitted that there were at least “two instances where he destroyed Clinton’s old mobile phones by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer.”

FBI file: Chinese hackers got copy of all Hillary’s emails​Despite these shocking irregularities and mounting evidence that Hillary had mishandled classified intel that compromised national security, Barack Obama ordered the FBI to turn a blind eye to her gross negligence.

According to Fox News:




			“In August, it was reported that* a Chinese state-owned company hacked Clinton’s email server, then inserted code that forwarded a copy of virtually every email she sent or received after that* — a revelation President Trump demanded be investigated.
*Lisa Page said the Obama administration’s Justice Department advised the FBI not to pursue the gross negligence statute for Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information.”*

Click to expand...

A May 2016 email from fired FBI official Peter Strzok also acknowledged that “we know foreign actors obtained access” to some Hillary emails, “via compromises of the private email accounts” of her staffers._


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> And classified documents they do want moved remain classified unless specifically designated as unclassified.


Except Presidents in archival and usage don't need to go through the process, it's part of their priveleges and doesn't pertain to them, once again the reason why other presidents took archival docs, remember Trumps office just happens to be at his resort not a typical home it's highly guarded, their concerns were met with compliance to add a lock.  It's more secure than a presidential library office in regions of burnt down gov't buildings and breaking of windows and other crime riddled carnage.


----------



## Batcat

Golfing Gator said:


> I agree 100%.
> 
> I have said a 100 or more times on here that I think Hillary should be in jail.  IF I had done what she did, I would still be in jail


I also handled classifed information on a daily basis and I agree with you that if I had placed classified data on a unauthorized compluter let alone a server and was caught — my ass would have been grass.


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> If Trump was negligently handling classified information, he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. It is not real complicated — the law should apply equally to all.


The circumstances surrounding Clinton and Trump are far from equal.


----------



## HaShev

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No I didn't. In fact, we know it was a lie. When he directed a sworn statement that he was turning over classified documents and no more of them were located at Mar a Lago that was a lie. Thus the obstruction of Justice allegations in the filing. Damn son, Trump has turned your brains to mush.


You just implicated the informant in a crime.
If there were more they wanted, they would have retrieved them the first time, and if the informant knew but nobody else did then the informant had to have broken a few laws, like not being privy to those docs-oops!
Once again this raid was done hours  after being humiliated requiring FBI hand over Hunter files=tit for tat revenge intimidation-the choice of fascist everywhere.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> No, I didn’t get my info from a Trump tweet.


Yes you did. You just didn't know it. You got it from a right wing paid liar who knew he was lying to you. That paid liar was regurgitating the tweet of the pathogical liar Trump.

Des this not bother or embarrass you at all? YOU are the sucker these paid liars use to make money.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump has not been arrested and I doubt there will be any criminal charges.
> 
> But if they are, they will not be for lying.


But it will be carried out by people found guilty of lying and framing him.


----------



## iceberg

Golfing Gator said:


> you are not exactly an unbiased source.


Who is anymore?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

iceberg said:


> But it will be carried out by people found guilty of lying and framing him.


False.


----------



## miketx

If trump had run against Hitler in the 30's and he was called Ubermon, the media in cahoots with Hitler would run a story with this headline - Ubermon destroys 2 million Jews!


----------



## miketx

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Yes you did. You just didn't know it. You got it from a right wing paid liar who knew he was lying to you. That paid liar was regurgitating the tweet of the pathogical liar Trump.
> 
> Des this not bother or embarrass you at all? YOU are the sucker these paid liars use to make money.


Everything you post is a lie.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

miketx said:


> Everything you post is a lie.


Cry it all out, mikey. I know this is a rough day for you Trumpers.


----------



## miketx

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Cry it all out, mikey. I know this is a rough day for you Trumpers.


How is it a rough day? I don't watch the news anymore because no one tells the truth.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

miketx said:


> How is it a rough day? I don't watch the news anymore because no one tells the truth.


Right, nobody but you and the orange pile of shit. Got it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Batcat said:


> I also handled classifed information on a daily basis and I agree with you that if I had placed classified data on a unauthorized compluter let alone a server and was caught — my ass would have been grass.



for sure.


----------



## meaner gene

BackAgain said:


> Let’s say that Congress passes a law by a slim majority in both houses which the President considers both very stupid and dangerous.  Accordingly, as he promised he would, he issues his veto. Upon signing that veto statement, it is all over. The act fails to become a law.
> 
> Sure, he has to send the veto message back to Congress, but regardless, the act is not a law.



Read the constitution for what happens if the president fails to tell people he issued a VETO.

*The bill is sent to the President for review. A bill becomes law if signed by the President or if not signed within 10 days and Congress is in session. *

If congress is in session, and the president doesn't return his VETO within 10 days (doesn't tell anybody) the bill becomes law.


----------



## miketx

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Right, nobody but you and the orange pile of shit. Got it.


Lol liar just can't stop. Trump really grabbed your mind by the pussy didn't he? Tell some more fantasy!


----------



## MarathonMike

Allow me to simplify. The J6 dog and pony show flopped and Team China needed to throw a hail Mary before the elections. That's what the Raid on Mar A Lago is all about. Another politcal hit job just like Russian Collusion Impeachment I and 2, J6 etc.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

miketx said:


> Lol liar just can't stop. Trump really grabbed your mind by the pussy didn't he? Tell some more fantasy!


No, I'll leave you to your little baby hissy fit and your pretending you don't read the news, after hopping into this thread to make an ass of yourself.

By the way, it appears your special little orange man is in a little bit of trouble.


----------



## meaner gene

BackAgain said:


> Now, let’s switch over to his role as Commander in Chief. He and his staff recognize a regional threat. War has not been declared, but he still has the authority to deploy one of our Fleets to that area. Now, he gives that very order to the Chairman if the joint chiefs. Guess what. His say so is all it takes.


Wrong.  It takes the Chairman of the joint chiefs to decide if the order he was given, was in fact a "lawful order".

A  lesson learned from Nuremberg, when soldiers carried out clearly illegal orders, and tried to use obedience as an excuse.

It didn't work.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

MarathonMike said:


> Allow me to simplify. The J6 dog and pony show flopped and Team China needed to throw a hail Mary before the elections. That's what the Raid on Mar A Lago is all about. Another politcal hit job just like Russian Collusion Impeachment I and 2, J6 etc.


Such embarrassing fantasies. I cannot believe the grip this historical freak of a man has on your brain.


----------



## shimon

HaShev said:


> Actually he "obstructed justice" when it was pointed out about his WH logs revealed that it was him using Russian agents to interefere and manipulate elections, that's when he quickly took public property and hid them in his archives.  You see THEY ALWAYS protect their crimes by created false narratives that their rival is doing what they are doing, so to protect themselves from later prosecution, I believe the parrots in this room called that strategy Whataboutism.
> I know this because I was the first to break the Obama spygate scandal before Greg Jarretts Book.  You can search and date my comments on these archives here.  Not just hide his WH logs, but also sent Kislyak and the others back to Russia, so they can never testify.


I see the “ art” of scapegoating is alive and well.. The dems were in trouble with the elections fast approaching and Hunter Biden’s laptop … How oh how to get out of their 
delema.  Easy Peasy play their “ Trump” card get everyone riled up and keep them off the real score then keep ramming it down their throats from every angle possible .. After all this isa tried and true method of picking someone or. group that is very visible and in the public’s eye blaming them and sending the herd in their direction while smiling and laughing and staying in power withoutany consequences after all  why play that card now why wasn’t it played before because these guys are masters at misdirection and timing it for their benefit…


----------



## miketx

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, I'll leave you to your little baby hissy fit and your pretending you don't read the news, after hopping into this thread to make an ass of yourself.
> 
> By the way, it appears your special little orange man is in a little bit of trouble.


Lol, you can't stop lying can you? Why can't you stop babbling about trump?


----------



## miketx

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Such embarrassing fantasies. I cannot believe the grip this historical freak of a man has on your brain.


The leftist desperation is imploding with hate.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

He just can't stop admitting crimes...


----------



## meaner gene

HaShev said:


> Except Presidents in archival and usage don't need to go through the process, it's part of their priveleges and doesn't pertain to them, once again the reason why other presidents took archival docs, remember* Trumps office just happens to be at his resort not a typical home it's highly guarded,* their concerns were met with compliance to add a lock.  It's more secure than a presidential library office in regions of burnt down gov't buildings and breaking of windows and other crime riddled carnage.


You have to be completely ignorant about mar-a-lago.  It's a resort where people dined with the president.  Trump even went around showing the guests he was dining with, classified pictures of the missile explosion in North Korea.

As far as security, it's paramount in the areas that the president would occupy, but would not include storage rooms, and other places the president did not occupy.


----------



## meaner gene

Zincwarrior said:


> Obstructing justice charge doesn't require classified docs, only that he intentionally tried to keep them after a lawful subpoena.


They can also go for theft of government property for taking presidential records act documents.  No different than if Trump tried to take the presidential limo, or AF-1 home, and refused to give them back.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Zincwarrior said:


> Very true. I don't think he will be charged with anything actually. I think they were trying to get the docs back.


And just kinda sorta hope they made no copies and that nobody saw them who shouldn't? That stretches credulity.


----------



## bravoactual

Batcat said:


> So Trump gets prosecuted and Hillary waltzes away scot-free even though her server was hacked by the Chinese and other nations.  I won’t even bother to mention Hunter Biden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BREAKING: Sources Claim Hillary's Server HACKED By FIVE Foreign Countries
> 
> 
> Bret Baier dropped a bombshell on Fox tonight. Sources are predicting INDICTMENT... and investigations (plural) that will continue even if Hillary were elected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> clashdaily.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 689680



The amount of pure unadulterated 99/44% essence of bullshit in that post is beyond the limits heretofore set by the Traitor.

There absolutely no proof any Chinese hacking.  We know the Traitor illegally stored/maintained classified information.  What makes you post totally ridiculous is all you have left is HRC....wow.  When in doubt, when nothing else is left, when your quiver is empty....bring up HRC.  Do you even realize your whole and entire post reeks of desparation? 

Pathetic, beyond pathetic.


----------



## Stann

HaShev said:


> 1) because they wanted them , because something was happening under Biden's watch a typical leak and they needed a scapegoat to blame.
> 2)you just admitted Trump complied-oops!


Right, finally complied; oops ! Actually he never complied that's why they had to do the raid. It's akin to throwing up your hands when the police have you cornered.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

bravoactual said:


> The amount of pure unadulterated 99/44% essence of bullshit in that post is beyond the limits heretofore set by the Traitor.
> 
> There absolutely no proof any Chinese hacking.  We know the Traitor illegally stored/maintained classified information.  What makes you post totally ridiculous is all you have left is HRC....wow.  When in doubt, when nothing else is left, when your quiver is empty....bring up HRC.  Do you even realize your whole and entire post reeks of desparation?
> 
> Pathetic, beyond pathetic.


He also likes to throw in cometely irrelevant  links he has never read, to make his posts look more official or something. It's kind of hilarious.


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump has not been arrested and I doubt there will be any criminal charges.
> 
> But if they are, they will not be for lying.


That's true, most of his actions have centered around treason.


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> During a July 12 House Committee on the Judiciary hearing, Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert (R) disclosed that the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found that virtually all of Clinton’s emails from her homebrew server were funneled to a “foreign entity.” Gohmert did not reveal the entity’s identity – however he said it wasn’t Russia.
> 
> A government staff official briefed on the ICIG’s findings told the Daily Caller that the Chinese firm which hacked Clinton’s emails *operates in Washington’s northern Virginia suburbs, *and that it was not a technology firm – but a “front group” for the Chinese government.


The ICIG got it wrong. The DoJ was well aware of this forwarding email address and used it to facilitate copies of emails. 

It wasn’t a hack. 









						Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics
					

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...




					www.cnn.com


----------



## Stann

Zincwarrior said:


> I'm fine with sending both Trump and HRC to Leavenworth for the next 20 years.


At least you got the trump part right.


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> Except Presidents in archival and usage don't need to go through the process, it's part of their priveleges and doesn't pertain to them, once again the reason why other presidents took archival docs, remember Trumps office just happens to be at his resort not a typical home it's highly guarded, their concerns were met with compliance to add a lock.  It's more secure than a presidential library office in regions of burnt down gov't buildings and breaking of windows and other crime riddled carnage.



The president doesn't personally have to go through the process but if they don't, they have to delegate the process because the process must be followed. If it's not followed, as is the case here, any related documents do not get marked up as unclassified and remain in their classified state.


----------



## meaner gene

Zincwarrior said:


> Very true. I don't think he will be charged with anything actually. I think they were trying to get the docs back.


That was true when it was the National Archives picking up the first 15 boxes of documents.  But after the subpoena, and then the search warrant, and now with the National Archives saying there are still more documents not recovered.    Trump is going to get charged, unless he turns over every last document, and i'm talking before they can summon a grand jury to indict him.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> Did you see all those documents with classified markings?


Post them.  Let's see it.


----------



## meaner gene

Faun said:


> The president doesn't personally have to go through the process but if they don't, they have to delegate the process because the process must be followed. If it's not followed, as is the case here, any related documents do not get marked up as unclassified and remain in their classified state.


As I pointed out to backagain.  If congress passes a bill, that the president doesn't like.  The president can VETO that bill (his part is done), but if his aides don't return it to congress witnin 10 days (if congress is in session) the bill automatically becomes law.  

An example of how the process has to be completed, for it to take effect.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Marener said:


> There are no records demonstrating these documents are declassified. None.


Says some random dude on the internet...lol


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> The president doesn't personally have to go through the process but if they don't, they have to delegate the process because the process must be followed. If it's not followed, as is the case here, any related documents do not get marked up as unclassified and remain in their classified state.


They did their job right the first time by asking and cooperating, although with the motive to harrass and intimidate as Hillary payback, but the Raid was pure obstruction which is why they deflect that term and accusation now on Trump.
The fact they scattered documents and took pictures of it will not sit well with Joe Public all who feel insulted as we all know what a clean freak he is.  If that is what they have on surveillance cameras behaving innapropriate, then the agents will be in hot water and any suppervisors protecting them now will be too.
The DOJ trting to cover their blooper just made things worse.   That 50 page rebuttle using such tactics along with a few comments look like baiting and staging you see when fascists go after their opposition claiming their radicalism (they the lawless ones created by corruption and deflection).  But this strategy just admits they were the radicals all along.
To give you an example; it's like Saddam calling the U.S. the great Satan.  It's a double negative when the radicals lawless ones call you radical and lawless, it's an admission that they find opposition to fascism and corruption a problem for their lawless behavior and pay to play money schemes.  It's bot helpful that this deflective tactic is writren publically in their rules for radicals play book-DUH!


----------



## meaner gene

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Post them.  Let's see it.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

meaner gene said:


>


That's your proof?... LMAO?


----------



## HaShev

meaner gene said:


> You have to be completely ignorant about mar-a-lago.  It's a resort where people dined with the president.  Trump even went around showing the guests he was dining with, classified pictures of the missile explosion in North Korea.
> 
> As far as security, it's paramount in the areas that the president would occupy, but would not include storage rooms, and other places the president did not occupy.


It's also a home to his office, it's a resort.
Where have you been this past few years where everyone is working at home, this was a *multi purpose resort not a typical home- home.
They were ok with it remember?
*Like Trump towers was home to both his offices and Apt.


----------



## meaner gene

HaShev said:


> The fact they scattered documents and took pictures of it will not sit well with Joe Public all who feel insulted as we all know what a clean freak he is.  If that is what they have on surveillance cameras behaving innapropriate, then the agents will be in hot water and any suppervisors protecting them now will be too.


When Joe Public saw the picture of all the classified documents, with the red and orange bands on the covers, and the big classification markings on the covers.  It sank in that these weren't just documents accidentally mixed in.  These documents are more than conspicuously marked as to their being highly classified.


----------



## HaShev

meaner gene said:


>


1)their scattering it open to claiming it was out in the open destroys the DOJ case, but also will not sit well with Joe Public.
2)if it's so top secret then why did they release these pics to the public which breeches the very laws they claimed were being breeched?
-*LOL*


----------



## meaner gene

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> That's your proof?... LMAO?


What more proof do you need.  You see the covers with the red or yellow bands indicating they're highly classified.  Along with the words "TOP SECRET" right on the cover.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> He just can't stop admitting crimes...



he has always been his own worst enemy


----------



## Golfing Gator

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Post them.  Let's see it.



Read the thread you lazy fuck


----------



## meaner gene

HaShev said:


> It's also a home to his office, it's a resort.
> Where have you been this past few years where everyone is working at home, this was a multi purpose resort not a typical home- home.
> They were ok with it remember?


They were not OK, with using it for the storage of highly classified documents.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Zincwarrior said:


> If he posted it he would go to prison dude.


He doesn't have access to it, dude...lol

He's simply parroting what the government told him to.


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Golfing Gator said:


> Read the thread you lazy fuck


Aww, did the FBI tell you to say that?...lol


----------



## meaner gene

HaShev said:


> 1)their scattering it open to claiming it was out in the open destroys the DOJ case, but also will not sit well with Joe Public.
> 2)if it's so top secret then why did they release these pics to the public which breeches the very laws they claimed were being breeched?
> -*LOL*  View attachment 689739


They didn't say the documents were out in the open.  They said the documents were in a desk draw, along with Trumps passports.

They laid them out on the floor of Trumps office, to show what they found, and what room they found them in.

The evidence is actually devastating.


----------



## HaShev

shimon said:


> I see the “ art” of scapegoating is alive and well.. The dems were in trouble with the elections fast approaching and Hunter Biden’s laptop … How oh how to get out of their
> delema.  Easy Peasy play their “ Trump” card get everyone riled up and keep them off the real score then keep ramming it down their throats from every angle possible .. After all this isa tried and true method of picking someone or. group that is very visible and in the public’s eye blaming them and sending the herd in their direction while smiling and laughing and staying in power withoutany consequences after all  why play that card now why wasn’t it played before because these guys are masters at misdirection and timing it for their benefit…


I worry how I see/hear them bait the people into acting up just so they can justify their fascist crackdowns on their opposition.   See this doesn't happen if there is more that 2 political parties, we got ourselves in this mess by not speaking out about the restrictions by the mainly leftist party to keep other parties from forming or having equal access and platform.


----------



## HaShev

meaner gene said:


> They didn't say the documents were out in the open.  They said the documents were in a desk draw, along with Trumps passports.
> 
> They laid them out on the floor of Trumps office, to show what they found, and what room they found them in.
> 
> The evidence is actually devastating.


The media says otherwise.
Nope he's allowed to, you are insulting the secret service now.


----------



## meaner gene

Zincwarrior said:


> If he posted it he would go to prison dude.


Well the agents did put sheets of paper over the more highly classified documents to obscure them.  They let people see the covers that indicated their level of classification, but no details about the subject.


----------



## meaner gene

Zincwarrior said:


> I meant the actual docs.


In that case, they wouldn't just go to prison, they would probably be sent to a "super max" where they would be kept in solitary, so they couldn't reveal any more classified information.


----------



## Marener

HaShev said:


> It's also a home to his office, it's a resort.
> Where have you been this past few years where everyone is working at home, this was a *multi purpose resort not a typical home- home.
> They were ok with it remember?
> *Like Trump towers was home to both his offices and Apt.


That’s the excuse! He had classified documents because of “work”?

He doesn’t have work to do. He does not work for the government anymore. When you lose your job, you don’t take their property with you. You’re done.


----------



## Marener

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Says some random dude on the internet...lol


It has the virtue of being true. No one is seriously suggesting otherwise.


----------



## Coyote

Seymour Flops said:


> They've got him this time, alright!


Why did he take and keep those documents?


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> They did their job right the first time by asking and cooperating, although with the motive to harrass and intimidate as Hillary payback, but the Raid was pure obstruction which is why they deflect that term and accusation now on Trump.
> The fact they scattered documents and took pictures of it will not sit well with Joe Public all who feel insulted as we all know what a clean freak he is.  If that is what they have on surveillance cameras behaving innapropriate, then the agents will be in hot water and any suppervisors protecting them now will be too.
> The DOJ trting to cover their blooper just made things worse.   That 50 page rebuttle using such tactics along with a few comments look like baiting and staging you see when fascists go after their opposition claiming their radicalism (they the lawless ones created by corruption and deflection).  But this strategy just admits they were the radicals all along.
> To give you an example; it's like Saddam calling the U.S. the great Satan.  It's a double negative when the radicals lawless ones call you radical and lawless, it's an admission that they find opposition to fascism and corruption a problem for their lawless behavior and pay to play money schemes.  It's bot helpful that this deflective tactic is writren publically in their rules for radicals play book-DUH!



Complete and utter rightarded bullshit. The fact that they found more classified and top secret documents at Mar-a-Raided proves the raid was warranted and fruitful. Not only did they find classified documents, they found them in locations outside of the storage room where they were supposedly locked up.

In the words of Robert De Niro -- _*"Fuck Trump!"*_


----------



## meaner gene

Coyote said:


> Why did he take and keep those documents?


He certainly didn't take them to read them.

Trump was notorious for not wanting to read.


----------



## Coyote

two_iron said:


> It's too bad President Trump didn't know someone that could have declassified those documents.
> 
> Ya know, I think the shit-eating rodents got him this time. Something about the 3,612th time... I was dreading it.
> 
> YOU.STUPID.FUCKING.SHEEP*™*
> 
> DJT is playing 4D chess while you slimy fucks are playing "wrong hole!" with each other. Enjoy the game.


You greatly overestimate Trump’s chess abilities.


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> 1)their scattering it open to claiming it was out in the open destroys the DOJ case, but also will not sit well with Joe Public.
> 2)if it's so top secret then why did they release these pics to the public which breeches the very laws they claimed were being breeched?
> -*LOL*  View attachment 689739



LOL

Idiot, that photo doesn't reveal any classified information. Your desperation is laughable.


----------



## Coyote

Seymour Flops said:


> They were declassified and the FBI had approved the storage already.


Why would the FBI need to approve storage of unclassified documents?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Coyote said:


> Why would the FBI need to approve storage of unclassified documents?



I have asked this many times....so far it has been met with silence.


----------



## Rambunctious

Stann said:


> That's because they're smarter than trump, they aren't going to make accusations unless they have proof to back them up.  Now they have plenty of proof. So let's see what happens next. Trump keeps pleading the fifth, which he himself said only criminals do. And now he wants a special master which is how true of his conspirators got away with their crimes. He also wanted the whole thing revealed so he could intimidate the witnesses as he has done in the past. Everybody's catching on to just how trump works and they're making sure he doesn't corrupt the justice process again. There's a very definite criminal pattern at work here. There's no denying that anymore. I consider donald trump worse than Benedict Arnold. During the civil war up to 30% of the population felt some allegiance to the British crown. With Trump it's all about ego, both men overestimated their value to the nation, they both felt betrayed in some way. It's sad but true.


So the idea of the FBI and the DOJ is to pull one over on a former president?.... that's not gonna fly with the American people....


----------



## Rambunctious

If Trump de classified these documents then the cover page where its titled top secret is no longer valid.... and missing a bundle of documents because they were in a different office is not unusual and is not a crime....


----------



## Rambunctious

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And yet directed his counsel to submit a sworn statement that he did, in fact, have classified documents and was handing them over to comply with a subpoena. 17 months after he says he declassified them.
> 
> Good luck with that.


People make mistakes it doesn't mean a crime has been committed...


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Yes. The American public definitely want to elect someone so that they can weasel out of a federal investigation.
> 
> Great plan.


Are you serious?... do you just ignore what your guy is guilty of?.... with his greedy family?.... give us a break....


----------



## Rambunctious

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Now everyone laughs at his childish lie. What else?


You must prove its a lie....


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

citygator said:


> If Trump shot someone on 5th avenue and told you that she died of a heart attack before the bullet got to her you’d believe it.


Gee, you're halfway decent at romantic fiction.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Are you serious?... do you just ignore what your guy is guilty of?.... with his greedy family?.... give us a break....


Yes! He’s guilty of breaking one of laws by doing stuff with people. 

It’s really very convincing and quite specific. I can’t imagine someone wouldn’t believe such a thorough and compelling case.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Yes! He’s guilty of breaking one of laws by doing stuff with people.
> 
> It’s really very convincing and quite specific. I can’t imagine someone wouldn’t believe such a thorough and compelling case.


You aren't making any sense.....


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> You aren't making any sense.....


I’m making fun of people who claim that Biden is such a crook but they never actually can say what he did.

It’s just vague hand waving blanket accusations.

With Trump, we can say very specifically what he did wrong. With Biden, it’s just stuff. Bad stuff.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> I’m making fun of people who claim that Biden is such a crook but they never actually can say what he did.
> 
> It’s just vague hand waving blanket accusations.
> 
> With Trump, we can say very specifically what he did wrong. With Biden, it’s just stuff. Bad stuff.


Really and what did Trump do?....


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> Yes, it does. Declassified documents must be disclosed at the request of people due to a little law called the Freedom of Information Act.


Yes, it is one of my favorite laws!  Unfortunately, it is the DOJ/FBI's second least favorite, with the 4th amendment being their all-time most hated.  I Know it and I and can prove it:


Marener said:


> It would be disclosed if they were declassified. If you asked the government to provide you a copy of any of them, they would be required legally to turn them over to you.


That's what the law says, alright.  Yep, sure does.

I started to prove the FBI/DOJ's hatred of the Freedom of Information Act, by challenging you to request a copy of the de-classified parts of Operation Crossfire Hurricane.  But I didn't want you to do that, because I would hate for you to have FBI agents showing up at your house, your job.

I wondered if perchance, someone had already made that request.  Someone has:

*From Just the News:

The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation.

The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit was filed quietly in federal court on Aug. 1 and announced Monday by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.*









						Judicial Watch sues DOJ to release Trump-declassified ‘smoking gun’ documents from Russia probe - Judicial Watch
					

From Just the News: The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation. The Freedom...



					www.judicialwatch.org
				




The materials in the binder spoken of in this memorandum from President Trump to the Attorney General are declassified by law, and even in writing though that was not required.









						Memorandum on Declassification of Certain Materials Related to the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation – The White House
					






					trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov
				




That date of the lawsuit was one week before the raid.  Not a coincidence.  That lawsuit meant that the walls were closing in on he DOJ/FBI.  They are about to be ordered to release the Crossfire Hurricane documents, and those documents are  known to be declassified.  Clearly, they are terrified to release them.

All they had to do was their usual redaction down to nothing usable job on the binder.  The only thing standing between them and again hiding the truth from the American people:  Trump's copy of the declassified binder.

So, they went and took it



> I don't know. This idea that Trump can declassify something without telling anyone seems to be legally shaky. Trump also had the ability to pardon anyone, even preemptively. Take a hypothetical, Guy Reffitt was a Capitol Rioter and sentenced to 7 years. What if Trump came out and said he pardoned Reffitt and just didn't tell anyone. Do you think the court would take that seriously? I doubt it.  I don't think there is any legal presumption that these documents are declassified. It's like finding a gun. It's loaded until proven otherwise. Those documents are classified until proven otherwise.



First of all, Marener, I could take the lib-Dem way out and refuse to answer a hypothetical or to recognize the validity of an analogy by saying "apples and oranges!"  I won't, so I hope in the future that you will not either.

No judge would release Reffitt after having been convicted and sentenced because Trump says he had pardoned him earlier.  But in that case, a jury or judge has ruled after due process and a fair trial (presumably).  Reffitt had presumption of innocence, but the government but the government over-came that presumption.  Trump has not been found guilty of anything, so the presumption of innocence still applies.  The government would have to prove that Trump did not declassify documents that he gave a clear indication were declassified by taking them out of the White House.

Besides,  you admitted upstream that they were de-classified.  Put that in all caps if I remember correctly.



Marener said:


> Good news. The subpoena was just revealed in the latest DoJ filing. It's on page 47.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DocumentCloud
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.documentcloud.org


That is good news, and it isn't redacted, which is great news.  Of course, since Trump's copy would have been among the documents they took in the raid, we won't have anything real to compare what they showed us.

I guess Trump should have just cut all the classification markings off of the declassified documents and sent the cut off pieces to the DOJ in response to that subpoena.

Regardless, the FBI still violated the Clinton Doctrines, of which one of the main tenets is that

_When served a subpoena, a senior U.S. political figure may simply reject the subpoena without having a search warrant served to take every document the FBI can find from their home._









						Clinton lawyer rejects subpoena for current server security details
					

Clinton's attorney says a subpoena to Florida-based computer security company SECNAP went too far.




					www.politico.com
				




Clinton lawyer rejects subpoena for current server security details​

*By JOSH GERSTEIN*

*09/23/2016 10:12 PM EDT
A lawyer for Hillary Clinton told a House committee Friday the panel won't be receiving some information it subpoenaed about security arrangements for Clinton's server.*




Marener said:


> Proving intent is not impossible. For starters, some of these documents were found in one of Trump's drawers in his office next to his passport. Many of them were found in the storage room which their lawyers said they searched thoroughly. It's not just one page. It's hundreds of them. They have bright cover sheets that are hard to miss. This is far different than Clinton.


She had her tens of thousands of classified documents on a server that was less secure than gmail, so yes.  That was different from declassified paper documents being kept in the home of a man with the protection of the Secret Service and a Billionaire's home security staff and equipment.

How would you prove that Trump intended something criminal by declassifying documents and taking them home?  Sounds like he was trying to  help the DOJ/FBI comply with the FOIA.

Remember another important tenet of the Hillary Doctrine:

_Intent is difficult to prove, so a senior U.S. political figure is a person that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute._



Marener said:


> I think those same privacy laws would prevent Trump from having those documents in his closet too.


The FBI/DOJ never cites "laws," when they refuse to provide information.  No, they flout the law and claim "ongoing investigation," not "privacy."

But they must, and will follow the third tenet of the Hillary Doctrine:

_If we've never prosecuted a senior politician for storing classified documents in an unauthorized way, we cannot do it now._

DOH!  If they had prosecuted Hillary, they could now prosecute Trump!


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> Idiot, that photo doesn't reveal any classified information. Your desperation is laughable.


Um then nothing can be compromised with same docs sitting in locked drawers of locked rooms in locked resorts with security and cams and secret service.-oops BUT THANKS for admitting your desperation to remove someone you claim lost the last election-wink*


----------



## Rambunctious

The article states that, by such conduct, President Biden


endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government;
threatened the integrity of the democratic system;
interfered with the peaceful transition of power;
imperiled a coordinate branch of government; and
demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security, democracy, and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office.
The article also states that this conduct warrants immediate impeachment, trial, and removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.


----------



## Rambunctious




----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Really and what did Trump do?....


Trump improperly took classified national defense documents. He failed to return the documents when asked. A subpoena was issued For the classified national defense documents. He failed to respond to the subpoena. He lied about his complying with the subpoena. 

These are violations of law.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Trump improperly took classified national defense documents. He failed to return the documents when asked. A subpoena was issued For the classified national defense documents. He failed to respond to the subpoena. He lied about his complying with the subpoena.
> 
> These are violations of law.


If they were declassified I don't see an issue... some documents even defense related can be classified for a very short period of time... and then they aren't secret anymore... get it?.... Biden has classified documents at his home too... all presidents do... they work from home...


----------



## Seymour Flops

Coyote said:


> Why did he take and keep those documents?


Luckily, I still live in a country in which if you do something that does not violate the law, you have no need to explain why you did it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> If Trump de classified these documents then the cover page where its titled top secret is no longer valid.... and missing a bundle of documents because they were in a different office is not unusual and is not a crime....



that is one damn big *IF*


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> Um then nothing can be compromised with same docs sitting in locked drawers of locked rooms in locked resorts with security and cams and secret service.-oops BUT THANKS for admitting your desperation to remove someone you claim lost the last election-wink*
> View attachment 689781



LOLOL

I point out you're desperate and all you can muster is, _nuh-uh, you're desperate!_


----------



## iceberg

Rambunctious said:


> You must prove its a lie....


Have they ever yet?


----------



## Maxdeath

bodecea said:


> I love how many on the Right want us to forget that the fat former guy had FOUR YEARS to do something about Hillary and her e-mails and did nothing.


Funny that you think I am on the right.


----------



## Wballz49

skews13 said:


> To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.
> 
> One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.
> 
> I wonder if she understands the implications of that





Rambunctious said:


> If they were declassified I don't see an issue... some documents even defense related can be classified for a very short period of time... and then they aren't secret anymore... get it?.... Biden has classified documents at his home too... all presidents do... they work from home...


It has nothing to do with being declassified.  The documents can't be removed from the SCIFS.  They are Government Property not Trump property.


----------



## Stann

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> He also likes to throw in cometely irrelevant  links he has never read, to make his posts look more official or something. It's kind of hilarious.


You guys keep bringing up HRC no one ever mentions George w Bush, now that's the second biggest fish, no one out does trump.  www.newsweek.com the George W Bush White House " Lost " 22 million E-mails. September 12th, 2016. Thousands of lives were lost in the Gulf War, half a billion dollars went missing, Iraqi antiquities went missing and so did a lot of emails that might have verified where these things all went to.                                https://www.washingtonpost.com>.... First panel members quit over looting-The Washington Post April 17th., 2003. A standard to use in this case                           www.washingtonpost.com presidential records from George Washington to Donald Trump ( 4 days ago ) Also;                www.nytimes.com trump flouted rules on presidential records here's why that's true. August 23rd.,2022.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> If they were declassified I don't see an issue... some documents even defense related can be classified for a very short period of time... and then they aren't secret anymore... get it?.... Biden has classified documents at his home too... all presidents do... they work from home...


If they were declassified it’s still an issue because 

1. They weren’t his in the first place 
2. He was ordered by a grand jury to give them back and he didn’t 
3. He lied that he said they gave them back. 

Trump isn’t president. No one is saying he couldn’t have had them when he was president. He’s not president.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> If they were declassified it’s still an issue because
> 
> 1. They weren’t his in the first place
> 2. He was ordered by a grand jury to give them back and he didn’t
> 3. He lied that he said they gave them back.
> 
> Trump isn’t president. No one is saying he couldn’t have had them when he was president. He’s not president.


----------



## Rambunctious

Wballz49 said:


> It has nothing to do with being declassified.  The documents can't be removed from the SCIFS.  They are Government Property not Trump property.


Its very possible that those documents have been there from when Trump worked from home... they may not have ever been in the white house....


----------



## Rambunctious




----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> Its very possible that those documents have been there from when Trump worked from home... they may not have ever been in the white house....



Its very possible that those documents were put there by aliens from Planet X....they may not have ever been in the white house....


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> I thought it was the right that always defended the police?
> 
> Here, the FBI gave Trump every opportunity to work with them. They failed to do so. The FBI discovered evidence that Trump was retaining documents. Therefore, they got a search warrant.
> 
> That's not a police state. Search warrants are so fundamental to the function of a liberal democracy that the constitution specifically mentions them.


The right never defended corrupt dirty cops, sellout scum.


----------



## Batcat

Marener said:


> Maybe you'd have a point if Hillary had these hanging at her house:
> View attachment 689682


So you think putting highly classified info on an unauthorized and improperly secured computer server where it can be hacked by foreign nations is no big deal. You can bet your ass the Russians, the Chinese, .op≥≥≥ the Iranians and the North Koreans all accessed that email.









						Chinese company reportedly hacked Clinton's server, got copy of every email in real-time
					

A Chinese state-owned company reportedly hacked former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email server, then inserted code that forwarded them a copy of virtually every email she sent or received after that -- a revelation President Trump is demanding be investigated.




					www.foxnews.com
				












						Chinese Reportedly Hacked Hillary Server. During Same Time, 12 CIA Sources Reportedly Killed by China. Coincidence?
					

'The Chinese firm obtained Clinton’s emails in real time.'




					www.westernjournal.com
				





Marener said:


> The ICIG got it wrong. The DoJ was well aware of this forwarding email address and used it to facilitate copies of emails.
> 
> It wasn’t a hack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics
> 
> 
> A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cnn.com


Interesting if true. 

However from your own link from CNN …

_After its own investigation, the FBI concluded in 2016 that there was no "direct evidence" that the server had been successfully hacked, though former FBI Director James Comey conceded that "given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."_

Plus there is this. …









						Mueller report sheds new light on how the Russians hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign
					

The Mueller report contains new information about how the Russian government hacked documents and emails from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. At one point, the Russians used servers located in the U.S. to carry out the massive data exfiltration...




					techcrunch.com
				




_The Mueller report contains new information about how the Russian government hacked documents and emails from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

At one point, the Russians used servers located in the U.S. to carry out the massive data exfiltration effort, the report confirms.

Much of the information was previously learned from the indictment of Viktor Borisovich Netyksho, the Russian officer in charge of Unit 26165. Netyksho is believed to be still at large in Russia.

**************
So if the Russians hacked the computers at the DNC and Hillary’s Presidential campaign, it would be logical they would also tap into Hillary’s illegal server. Reading all the emial of Hillary when she was Secretary of State would be important to Vlad Putin. 

If Russia failed to hack Hillary’s unauthorized computer, I would hate to be the man in charge of Russian’s intelligence services. He is probably repairing computers in Siberia today._


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> Its very possible that those documents were put there by aliens from Planet X....they may not have ever been in the white house....


Presidents do work from home... biden admitted he has a cabinet in his home where he locks secret documents up....


----------



## Rambunctious

The FBI is trying to sway Americans opinion by taking that picture and releasing it... That's the way someone desperate to explain what they did would act.... I think the DOJ and the FBI are exposed and they know it.....


----------



## Batcat

bravoactual said:


> The amount of pure unadulterated 99/44% essence of bullshit in that post is beyond the limits heretofore set by the Traitor.
> 
> There absolutely no proof any Chinese hacking.  We know the Traitor illegally stored/maintained classified information.  What makes you post totally ridiculous is all you have left is HRC....wow.  When in doubt, when nothing else is left, when your quiver is empty....bring up HRC.  Do you even realize your whole and entire post reeks of desparation?
> 
> Pathetic, beyond pathetic.


Even Comey admitted Hillary’s computer might have been hacked.






						Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI
					

Director Comey's statement to the press on the FBI’s investigation of Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail system during her time as Secretary of State.




					www.fbi.gov
				




***snip***

_*With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence.* We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account._









						Experts say Hillary's email was probably hacked
					

According to David Sanger of the New York Times, experts believe that Hillary Clinton's email account probably was hacked successfully. They also say that James Comey's statement on the subject suggests he believes this too. Comey chose his words carefully. He said his investigators found no...




					www.powerlineblog.com
				




_
POSTED ON JULY 7, 2016 BY PAUL MIRENGOFF IN HILLARY CLINTON, NATIONAL SECURITY
EXPERTS SAY HILLARY’S EMAIL WAS PROBABLY HACKED​According to David Sanger of the New York Times, experts believe that Hillary Clinton’s email account probably was hacked successfully. They also say that James Comey’s statement on the subject suggests he believes this too.

Comey chose his words carefully. He said his investigators found no “direct evidence” that Hillary Clinton’s email account had been “successfully hacked.” It’s reasonable to infer that they found circumstantial evidence of successful hacking.

Circumstantial evidence (most of which Comey mentioned in his statement) is what the experts Sanger cites rely on. First, as Adam Segal, the author of “Hacked World Order,” who studies cyberissues at the Council on Foreign Relations explains, “sophisticated attackers would have known of the existence of the account, would have targeted it and would not have been seen.” (Emphasis added)
How would they have known about Hillary’s private account? Because, as Comey said, “hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact.” From there, tracking the trail of electronic breadcrumbs back to her server would have been a pretty simple task.
Would hostile actors then have been able successfully to hack Clinton’s system? Sanger says “their ability to break in would have been a mix of skill and luck, but they had plenty of time to get it right.”
One other fact, which Comey highlighted, makes it likely that hostile actors “got it right.” Clinton used her private email while in the territory of what he called “sophisticated adversaries.” Presumably, this means China and/or Russia, though it could mean some other country that’s comparably tech savvy. 

Sanger explains that once the hardware is in a foreign country, and on its phone networks, it is particularly vulnerable. James A. Lewis, a former government cyber security expert who now studies the cyber activities of nations at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Sanger, “if she used it in Russia or China, they almost certainly picked it up.”_


----------



## meaner gene

Seymour Flops said:


> The materials in the binder spoken of in this memorandum from President Trump to the Attorney General are declassified by law, and even in writing though that was not required.
> 
> All they had to do was their usual redaction down to nothing usable job on the binder.  The only thing standing between them and again hiding the truth from the American people:  Trump's copy of the declassified binder.
> 
> So, they went and took it


Trumps copy was "redacted" as per the January 17th 2020 letter.


----------



## MarathonMike

bravoactual said:


> No, the Security of the Country takes precedence.  Illegally handling Classified Material is a threat to the Nation's Safety.  The Freedom of Speech is no way threatened, nor is what happened at Shit-A-Lago is NOT Freedom of Speech Issue.


Dusty boxes of documents NOT a threat. Wide open server with minimal cybersecurity big threat.


----------



## meaner gene

Oddball said:


> The right never defended corrupt dirty cops, sellout scum.


Wrong.  Just search titles for Derek Chauvin


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Marener said:


> It has the virtue of being true. No one is seriously suggesting otherwise.


True, says who?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> Presidents do work from home... biden admitted he has a cabinet in his home where he locks secret documents up....



So, your defense of your god is that more than 1.5 years ago he had some classified documents he was working with and just forgot about them and left them in his desk?  

Really?

Hey, you run with that one


----------



## Rambunctious

Wow even democrat lawyers are laughing at Garlands filing... "worded like a 1st year law student"....


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


>


That was pathetic. He didn’t even touch on any of the actual issues. 

He asks some interesting questions. 

Why now? Because Trump dragged his feet for months. He dragged his feet with NARA. He tried to delay turning documents over to DoJ with phony claims of privilege. He delayed complying with the subpoena. 

Why didn’t the DoJ just say “hey we are coming in”? That’s too stupid for words. They gave Trump the opportunity to comply. He didn’t. It’s on Trump. Not the DoJ. 

Can he claim executive privilege? Hell no. You can’t claim executive privilege to the current executive. It’s idiotic to think that’s legitimate. 

He claimed the photo was a scare tactic? It’s reality. It makes it harder for shitbags like Representative Ass Licker here to lie about it.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> The right never defended corrupt dirty cops, sellout scum.


They attack people who want consequences for them. 

So yeah. They do.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> They attack people who want consequences for them.
> 
> So yeah. They do.


Wrong again, sock-o.


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> So, your defense of your god is that more than 1.5 years ago he had some classified documents he was working with and just forgot about them and left them in his desk?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Hey, you run with that one


He declassified them... and was cooperating with retuning them... you can't just put government documents in a envelope and drop it in the mail...
This is falling apart by the hour.... the FBI releases a gratuitous photo like this tells me they are grasping at straws...


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> So you think putting highly classified info on an unauthorized and improperly secured computer server where it can be hacked by foreign nations is no big deal. You can bet your ass the Russians, the Chinese, .op≥≥≥ the Iranians and the North Koreans all accessed that email.


I think it’s a lot more obvious that Trump was mishandling classified information than Clinton. 

Plus Trump is now grappling with the very real accusation that he was obstructing the investigation into his handling of classified information. 

No evidence exists that her server was hacked. It’s merely people saying they think it likely was. Just speculation. No facts.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> That was pathetic. He didn’t even touch on any of the actual issues.
> 
> He asks some interesting questions.
> 
> Why now? Because Trump dragged his feet for months. He dragged his feet with NARA. He tried to delay turning documents over to DoJ with phony claims of privilege. He delayed complying with the subpoena.
> 
> Why didn’t the DoJ just say “hey we are coming in”? That’s too stupid for words. They gave Trump the opportunity to comply. He didn’t. It’s on Trump. Not the DoJ.
> 
> Can he claim executive privilege? Hell no. You can’t claim executive privilege to the current executive. It’s idiotic to think that’s legitimate.
> 
> He claimed the photo was a scare tactic? It’s reality. It makes it harder for shitbags like Representative Ass Licker here to lie about it.


Grasping at straws... you are being played.... just like with Russian collusion... don't let them do this to you again.....


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> Wrong again, sock-o.


Nope. Saw it with my own two eyes. They defend the bad cops who kill civilians. 

Just look at Chauvin.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Grasping at straws... you are being played.... just like with Russian collusion... don't let them do this to you again.....


Grasping at straws is being asked a question about the search which turned a hundred classified documents and then talking about Hunter Biden and baby formula.


----------



## beagle9

Marener said:


> This filing refutes so much of the right wing narrative about this whole fiasco.
> 
> When Jay Bratt went down to the storage locker on June 3rd, he was forbidden from looking through any of the boxes.
> 
> So whoever says that Trump was cooperating and willing to give them whatever they want can go fuck themselves.


Word of mouth doesn't cut it... Anything that went down needs to be released entirely and not redacted.. It's all political bull crap that went down, just like everything else that's going down in an attempt to gain votes in an election. The Democrat's are so easily read that it's pathetic..

Anyone that can be easily sold a bill of goods at this point and time, uhhhh is some weak ace human beings I tell ya.

Half of these election's is brainwashing in order to get the vote, and the other half is buying the vote.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> Nope. Saw it with my own two eyes. They defend the bad cops who kill civilians.
> 
> Just look at Chauvin.


You're full of shit, sock-o.

Nobody I know defended Chauvin....Though he was overcharged, nobody defended his excessive use of force.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Grasping at straws is being asked a question about the search which turned a hundred classified documents and then talking about Hunter Biden and baby formula.


They got nothing again... you know that right?.... this is the same bunch that ran Russia gate....


----------



## Marener

beagle9 said:


> Word of mouth doesn't cut it


It’s in the new DoJ filing. You should read it.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> You're full of shit, sock-o.
> 
> Nobody I know defended Chauvin....Though he was overcharged, nobody defended his excessive use of force.


You just defended Chauvin by saying he was “overcharged” and yes tons of people defended him.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> It’s in the new DoJ filing. You should read it.


"Marked classified" doesn't mean that they weren't subsequently declassified, sock-o.


----------



## beagle9

Marener said:


> Nope. Saw it with my own two eyes. They defend the bad cops who kill civilians.
> 
> Just look at Chauvin.


No one defended Chauvin, and in fact Limbaugh, Hannity, and other's said on their podcast and on their shows that what Chauvin did wasn't right, and he needed to be punished severely for it. So you are here peddling bull crap lie's for the Democrat's eh ?


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> You just defended Chauvin by saying he was “overcharged” .


Wow....You are one seriously stupid fuck, sock-o.


----------



## Rambunctious

Operation Crossfire Hurricane...2.....
Buuuaaahahahahahahahahaheeheeheeheehahahahaha.....


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Rambunctious said:


> People make mistakes it doesn't mean a crime has been committed...


That's nice. And irrelevant. Of course, saying  he declassified then, when he directed a sworn statement stating  they were classified, isn't a mistake. That's a lie.


----------



## HaShev

Faun said:


> LOLOL
> 
> I point out you're desperate and all you can muster is, _nuh-uh, you're desperate!_


I'm not the one trying to remove someone you claim can be beat in an election Senior Meduro!
-checkmate!


----------



## beagle9

Marener said:


> You just defended Chauvin by saying he was “overcharged” and yes tons of people defended him.


Meanwhile Chicago and every other Democrat stronghold is full of chaos and murder without any accountability or use of force being used to STOP THEM.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> Luckily, I still live in a country in which if you do something that does not violate the law, you have no need to explain why you did it.


If you are too big a sissy to discuss the topic, you should leave the thread.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> So you think putting highly classified info on an unauthorized and improperly secured computer server where it can be hacked by foreign nations is no big deal.


No, YOU think that. Which is why you didn't say a word, when the Trump family was doing it.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

beagle9 said:


> Meanwhile Chicago and every other Democrat stronghold is full of chaos and murder without any accountability or use of force being used to STOP THEM.


What a fucking idiotic lie. They arrest people there all the time.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Team Trumps response. Oh. My. God. Who is writing this? What a joke. Is he trying  to set up an argument for "incompetent counsel"?






						DocumentCloud
					






					www.documentcloud.org


----------



## meaner gene

Rambunctious said:


> He declassified them... and was cooperating with retuning them... you can't just put government documents in a envelope and drop it in the mail...
> This is falling apart by the hour.... the FBI releases a gratuitous photo like this tells me they are grasping at straws...


Actually if what Trump said about them being declassified, you can return them 1st class mail.


----------



## Marener

beagle9 said:


> No one defended Chauvin, and in fact Limbaugh, Hannity, and other's said on their podcast and on their shows that what Chauvin did wasn't right, and he needed to be punished severely for it. So you are here peddling bull crap lie's for the Democrat's eh ?


Tons of people defended Chauvin. Especially the police Union.


----------



## Indeependent

meaner gene said:


> Actually if what Trump said about them being declassified, you can return them 1st class mail.


Let the schmucks from the FBI pick them up.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> "Marked classified" doesn't mean that they weren't subsequently declassified, sock-o.


Sure. Funny enough, Trump seems to have never told anyone they were declassified. 

I mean, he says it on social media which means fuck all. He never seems to say it to anyone that matters.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Sure. Funny enough, Trump seems to have never told anyone they were declassified.
> 
> I mean, he says it on social media which means fuck all. He never seems to say it to anyone that matters.


That's because whoever knows would be targeted forever.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Indeependent said:


> Let the schmucks from the FBI pick them up.


The FBI offered to do precisely that in the subpoena. Their choices were to bring it to the grand jury or let the FBI come get them. And so that is exactly what happened: the FBI went to mar a lago and got them, per the filing that is the topic of this thread.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> They got nothing again... you know that right?.... this is the same bunch that ran Russia gate....


Doesn’t look like “nothing” to me. 




You don’t actually believe that, right? I mean, be rational for a minute. Use the part of your brain that Trump hasn’t taken from you.


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> That's because whoever knows would be targeted forever.


Gibberish


----------



## Marener

beagle9 said:


> Meanwhile Chicago and every other Democrat stronghold is full of chaos and murder without any accountability or use of force being used to STOP THEM.


Accountability requires cops to find and arrest the murderers. 

The cops decided that’s not their thing anymore. 









						As Murders Spiked, Police Solved About Half in 2020
					

The U.S. homicide clearance rate is at a historic low. Here’s what that means.




					www.themarshallproject.org


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Gibberish


I suggest reading your own posts and those of your fellow insane asylum inmates.


----------



## dblack

rightwinger said:


> Maybe they should have checked Trumps office before they declared they had no classified information


Always in the last place you look ...


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> I suggest reading your own posts and those of your fellow insane asylum inmates.


I suggest you stop trolling.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> Sure. Funny enough, Trump seems to have never told anyone they were declassified.
> 
> I mean, he says it on social media which means fuck all. He never seems to say it to anyone that matters.


More meaningless hearsay, sock-o.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> More meaningless hearsay, sock-o.


Not hearsay. It’s in the DoJ filing. Trump forgot to mention that the documents were declassified. He didn’t say anything until after the raid and even then only on social media. 

He’s scrambling.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Oddball said:


> More meaningless hearsay, sock-o.


Trump's own postings on social media is not hearsay. You apparently don't know what that word means.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> I suggest you stop trolling.


I more than suggest you see a psychiatrist.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Not hearsay. It’s in the DoJ filing. Trump forgot to mention that the documents were declassified. He didn’t say anything until after the raid and even then only on social media.
> 
> He’s scrambling.


The DOJ diary can say anything it wants.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> Not hearsay. It’s in the DoJ filing. Trump forgot to mention that the documents were declassified. He didn’t say anything until after the raid and even then only on social media.
> 
> He’s scrambling.


The DOJ filing says "MARKED CLASSIFIED", stupid fuck....The "marking" has no bearing as to the classification level in the here and now...That's how weasel language works, you fucking cement head.


----------



## Indeependent

Oddball said:


> The DOJ filing says "MARKED CLASSIFIED", stupid fuck....The "marking" has no bearing as to the classification level in the here and now...That's how weasel language works, you fucking cement head.


Liberals and facts shall *never* meet.


----------



## Oddball

Marener said:


> Gibberish


That's what your 2,400 posts in a month have amounted to, sock-o.


----------



## Indeependent

Oddball said:


> That's what your 2,400 posts in a month have amounted to, sock-o.


Liberals throw shit at the wall and then mark it as a bullseye.


----------



## Oddball

Indeependent said:


> Liberals throw shit at the wall and then mark it as a bullseye.


For a sock puppet who supposedly just showed up a month and four days ago, that a lot of shit flinging!


----------



## meaner gene

Oddball said:


> The DOJ filing says "MARKED CLASSIFIED", stupid fuck....The "marking" has no bearing as to the classification level in the here and now...That's how weasel language works, you fucking cement head.


It also means it makes no difference if Trump declassified them.  The markings are what the subpoena went by.


----------



## Oddball

meaner gene said:


> It also means it makes no difference if Trump declassified them.  The markings are what the subpoena went by.


What subpoena?


----------



## Indeependent

Oddball said:


> What subpoena?


Are Liberals born stupid or does it take lots of booze and pot?


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> I more than suggest you see a psychiatrist.


I guess you’re not going to take my advice. 

Whatever.


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> Are Liberals born stupid or does it take lots of booze and pot?





Oddball said:


> What subpoena?



Your arrogance would be less obnoxious if you were less ignorant.

There was a grand jury subpoena delivered to Trump demanding all documents with classified markings.

Weren’t you aware?


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> I guess you’re not going to take my advice.
> 
> Whatever.


I never take advice from people who don't appreciate facts; that includes you.


----------



## Marener

Oddball said:


> The DOJ filing says "MARKED CLASSIFIED", stupid fuck....The "marking" has no bearing as to the classification level in the here and now...That's how weasel language works, you fucking cement head.


You morons don’t actually think he declassified all those documents, do you?


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Your arrogance would be less obnoxious if you were less ignorant.
> 
> There was a grand jury subpoena delivered to Trump demanding all documents with classified markings.
> 
> Weren’t you aware?


It's obvious you didn't watch the video I posted and didn't read today's *entire* AP News article on the issue.
You don't have the emotional capacity to go to those who have the facts and know the law.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Oddball said:


> ...The "marking" has no bearing as to the classification level in the here and now..


100%, naturally


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> I never take advice from people who don't appreciate facts; that includes you.


Okay troll.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> You morons don’t actually think he declassified all those documents, do you?


Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't...the law doesn't care.
But you're the legal expert.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> Okay troll.


An ad hominem...how mature.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> Doesn’t look like “nothing” to me.
> View attachment 689876
> You don’t actually believe that, right? I mean, be rational for a minute. Use the part of your brain that Trump hasn’t taken from you.


This is what I mean... that picture is for you... and people like you to get you all riled up and able to accept any unconstitutional act by our justice system... even the dictatorship like act of raiding the former presidents home with guns and locking up MAGA protesters for years for trespassing WTF man... have you lost your mind?....


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> It's obvious you didn't watch the video I posted and didn't read today's *entire* AP News article on the issue.
> You don't have the emotional capacity to go to those who have the facts and know the law.


I read the entire DoJ filing. 

Meanwhile you and your fellow moron are wondering “what subpoena” demonstrating you’re incredibly ignorant of the facts. 

This article covers it pretty well, but the facts are easy to understand. 

1. Trump took government owned documents. 
2. The government told him to give them back. 
3. Trump only gave some of them back
4. Trump and said he gave them all badk
5. The DoJ raided his house and found a ton of documents. 









						How the DOJ has built a case against Trump for obstruction
					

If the evidence of obstruction of justice against former President Donald Trump proved to be convincing, there’s a very good chance the government would indict.




					nypost.com


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> An ad hominem...how mature.


You’ve been attacking me relentlessly. You’re a troll and a hypocrite, but trolls almost always are.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> I read the entire DoJ filing.
> 
> Meanwhile you and your fellow moron are wondering “what subpoena” demonstrating you’re incredibly ignorant of the facts.
> 
> This article covers it pretty well, but the facts are easy to understand.
> 
> 1. Trump took government owned documents.
> 2. The government told him to give them back.
> 3. Trump only gave some of them back
> 4. Trump and said he gave them all badk
> 5. The DoJ raided his house and found a ton of documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How the DOJ has built a case against Trump for obstruction
> 
> 
> If the evidence of obstruction of justice against former President Donald Trump proved to be convincing, there’s a very good chance the government would indict.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nypost.com


I know, I know, you have a law degree.
Ted Cruz, who has a law degree, says you're an idiot.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> You’ve been attacking me relentlessly. You’re a troll and a hypocrite, but trolls almost always are.


I'm simply pointing out that a layman, such as yourself, continuously looks at line items and thinks he knows what's going on.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> This is what I mean... that picture is for you... and people like you to get you all riled up and able to accept any unconstitutional act by our justice system... even the dictatorship like act of raiding the former presidents home with guns and locking up MAGA protesters for years for trespassing WTF man... have you lost your mind?....


A picture is worth a thousand words, friend. 

Those documents didn’t belong in Trump’s closet. The government was right to try to retrieve them. They tried doing it nicely. Trump decided to fuck around and so he found out. 

What was unconstitutional about it?


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> You’ve been attacking me relentlessly. You’re a troll and a hypocrite, but trolls almost always are.


You see this hippie?
He's been doing this for over 20 years and knows the law.
Ted Cruz, in today's AP News article, says you have no idea what you're babbling about.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words, friend.
> 
> Those documents didn’t belong in Trump’s closet. The government was right to try to retrieve them. They tried doing it nicely. Trump decided to fuck around and so he found out.
> 
> What was unconstitutional about it?


Watch the video.


----------



## Rambunctious

Marener said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words, friend.
> 
> Those documents didn’t belong in Trump’s closet. The government was right to try to retrieve them. They tried doing it nicely. Trump decided to fuck around and so he found out.
> 
> What was unconstitutional about it?


There is nothing in the picture... Of course there was classified documents in his office... but we don't know what they were and if they were declassified... so why would the FBI put this picture out knowing that?.... because they fucked up... they underestimated the backlash.... CYA time here come the FBI leaks.....


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> I know, I know, you have a law degree.
> Ted Cruz, who has a law degree, says you're an idiot.


I have something that Ted Cruz doesn’t have. 

A spine. 

Ted Cruz will say whatever will help his political ambitions. 

I know he called the raid a “horrific abuse of power” which seems a bit premature since he was oh so ignorant of the circumstances surrounding the case. 

I wonder if he has crawled out of his hole to say anything about it today?


----------



## dblack

The problem with all this is that lots of people, maybe most, are going to see this as a witch hunt - regardless of the actual validity of the case.

Everyone knows that Democrats have spent the last five years looking for something, anything, that they could finally nail on Trump.

We don't know what really happened. There may be disturbing details about this that make it a really horrible crime. And it may be that Trump's organization is such a mess that they actually lost track of the documents. If he had nefarious plans, you'd think he wouldn't just leave this stuff laying around.

But the truth doesn't matter. It rarely does these days. If the Dems get their wish, and hang a felony conviction on him so he can't run again, it may be the worst mistake they've made yet. I guess they think it will finally quell the wave of populist anger that Trump has been riding. They need to have another think.


----------



## Indeependent

Marener said:


> I have something that Ted Cruz doesn’t have.
> 
> A spine.
> 
> Ted Cruz will say whatever will help his political ambitions.
> 
> I know he called the raid a “horrific abuse of power” which seems a bit premature since he was oh so ignorant of the circumstances surrounding the case.
> 
> I wonder if he has crawled out of his hole to say anything about it today?


Another ad hominem...how mature.
Liberals hate to lose even when they aren't even in the game.
I don't like Cruz but he knows his law and processes and procedure.
You and I know dip.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


>



LOLOL 

_"No, it doesn't have to be in writing; but there has to be evidence that it was done while he was president." _


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> Another ad hominem...how mature.
> Liberals hate to lose even when they aren't even in the game.
> I don't like Cruz but he knows his law and processes and procedure.
> You and I know dip.


So it’s just an appeal to authority?

Has Teddy responded to the DOJ filing from yesterday? Since you don’t know dip, I guess I’ll see if the person who does your thinking has anything interesting to say.


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> There is nothing in the picture... Of course there was classified documents in his office... but we don't know what they were and if they were declassified... so why would the FBI put this picture out knowing that?.... because they fucked up... they underestimated the backlash.... CYA time here come the FBI leaks.....


Because those were documents that clearly should have been turned over in response to the subpoena. 

It’s only nothing if you have your head up your ass. 

The fuck up here was Trump thinking he can do whatever he wants and get away with it. He’s a goddamn moron for picking this fight.


----------



## Marener

Indeependent said:


> You see this hippie?
> He's been doing this for over 20 years and knows the law.
> Ted Cruz, in today's AP News article, says you have no idea what you're babbling about.


This guy declared that Trump committed no crime.

Because he would know.

Thanks. He’s a moron.

He’s a bigger moron than I first thought. 

The first defense is to claim they’re personal documents. Right. Look at the cover pages. Personal documents don’t get cover pages with TOP SECRET in giant letters. Let’s not be stupid. They’re government documents. 

Second defense is executive privilege? You don’t get to claim executive privilege to the current executive. We have one president at a time. That president has the authority to look at any executive documents he wants. That means Trump’s documents too. Saying it’s executive privilege is a bullshit defense that will be laughed out of court. 

Third defense is some of them are attorney client privilege? Idiotic. That won’t save him. Only a handful of documents are protected that way. There are still hundreds of documents left over. 

What a moron.


----------



## San Souci

rightwinger said:


> If it was “a safe” they would have said safe


You lie. The FBI are Gestapo. Agents of the Traitor Democrats.


----------



## San Souci

Marener said:


> Because those were documents that clearly should have been turned over in response to the subpoena.
> 
> It’s only nothing if you have your head up your ass.
> 
> The fuck up here was Trump thinking he can do whatever he wants and get away with it. He’s a goddamn moron for picking this fight.


If those "Documents" were Secret , why does the DOJ put pictures of them on Public Media?  Just another "Russia Collusion".


----------



## Faun

HaShev said:


> I'm not the one trying to remove someone you claim can be beat in an election Senior Meduro!
> -checkmate!



You're the one desperately making shit up.

_"-checkmate!"_


----------



## Stann

HaShev said:


> They did their job right the first time by asking and cooperating, although with the motive to harrass and intimidate as Hillary payback, but the Raid was pure obstruction which is why they deflect that term and accusation now on Trump.
> The fact they scattered documents and took pictures of it will not sit well with Joe Public all who feel insulted as we all know what a clean freak he is.  If that is what they have on surveillance cameras behaving innapropriate, then the agents will be in hot water and any suppervisors protecting them now will be too.
> The DOJ trting to cover their blooper just made things worse.   That 50 page rebuttle using such tactics along with a few comments look like baiting and staging you see when fascists go after their opposition claiming their radicalism (they the lawless ones created by corruption and deflection).  But this strategy just admits they were the radicals all along.
> To give you an example; it's like Saddam calling the U.S. the great Satan.  It's a double negative when the radicals lawless ones call you radical and lawless, it's an admission that they find opposition to fascism and corruption a problem for their lawless behavior and pay to play money schemes.  It's bot helpful that this deflective tactic is writren publically in their rules for radicals play book-DUH!


You are as delusional as trump is.


----------



## Faun

Indeependent said:


> Let the schmucks from the FBI pick them up.



LOL

That's exactly what they did and rightards haven't stopped crying about it since.


----------



## Marener

San Souci said:


> If those "Documents" were Secret , why does the DOJ put pictures of them on Public Media?  Just another "Russia Collusion".


Because they have everything blacked out except the classified markings on the documents.


----------



## Stann

Zincwarrior said:


> Yes, you're not President forever. Once you're done you're done. He shouldn't have any of that shit.
> 
> At best it's weird hoarder behavior. At worst he's a god damn spy, selling that shit or trying to blackmail people.


There's no possibility of any good intentions in what he did.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> There's no possibility of any good intentions in what he did.


Declassifies all the Russia/Hillary files , which He said He would do, which would be embarrassing for your heroes at DOJ/FBI.......and you wonder about all this?


----------



## iceberg

Marener said:


> I have something that Ted Cruz doesn’t have.
> 
> A spine.
> 
> Ted Cruz will say whatever will help his political ambitions.
> 
> I know he called the raid a “horrific abuse of power” which seems a bit premature since he was oh so ignorant of the circumstances surrounding the case.
> 
> I wonder if he has crawled out of his hole to say anything about it today?


You funny.


----------



## Stann

Rambunctious said:


> Really and what did Trump do?....


This is the latest in the in the long line of very questionable actions. He's got places where no person has gone before. It's a slow process I think Justice will be served in the end. Unlike trump, the DOJ is it going to make allegations that it can't back up with the facts and trump is providing all the facts they could ever need to make a solid case against. trump has always thought he was about the law, it's long overdue that he knows he isn't. Pleading the fifth, intimidating witnesses, mishandling of government documents, threatening other government workers that don't agree with him, the list is endless. The man is totally corrupt and he knows it, it's his way of life.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Declassifies all the Russia/Hillary files , which He said He would do, which would be embarrassing for your heroes at DOJ/FBI.......and you wonder about all this?


Where is the paper trail, did he actually do his homework. He never did before.


----------



## Batcat

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, YOU think that. Which is why you didn't say a word, when the Trump family was doing it.


I have said if Trump violated the laws involving handling classified information he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. Here’s a link to that comment. …





__





						No Special Master As DOJ Drops Bombshell 40 Page Ruling Obstruction By Trump Team
					

Does it not bother you even a tiny bit that he had classified documents just laying around his house?  Even if it was not illegal, is is still the right thing to do?  What bothers a lot of people in our nation is that Hillary who had classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured...



					www.usmessageboard.com
				




_If Trump was negligently handling classified information, he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. It is not real complicated — the law should apply equally to all._

**********

The last thing we need in this nation at this time is a two tiered system of justice, one for Democrats and one for conservatives and especially Trump supporters. 









						America Has a Two-Tiered Justice System and the FBI Just Proved It
					

The DOJ’s handling of Hillary Clinton serves as one of the many examples of dual standards of justice when powerful Democrats face the FBI.




					www.dailysignal.com
				




***snip***

_The Justice Department’s handling of Clinton with kid gloves serves as but one of the many examples of dual standards of justice seen when powerful Democrats or their backers face the FBI. 

Hunter Biden’s home likewise has seen no breach even as the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s Office enters its fourth year of investigating the current president’s son for multiple potential federal crimes, including tax evasion, money laundering, and Foreign Agents Registration Act violations. Instead, the FBI executed a search warrant on the Apple repair store owner who alerted agents to the existence of his laptop.

And although emails from Hunter’s laptop implicate President Joe Biden’s brother, Jim Biden, in the apparent pay-to-play scheme, the feds have yet to raid his home either._

***snip***

_In contrast, those in Trump’s orbit, such as Roger Stone, faced pre-dawn searches and arrests, with scores of federal agents flooding the scene with the tipped-off media in tow. Federal agents reportedly also searched Trump-advocate Rudy Giuliani’s residence in New York, as well as that of Trump associate Victoria Toensing.

Former Department of Justice attorney Jeff Clark, another Trump loyalist, also saw his home raided by the FBI.

Against this two-pronged approach to justice, Americans need not lean conservative or support Trump to spot the scandal. And Americans need not care about politics to oppose the politicization of the Justice Department and FBI: They just need to care about the future of the country—one that cannot survive long if such corruption and cronyism continues._


----------



## Batcat

Marener said:


> I think it’s a lot more obvious that Trump was mishandling classified information than Clinton.
> 
> Plus Trump is now grappling with the very real accusation that he was obstructing the investigation into his handling of classified information.
> 
> No evidence exists that her server was hacked. It’s merely people saying they think it likely was. Just speculation. No facts.


So let’s say Trump had classified documents in his desk at Mar-a -Lago that while he says he declassified he wasn’t allowed to. 

Trump’s residence is guarded by Secret Service and I imagine anyone who goes into Trump’s office to clean is escorted. Perhaps the Secret Service officers might read the data.

Hillary’s classified email was on an unauthorized and improperly secured server where a computer savvy high school kid could have hacked it. Governments all ove the world probably accessed that server and not only had insight on what Hillary thought and was involved in but also access to highly classified data, 



			https://www.newsmax.com/Hirsen/hillary-hackers-homeland-security/2016/08/01/id/741513/
		


***snip***

_When FBI Director James Comey stated that his investigators had no “direct evidence” that Hillary’s email account had been “successfully hacked,” computer experts understood that Hillary’s server had most likely been breached, but by hackers much too sophisticated to leave behind traces of evidence.

Comey also confirmed that Hillary had used her private email while she was in the territory of what the director referred to as “sophisticated adversaries.”

The New York Times provided a quote from former government cyber-security expert James Lewis, which read, “If she [Hillary] used it [mobile device] in Russia or China, they almost certainly picked it up.”

Other cyber-intrusions about which the Associated Press reported indicate that hackers had attempted to gain unauthorized access to Hillary’s server, and they did so without relying on email messages.

Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel, a.k.a., Guccifer, told Fox News that he hacked Hillary’s server, as did at least 10 others.

A hack of Hillary’s private server could potentially yield a harvest of email addresses of individuals with whom the former secretary of state had corresponded. The said hackers could then send “spear phishing” emails to any or all of the individuals on the procured list, emails that could contain embedded programs with the capacity to infiltrate recipients’ computers, systems, networks, and the like._


----------



## Care4all

Batcat said:


> So you think putting highly classified info on an unauthorized and improperly secured computer server where it can be hacked by foreign nations is no big deal. You can bet your ass the Russians, the Chinese, .op≥≥≥ the Iranians and the North Koreans all accessed that email.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese company reportedly hacked Clinton's server, got copy of every email in real-time
> 
> 
> A Chinese state-owned company reportedly hacked former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email server, then inserted code that forwarded them a copy of virtually every email she sent or received after that -- a revelation President Trump is demanding be investigated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese Reportedly Hacked Hillary Server. During Same Time, 12 CIA Sources Reportedly Killed by China. Coincidence?
> 
> 
> 'The Chinese firm obtained Clinton’s emails in real time.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.westernjournal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interesting if true.
> 
> However from your own link from CNN …
> 
> _After its own investigation, the FBI concluded in 2016 that there was no "direct evidence" that the server had been successfully hacked, though former FBI Director James Comey conceded that "given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence."_
> 
> Plus there is this. …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mueller report sheds new light on how the Russians hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign
> 
> 
> The Mueller report contains new information about how the Russian government hacked documents and emails from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. At one point, the Russians used servers located in the U.S. to carry out the massive data exfiltration...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> techcrunch.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The Mueller report contains new information about how the Russian government hacked documents and emails from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
> 
> At one point, the Russians used servers located in the U.S. to carry out the massive data exfiltration effort, the report confirms.
> 
> Much of the information was previously learned from the indictment of Viktor Borisovich Netyksho, the Russian officer in charge of Unit 26165. Netyksho is believed to be still at large in Russia.
> 
> **************
> So if the Russians hacked the computers at the DNC and Hillary’s Presidential campaign, it would be logical they would also tap into Hillary’s illegal server. Reading all the emial of Hillary when she was Secretary of State would be important to Vlad Putin.
> 
> If Russia failed to hack Hillary’s unauthorized computer, I would hate to be the man in charge of Russian’s intelligence services. He is probably repairing computers in Siberia today._


Bottom line, the investigators found no proof or evidence that her server was hacked by the Chinese or Russians.  The DNC and Podesta emails hacked by the Russians were found when investigating their servers, but not found when Clinton's server was investigated for nearly a year.....

Most of the articles you posted are from right wing partisan hacks and is fake news, trying to stir up shit, using anonymous sources and partisans stirring up trouble with no evidence....it's been 4 years since their accusations and Gomert and Johnson still have nothing but their jive talking.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Declassifies all the Russia/Hillary files , which He said He would do, which would be embarrassing for your heroes at DOJ/FBI.......and you wonder about all this?


I don't have to wonder at all. trump has finally cooked his goose. This time not with his mouth as usual, but by his criminal actions.


----------



## HaShev

Care4all said:


> Bottom line, the investigators found no proof or evidence that her server was hacked by the Chinese or Russians.  The DNC and Podesta emails hacked by the Russians were found when investigating their servers, but not found when Clinton's server was investigated for nearly a year.....
> 
> Most of the articles you posted are from right wing partisan hacks and is fake news, trying to stir up shit, using anonymous sources and partisans stirring up trouble with no evidence....it's been 4 years since their accusations and Gomert and Johnson still have nothing but their jive talking.


They admitted it was hacked when they complained someone (claiming Russians) had their emails.  How else do emails surface, but by being hacked ?
By the way, Hillary and Al Gore have something in common, their emails from certain people mysteriously vanished, which is destruction of subpoena evidence thus obstruction.


----------



## HaShev

Stann said:


> I don't have to wonder at all. trump has finally cooked his goose. This time not with his mouth as usual, but by his criminal actions.


----------



## Batcat

Care4all said:


> Bottom line, the investigators found no proof or evidence that her server was hacked by the Chinese or Russians.  The DNC and Podesta emails hacked by the Russians were found when investigating their servers, but not found when Clinton's server was investigated for nearly a year.....
> 
> Most of the articles you posted are from right wing partisan hacks and is fake news, trying to stir up shit, using anonymous sources and partisans stirring up trouble with no evidence....it's been 4 years since their accusations and Gomert and Johnson still have nothing but their jive talking.


Of course you will argue your liberal news media sources are always right, totally ignoring the many false news stories they have generated in the last few years. 





__





						MSNBC Producer Quits Because It's Liberal Fake News: "We are a Cancer and There is No Cure" - LifeNews.com
					

An MSNBC producer for Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell left the network in dramatic fashion on Monday, writing a harshly critical open letter on her personal website. “July 24th was my last day at MSNBC. I don’t know what I’m going to do next exactly but I simply couldn’t stay there anymore,”...



					www.lifenews.com
				












						It HAPPENED: Here Are Eight Fake News Narratives About Trump the Media Has Admitted Were Always Wrong
					

Supporters of President Donald Trump discovered early in his tenure that whenever he claimed that the news media had gotten something wrong […] More




					trendingpolitics.com
				





Considering recent events I wonder how if the investigation into Hillary’s server was a lot like the investigation of Hunter’s laptop. 



			New FBI whistleblower claims bureau leadership slow-walked Hunter Biden investigation
		


_Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) sent a letter to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz on Tuesday about the new whistleblower claims, following disclosures made public last month about the bureau allegedly wrongly labeling Hunter Biden evidence as “disinformation” in 2020.

“Whistleblowers have recently contacted my office to share serious concerns about the FBI’s handling of Hunter Biden’s laptop,” Johnson told Horowitz, telling the watchdog that after the FBI obtained the laptop from a Delaware computer shop in late 2019, local FBI leadership told bureau employees that “you will not look at that Hunter Biden laptop” and that the FBI is “not going to change the outcome of the election again,” the whistleblowers said. 

Johnson said the new whistleblower claims “allege that the FBI did not begin to examine the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop until after the 2020 presidential election — potentially a year after the FBI obtained the laptop in Dec. 2019.”_

*****************

The problem is it takes years and years to develop a great reputation which the FBI had but just a couple incidents to ruin that reputation and you have to start all over again. 









						Liberals’ FBI trust is a real gut buster
					

While just 30% of Republicans and 45% of independents feel positive about the FBI, 75% of Democrats and 81% of liberals are big fans.




					nypost.com
				




I lost my trust in the FBI years ago (2015) when I read this. …









						FBI admits it fudged forensic hair matches in nearly all criminal trials for decades
					

Of the hundreds of cases involving bogus FBI hair analysis, 32 defendants were sentenced to death and 14 have so far been executed or died in prison




					nationalpost.com
				









						Bad Hair Days At The FBI
					

In which we learn that the FBI has been having bad hair days.




					www.esquire.com
				




Plus times haven’t changed much. …









						FBI And DOJ Personnel Confirm Agents Frequently Fudge Facts When Seeking FISA Warrants
					

The fallout from the FBI’s highly-questionable Carter Page investigation continues. The problems first came to light in an Inspector General’s report which found the FBI did a lot of cr…




					www.techdirt.com


----------



## HaShev

By the way, THIS IS TRUE CAUSE I PULLED IT FROM THEIR SITE, Hillary's host cloud server logo WAS A Luciferian fallen star (seen below).  I'm not making this up to be funny, because it should be concerning.
But my latest meme is both funny but also makes you wonder about these lawless supporters running for office.


----------



## Batcat

Stann said:


> I don't have to wonder at all. trump has finally cooked his goose. This time not with his mouth as usual, but by his criminal actions.


I suspect that once again you will find yourself wrong in the end. How many times have I read that finally Trump is going down and it doesn’t happen.


----------



## SweetSue92

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news



A joke.

If any WalLs ArE ClOSinG In it's on the cretins in the FBI/DOJ


----------



## Batcat

San Souci said:


> If those "Documents" were Secret , why does the DOJ put pictures of them on Public Media?  Just another "Russia Collusion".


Cover sheets are not classified. You didn’t see what was in the documents in the picture just the cover sheets. 

Note the statement just above the bottom Top Secret. “This cover sheet is unclassified.”


----------



## Deplorable Yankee




----------



## HaShev

Deplorable Yankee said:


> View attachment 689939


😄


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


> LOL
> 
> That's exactly what they did and rightards haven't stopped crying about it since.


Thanks for proving you don't read every post.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> He declassified them... and was cooperating with retuning them... you can't just put government documents in a envelope and drop it in the mail...
> This is falling apart by the hour.... the FBI releases a gratuitous photo like this tells me they are grasping at straws...



I do agree, Trump's story is falling apart by the second, it is ever changing


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe

Marener said:


> It has the virtue of being true. No one is seriously suggesting otherwise.


Those are just cover sheets.  Literally anyone with a printer can print one off the internet.

I screenshotted this one...lol


----------



## Golfing Gator

beagle9 said:


> Meanwhile Chicago and every other Democrat stronghold is full of chaos and murder without any accountability or use of force being used to STOP THEM.


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> So let’s say Trump had classified documents in his desk at Mar-a -Lago that while he says he declassified he wasn’t allowed to.
> 
> Trump’s residence is guarded by Secret Service and I imagine anyone who goes into Trump’s office to clean is escorted. Perhaps the Secret Service officers might read the data.
> 
> Hillary’s classified email was on an unauthorized and improperly secured server where a computer savvy high school kid could have hacked it. Governments all ove the world probably accessed that server and not only had insight on what Hillary thought and was involved in but also access to highly classified data,
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.newsmax.com/Hirsen/hillary-hackers-homeland-security/2016/08/01/id/741513/
> 
> 
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> _When FBI Director James Comey stated that his investigators had no “direct evidence” that Hillary’s email account had been “successfully hacked,” computer experts understood that Hillary’s server had most likely been breached, but by hackers much too sophisticated to leave behind traces of evidence.
> 
> Comey also confirmed that Hillary had used her private email while she was in the territory of what the director referred to as “sophisticated adversaries.”
> 
> The New York Times provided a quote from former government cyber-security expert James Lewis, which read, “If she [Hillary] used it [mobile device] in Russia or China, they almost certainly picked it up.”
> 
> Other cyber-intrusions about which the Associated Press reported indicate that hackers had attempted to gain unauthorized access to Hillary’s server, and they did so without relying on email messages.
> 
> Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel, a.k.a., Guccifer, told Fox News that he hacked Hillary’s server, as did at least 10 others.
> 
> A hack of Hillary’s private server could potentially yield a harvest of email addresses of individuals with whom the former secretary of state had corresponded. The said hackers could then send “spear phishing” emails to any or all of the individuals on the procured list, emails that could contain embedded programs with the capacity to infiltrate recipients’ computers, systems, networks, and the like._


The point you’re bringing up is entirely irrelevant. 

It makes no difference whatsoever if Trump had secret service or not. Trump had no authorization to possess those documents.


----------



## Marener

Wild Bill Kelsoe said:


> Those are just cover sheets.  Literally anyone with a printer can print one off the internet.
> 
> I screenshotted this one...lolView attachment 689955


Is that the explanation? That Trump just printed them off for funsies?

Get real guys.


----------



## Care4all

Delldude said:


> Declassifies all the Russia/Hillary files , which He said He would do, which would be embarrassing for your heroes at DOJ/FBI.......and you wonder about all this?


duh Del, he didn't need to steal records to reclassify them!   

if he wanted to declassify them, he merely needed to do so when President, and procedures following his written command to declassify the investigational material would be put in place to declassify the govt records, then anyone can request the information from the govt via a FOIA request.

stealing them to do such, is simply ridiculous....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Marener said:


> Is that the explanation? That Trump just printed them off for funsies?
> 
> Get real guys.



There have been a good 15 or so excuses for Trump, they have even now started to recycle them


----------



## Marener

Golfing Gator said:


> There have been a good 15 or so excuses for Trump, they have even now started to recycle them


They’re behind Trump who shockingly admitted they were his.


----------



## Care4all

Rambunctious said:


> He declassified them... and was cooperating with retuning them... you can't just put government documents in a envelope and drop it in the mail...
> This is falling apart by the hour.... the FBI releases a gratuitous photo like this tells me they are grasping at straws...


it was an evidence photo, with a ruler in lower part to scale the size of items retrieved in the search, WHICH IS DONE IN ALL SEARCHES.....

I almost choked from laughing while watching Hannity and f ox hosts claiming the photo was for show, or Trump claiming that he would never have them on the floor spread out like that, for guests to see....

Well duh, no one put them on the ground to make you look untidy Donald....   They are evidence photos, done with all search warrants.


----------



## citygator

Here is the current Republican talking point torn down in an instant.


----------



## citygator

Always a tweet for that..


----------



## skews13

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, it is one of my favorite laws!  Unfortunately, it is the DOJ/FBI's second least favorite, with the 4th amendment being their all-time most hated.  I Know it and I and can prove it:
> 
> That's what the law says, alright.  Yep, sure does.
> 
> I started to prove the FBI/DOJ's hatred of the Freedom of Information Act, by challenging you to request a copy of the de-classified parts of Operation Crossfire Hurricane.  But I didn't want you to do that, because I would hate for you to have FBI agents showing up at your house, your job.
> 
> I wondered if perchance, someone had already made that request.  Someone has:
> 
> *From Just the News:
> 
> The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation.
> 
> The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit was filed quietly in federal court on Aug. 1 and announced Monday by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judicial Watch sues DOJ to release Trump-declassified ‘smoking gun’ documents from Russia probe - Judicial Watch
> 
> 
> From Just the News: The conservative watchdog Judicial Watch has sued the Justice Department to compel the release of “smoking gun” documents former President Donald Trump declassified and ordered release that detail misconduct in the FBI’s discredited Russia collusion investigation. The Freedom...
> 
> 
> 
> www.judicialwatch.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The materials in the binder spoken of in this memorandum from President Trump to the Attorney General are declassified by law, and even in writing though that was not required.
> 
> View attachment 689766
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memorandum on Declassification of Certain Materials Related to the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation – The White House
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That date of the lawsuit was one week before the raid.  Not a coincidence.  That lawsuit meant that the walls were closing in on he DOJ/FBI.  They are about to be ordered to release the Crossfire Hurricane documents, and those documents are  known to be declassified.  Clearly, they are terrified to release them.
> 
> All they had to do was their usual redaction down to nothing usable job on the binder.  The only thing standing between them and again hiding the truth from the American people:  Trump's copy of the declassified binder.
> 
> So, they went and took it
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, Marener, I could take the lib-Dem way out and refuse to answer a hypothetical or to recognize the validity of an analogy by saying "apples and oranges!"  I won't, so I hope in the future that you will not either.
> 
> No judge would release Reffitt after having been convicted and sentenced because Trump says he had pardoned him earlier.  But in that case, a jury or judge has ruled after due process and a fair trial (presumably).  Reffitt had presumption of innocence, but the government but the government over-came that presumption.  Trump has not been found guilty of anything, so the presumption of innocence still applies.  The government would have to prove that Trump did not declassify documents that he gave a clear indication were declassified by taking them out of the White House.
> 
> Besides,  you admitted upstream that they were de-classified.  Put that in all caps if I remember correctly.
> 
> 
> That is good news, and it isn't redacted, which is great news.  Of course, since Trump's copy would have been among the documents they took in the raid, we won't have anything real to compare what they showed us.
> 
> I guess Trump should have just cut all the classification markings off of the declassified documents and sent the cut off pieces to the DOJ in response to that subpoena.
> 
> Regardless, the FBI still violated the Clinton Doctrines, of which one of the main tenets is that
> 
> _When served a subpoena, a senior U.S. political figure may simply reject the subpoena without having a search warrant served to take every document the FBI can find from their home._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clinton lawyer rejects subpoena for current server security details
> 
> 
> Clinton's attorney says a subpoena to Florida-based computer security company SECNAP went too far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Clinton lawyer rejects subpoena for current server security details​
> 
> *By JOSH GERSTEIN*
> 
> *09/23/2016 10:12 PM EDT
> A lawyer for Hillary Clinton told a House committee Friday the panel won't be receiving some information it subpoenaed about security arrangements for Clinton's server.*
> 
> 
> 
> She had her tens of thousands of classified documents on a server that was less secure than gmail, so yes.  That was different from declassified paper documents being kept in the home of a man with the protection of the Secret Service and a Billionaire's home security staff and equipment.
> 
> How would you prove that Trump intended something criminal by declassifying documents and taking them home?  Sounds like he was trying to  help the DOJ/FBI comply with the FOIA.
> 
> Remember another important tenet of the Hillary Doctrine:
> 
> _Intent is difficult to prove, so a senior U.S. political figure is a person that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute._
> 
> 
> The FBI/DOJ never cites "laws," when they refuse to provide information.  No, they flout the law and claim "ongoing investigation," not "privacy."
> 
> But they must, and will follow the third tenet of the Hillary Doctrine:
> 
> _If we've never prosecuted a senior politician for storing classified documents in an unauthorized way, we cannot do it now._
> 
> DOH!  If they had prosecuted Hillary, they could now prosecute Trump!



Be sure to present that at the trial. Be sure to let us know how that works out for you.


----------



## Seymour Flops

That judge will almost certainly appoint the requested special master. The desperation with which the DOJ/FBI/DNC is trying to avoid one only shows how much one is needed.


----------



## dblack

Golfing Gator said:


> There have been a good 15 or so excuses for Trump, they have even now started to recycle them


It's like none of these people have ever been parents.


----------



## skews13

Seymour Flops said:


> That judge will almost certainly appoint the requested special master. The desperation with which the DOJ/FBI/DNC is trying to avoid one only shows how much one is needed.



Doesn’t matter. The DOJ doesn’t have to comply with the order. The judge has no authority to order review of classified material, she isn’t cleared to see, or appoint anyone not cleared by NSA.

And no Florida law enforcement agency is going arrest anyone for not complying.

You’re in way over your head son.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> I don't have to wonder at all. trump has finally cooked his goose. This time not with his mouth as usual, but by his criminal actions.


Meh......once again, a hugeTDS induced Trump hardon.....LOL

I've seen this movie before.


----------



## Delldude

skews13 said:


> Doesn’t matter. The DOJ doesn’t have to comply with the order. The judge has no authority to order review of classified material, she isn’t cleared to see, or appoint anyone not cleared by NSA.
> 
> And no Florida law enforcement agency is going arrest anyone for not complying.
> 
> You’re in way over your head son.


DOJ will or reveal they are actually a kangaroo court. She isn't the special master, she will appoint someone with qualifications. No biggy.


----------



## Delldude

Care4all said:


> duh Del, he didn't need to steal records to reclassify them!
> 
> if he wanted to declassify them, he merely needed to do so when President, and procedures following his written command to declassify the investigational material would be put in place to declassify the govt records, then anyone can request the information from the govt via a FOIA request.
> 
> stealing them to do such, is simply ridiculous....


I believe it was 1-19 it was reported they were declassified....He was still POTUS......duh.
Nothing here matters until proven in court.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> That judge will almost certainly appoint the requested special master. The desperation with which the DOJ/FBI/DNC is trying to avoid one only shows how much one is needed.



You willing to bet on that?  Even though the judge is a biased Trump appointee, I do not think they will be able to twist the law enough to do so


----------



## Delldude

Golfing Gator said:


> You willing to bet on that?  Even though the judge is a biased Trump appointee, I do not think they will be able to twist the law enough to do so


I don't think she has to twist the law at all. If there is any indication of DOJ strong arming her into a decision, that looks awfully biased ala DOJ.


----------



## Care4all

skews13 said:


> Doesn’t matter. The DOJ doesn’t have to comply with the order. The judge has no authority to order review of classified material, she isn’t cleared to see, or appoint anyone not cleared by NSA.
> 
> And no Florida law enforcement agency is going arrest anyone for not complying.
> 
> You’re in way over your head son.


The AG can appeal, if the terms for the special master are objectionable to him and our national security is at stake.


----------



## Care4all

Delldude said:


> I don't think she has to twist the law at all. If there is any indication of DOJ strong arming her into a decision, that looks awfully biased ala DOJ.


And Trump judge shopping, 67 miles away, to find a trump appointed judge, didn't look awfully biased to you???


----------



## Delldude

Care4all said:


> The AG can appeal, if the terms for the special master are objectionable to him and our national security is at stake.


Not if a qualified individual does the review. Actually, the special master is to review what materials were covered under atty/client privilege.....I don't see how declassified or classified doc's fall under that.


----------



## Delldude

Care4all said:


> And Trump judge shopping, 67 miles away, to find a trump appointed judge, didn't look awfully biased to you???


Works for the dems everytime......


----------



## Seymour Flops

skews13 said:


> Doesn’t matter. The DOJ doesn’t have to comply with the order. The judge has no authority to order review of classified material, she isn’t cleared to see, or appoint anyone not cleared by NSA.
> 
> And no Florida law enforcement agency is going arrest anyone for not complying.
> 
> You’re in way over your head son.


There's no doubt that the DOJ/FBI/DNC will resist being held accountable for violating a private citizen's rights. That's nothing new.

The judge who will order the special master is a federal judge so you're confused in thinking Florida cops would enforce the order.

The FBI/DOJ/DNC will either turn over the documents to the special master or admit that they are about personal destruction and not about the law.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> You willing to bet on that?  Even though the judge is a biased Trump appointee, I do not think they will be able to twist the law enough to do so


Name your stakes.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Name your stakes.



If one is appointed I leave the forum for a week.  If one is not, you leave for a week.


----------



## postman

skews13 said:


> Doesn’t matter. The DOJ doesn’t have to comply with the order. The judge has no authority to order review of classified material, she isn’t cleared to see, or appoint anyone not cleared by NSA.



I believe the judge has the clearance, or would not have been assigned to the case.

As for the special master, there are two caveats.  First isn't it moot, since the FBI already finished going over all the documents for lawyer-client privilege.  And with executive privilege belonging to the sitting president, that hasn't been invoked, hence no privilege can be exercised.  What would the special master do, that hasn't already been done.

Second, who that special master would be.  They would need the top secret and beyond clearance to handle the seized documents,  so they would have to chose someone already having that clearance, or the process would face delays while the person applied for the needed security clearance.


----------



## OhPleaseJustQuit

Rambunctious said:


> You aren't making any sense.....


It never makes sense.  Either that, or it simply lies.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> The FBI/DOJ/DNC will either turn over the documents to the special master or admit that they are about personal destruction and not about the law.


This is where there is a potential conflict.  If the special master doesn't have the top secret and above clearance to handle the documents, the FBI can't legally hand them over to them.

And a judge can not compel someone to break the law.


----------



## postman

Delldude said:


> DOJ will or reveal they are actually a kangaroo court. She isn't the special master, she will appoint someone with qualifications. No biggy.



It's not easy to find somebody with those security clearances, that isn't busy doing something more important.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> If one is appointed I leave the forum for a week.  If one is not, you leave for a week.


My claim is that this judge will grant the request for the special master, not that he will be appointed.

I believe the DOJ will appeal instead of complying with the judge's order, and/or  object to anyone named for the role.  So I don't know if the special master will ever be actually appointed due to DOJ stalling.

I'll bet a week that the judge will agree with Trump's attorneys that a special master is needed. She wont reject the request because it is highly appropriate.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> It's not easy to find somebody with those security clearances, that isn't busy doing something more important.


Where do you get the idea that there aren't lawyers with security clearances or that they'd be too busy to work on a case of this importance?

These guys I found in less than a minute:

gibsondunn.com

Plus you forget we're talking about declassified not classified documents here.


----------



## Care4all

Delldude said:


> Not if a qualified individual does the review. Actually, the special master is to review what materials were covered under atty/client privilege.....I don't see how declassified or classified doc's fall under that.


you're probably right,

I hadn't thought of that.....

and who really knows what will actually happen?


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Where do you get the idea that there aren't lawyers with security clearances or that they'd be too busy to work on a case of this importance?


Why do they need a lawyer with security clearances?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> My claim is that this judge will grant the request for the special master, not that he will be appointed.
> 
> I believe the DOJ will appeal instead of complying with the judge's order, and/or  object to anyone named for the role.  So I don't know if the special master will ever be actually appointed due to DOJ stalling.
> 
> I'll bet a week that the judge will agree with Trump's attorneys that a special master is needed. She wont reject the request because it is highly appropriate.



Ok. 

I think she will not as it is no longer appropriate at all since the FIB has already taken a look at everything they have.  Makes the need for the master pretty much moot.  It was nothing more than a stalling maneuver by Trump


----------



## Wballz49

Under the law, it doesn’t matter if the documents on which NDI is contained are classified or not, as it is simply and always criminal to have NDI in a non-federal facility, to have those without security clearances move it from one place to another, and to keep it from the feds when they are seeking it. Stated differently, the absence of classification — for whatever reason — is not a defense to the charges that are likely to be filed against Mr. Trump.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Plus you forget we're talking about declassified not classified documents here.



No we are not. That has not yet been determined....no matter how much you wish to pretend otherwise


----------



## Wballz49

Rambunctious said:


> Its very possible that those documents have been there from when Trump worked from home... they may not have ever been in the white house....


🤦‍♂️U idiot the documents are never to leave SCIFS.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> Where do you get the idea that there aren't lawyers with security clearances or that they'd be too busy to work on a case of this importance?


First we aren't talking a low level security clearance, we're talking the highest level of security clearance the government can issue.  And those require a need to have one, job waiting in order to apply.


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> Maybe they should have checked Trumps office before they declared they had no classified information


  So how many Docs were technically considered " Classified "
    And does anyone believe that they just so happened to be 
   strewn on the floor.Knowing full well that Trump is about as   
    dedicated a neatnik as they come.
    Levin said last night on his Radio show there were THREE
    Docs found in his office.That are " classified " and not under lock and
  key where they were instructed to be.
       Is Three like the old adage ...  Third time is the charm.
    Since where dealing with an FBI and Justice Department who
    literally have the same mindset as The Wicked Witch of the West
   from - The Wizard of Oz { 1939 }.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> Plus you forget we're talking about declassified not classified documents here.


We're talking documents "marked" classified.   And the law says that unless somebody marks them otherwise, they are legally treated according to their classification markings.


----------



## postman

Foolardi said:


> So how many Docs were technically considered " Classified "
> And does anyone believe that they just so happened to be
> strewn on the floor.Knowing full well that Trump is about as
> dedicated a neatnik as they come.


Don't be ridiculous.  They were placed on the floor, many with sheets of paper covering the classified sections as evidence of what they found, and where they found it.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> Why do they need a lawyer with security clearances?


I'm not saying that they do.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> First we aren't talking a low level security clearance, we're talking the highest level of security clearance the government can issue.  And those require a need to have one, job waiting in order to apply.


I'm on my phone so I can't copy and paste. But Gibson Dunn specializes in having lawyers with high level clearances.

Think man!

If what you claim were actually true, Trump could not have a lawyer who could look at the evidence. So he couldn't have due process so could never be convicted.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> Don't be ridiculous.  They were placed on the floor, many with sheets of paper covering the classified sections as evidence of what they found, and where they found it.


Yes that photo was staged.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> We're talking documents "marked" classified.   And the law says that unless somebody marks them otherwise, they are legally treated according to their classification markings.


Show me that law, if you're not making that up.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> No we are not. That has not yet been determined....no matter how much you wish to pretend otherwise


If not determined, Trump is innocent. Until PROVEN guilty.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes that photo was staged.


Of course it was. That’s how the FBI photographs evidence taken in searches. 

That doesn’t change the fact that they found all of them in Trump’s home.


----------



## August West

Seymour Flops said:


> They've got him this time, alright!


Unless Georgia or New York get him first. It seems like it was only yesterday when he had his white trash chanting "lock her up". There will be no indictments until after the midterms at least. Every day is worse than the day before for "find me 11,780 votes".
Obstruction is a serious offense.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Ok.
> 
> I think she will not as it is no longer appropriate at all since the FIB has already taken a look at everything they have.  Makes the need for the master pretty much moot.  It was nothing more than a stalling maneuver by Trump


Wager accepted then.

I'm surprised that you make that "the FBI already checked it" argument. The FBI is who is trying to convict Trump. A neutral party should have some oversight.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> Of course it was. That’s how the FBI photographs evidence taken in searches.
> 
> That doesn’t change the fact that they found all of them in Trump’s home.


That's not a fact, it's a claim. 

A claim by an agency with both a long and a recent history of lying and faking evidence.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> That's not a fact, it's a claim.
> 
> A claim by an agency with both a long and a recent history of lying and faking evidence.


Uh huh. I dare you to go with the “planted evidence” defense. 

I dare you.


----------



## Rambunctious

Wballz49 said:


> 🤦‍♂️U idiot the documents are never to leave SCIFS.


Not if they were generated in Mar a Lago while Trump worked from home... Idiot..... biden has a cabinet at his home full of documents... he admitted it.... so sorry but you are just wrong... turn off MSNBC and CNN and get caught up.... kid.....


----------



## miketx

This is just the latest in the never ending we got him now collosal waste of time and money govt scandal.


----------



## Rambunctious

Care4all said:


> it was an evidence photo, with a ruler in lower part to scale the size of items retrieved in the search, WHICH IS DONE IN ALL SEARCHES.....
> 
> I almost choked from laughing while watching Hannity and f ox hosts claiming the photo was for show, or Trump claiming that he would never have them on the floor spread out like that, for guests to see....
> 
> Well duh, no one put them on the ground to make you look untidy Donald....   They are evidence photos, done with all search warrants.


What was the point of showing the picture?.... hmmmmm?.... it was for public consumption which tells me their dirty trick is not working and they have nothing to prosecute Trump on.... so they will do the next best thing... create a false narrative with a picture.... and you dummies can't wait to fall all over it....


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> I do agree, Trump's story is falling apart by the second, it is ever changing


He hasn't told his story yet... maybe your favorite network MSNBC is telling his story for him... Buuuaaahahahahaha what a buffoon....


----------



## Rambunctious

Stann said:


> very questionable actions


......


----------



## Rambunctious

biden Garland and the FBI are playing libs like a fiddle.....
talk about gas lighting... what a bunch of losers you libs are....


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> Uh huh. I dare you to go with the “planted evidence” defense.
> 
> I dare you.


It would work like a charm. Especially if the DOJ/FBI/DNC plan is to go with a DC jury.

Why was OJ acquitted with all the evidence against him?


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> It would work like a charm. Especially if the DOJ/FBI/DNC plan is to go with a DC jury.
> 
> Why was OJ acquitted with all the evidence against him?


I eagerly await the evidence that the documents were planted. There is none and Trump would never use that as a defense. 

Especially not after this:


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> If not determined, Trump is innocent. Until PROVEN guilty.



The only known fact at this time is that Trump had documents that were marked as classified.  That much is beyond dispute.  If I were found with documents that were marked as classified, the burden to prove they were not actually classified would fall on me.

The same holds true for anyone.


----------



## Rambunctious

Its not unusual for lawyers to have to wait outside but in a case like that they will video the search... this group of agents didn't do that...in fact they shut off the security cameras... highly unusual.... especially when raiding a presidents home.....


----------



## Rambunctious

If Garland had found anything they wouldn't have released that false narrative picture....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Wager accepted then.
> 
> I'm surprised that you make that "the FBI already checked it" argument. The FBI is who is trying to convict Trump. A neutral party should have some oversight.



The neutral party was to keep the FBI from looking at things they were not supposed to look at.

Too late for that.


----------



## miketx

Stann said:


> Where is the paper trail, did he actually do his homework. He never did before.


The tv has told you all about trump.


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> The neutral party was to keep the FBI from looking at things they were not supposed to look at.
> 
> Too late for that.


The special master would have stopped the release of the picture... and a special master would also have every document that does belong to Trump back at Mar a Lago....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> The special master would have stopped the release of the picture... and a special master would also have every document that does belong to Trump back at Mar a Lago....



And it is too late to stop the release of the picture and the stuff is being sent back to Trump now that they have separated it all. 

Thus no need for it


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> And it is too late to stop the release of the picture and the stuff is being sent back to Trump now that they have separated it all.
> 
> Thus no need for it


Why is Garland using tax dollars to fight it?....


----------



## skews13

Seymour Flops said:


> There's no doubt that the DOJ/FBI/DNC will resist being held accountable for violating a private citizen's rights. That's nothing new.
> 
> The judge who will order the special master is a federal judge so you're confused in thinking Florida cops would enforce the order.
> 
> The FBI/DOJ/DNC will either turn over the documents to the special master or admit that they are about personal destruction and not about the law.



You just changed your story again.

Now he’s a private citizen.

Well, you just sunk your own case. If he’s a private citizen, he has committed multiple felonies being in possession of, and handling classified information. If it is proven he sold any of it, now we’re talking firing squad at Leanworth.

Your orange messiah is dead meat son. You might want to start coming to grips with that fact.


----------



## Rambunctious

Zincwarrior said:


> Biden is President. Trump is no one. How do you people not understand that?


biden is the Resident..... President Trump is referred to as President Trump for the rest of his life... just like President Clinton and President Bush....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> Why is Garland using tax dollars to fight it?....



Because it is a clear delaying tactic that serves no other purpose.


----------



## miketx

Zincwarrior said:


> Biden is President. Trump is no one. How do you people not understand that?


It's doubtful Biden knows what day it is.


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> Because it is a clear delaying tactic that serves no other purpose.


It keeps the FBI honest... if it delays so be it... we are talking about a former president you crumb.... not a drug cartel leader....


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> It keeps the FBI honest... if it delays so be it... we are talking about a former president you crumb.... not a drug cartel leader....



It could have kept them honest, but now every purpose it might have served is now moot. 

Should people be treated differently based upon their former position?


----------



## Rambunctious

Golfing Gator said:


> It could have kept them honest, but now every purpose it might have served is now moot.
> 
> Should people be treated differently based upon their former position?


Not until this thing is over and the FBI backs off... until that day Trump must use every tool to push back at the corrupt FBI and DOJ....


----------



## Rambunctious

Zincwarrior said:


> And? I refer to myself as Emperor of Known Space. Thats irrelevant. He has no powers, clearances, or any connection to the government once the next President is sworn in.


You do not lose the clearance level you had as president unless its taken away....


----------



## Marener

Rambunctious said:


> Not until this thing is over and the FBI backs off... until that day Trump must use every tool to push back at the corrupt FBI and DOJ....


Trump and his legal team are incompetent.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Rambunctious said:


> Not until this thing is over and the FBI backs off... until that day Trump must use every tool to push back at the corrupt FBI and DOJ....



Did you ever, even once, occur to you that Trump might have done things he was not allowed/supposed to do?


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> What was the point of showing the picture?.... hmmmmm?.... it was for public consumption which tells me their dirty trick is not working and they have nothing to prosecute Trump on.... so they will do the next best thing... create a false narrative with a picture.... and you dummies can't wait to fall all over it....



*Translation: *_You're pissed because Trump got caught with the goods._


----------



## Rambunctious

Faun said:


> *Translation: *_You're pissed because Trump got caught with the goods._


What goods?... did that picture work on you?....


----------



## Rambunctious

Zincwarrior said:


> You don't have any clearance level once you're Ex President. The President doesn't have a clearance level. It has to be granted by the next President.  As such, absent a specific grant he had no right to the documents, whether they were classified or not. Active attempts to hide them after subpoena is its own crime. If the Feds decide to pursue, he is in deep deep criminal trouble.
> _*Former presidents aren't subject to security clearance investigations, either. They are provided access to secrets as a courtesy, with the permission of the current president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can ex-President Trump be trusted with America's secrets?
> 
> 
> Ex-presidents are entitled to classified briefings. Some ex-intel officials think Trump shouldn't get access to any national secrets when he leaves office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *_


Ummm your link says you are wrong....


----------



## iceberg

Batcat said:


> I have said if Trump violated the laws involving handling classified information he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. Here’s a link to that comment. …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Special Master As DOJ Drops Bombshell 40 Page Ruling Obstruction By Trump Team
> 
> 
> Does it not bother you even a tiny bit that he had classified documents just laying around his house?  Even if it was not illegal, is is still the right thing to do?  What bothers a lot of people in our nation is that Hillary who had classified email on an unauthorized and improperly secured...
> 
> 
> 
> www.usmessageboard.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _If Trump was negligently handling classified information, he should be prosecuted but so should Hillary. It is not real complicated — the law should apply equally to all._
> 
> **********
> 
> The last thing we need in this nation at this time is a two tiered system of justice, one for Democrats and one for conservatives and especially Trump supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> America Has a Two-Tiered Justice System and the FBI Just Proved It
> 
> 
> The DOJ’s handling of Hillary Clinton serves as one of the many examples of dual standards of justice when powerful Democrats face the FBI.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dailysignal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> _The Justice Department’s handling of Clinton with kid gloves serves as but one of the many examples of dual standards of justice seen when powerful Democrats or their backers face the FBI.
> 
> Hunter Biden’s home likewise has seen no breach even as the Delaware U.S. Attorney’s Office enters its fourth year of investigating the current president’s son for multiple potential federal crimes, including tax evasion, money laundering, and Foreign Agents Registration Act violations. Instead, the FBI executed a search warrant on the Apple repair store owner who alerted agents to the existence of his laptop.
> 
> And although emails from Hunter’s laptop implicate President Joe Biden’s brother, Jim Biden, in the apparent pay-to-play scheme, the feds have yet to raid his home either._
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> _In contrast, those in Trump’s orbit, such as Roger Stone, faced pre-dawn searches and arrests, with scores of federal agents flooding the scene with the tipped-off media in tow. Federal agents reportedly also searched Trump-advocate Rudy Giuliani’s residence in New York, as well as that of Trump associate Victoria Toensing.
> 
> Former Department of Justice attorney Jeff Clark, another Trump loyalist, also saw his home raided by the FBI.
> 
> Against this two-pronged approach to justice, Americans need not lean conservative or support Trump to spot the scandal. And Americans need not care about politics to oppose the politicization of the Justice Department and FBI: They just need to care about the future of the country—one that cannot survive long if such corruption and cronyism continues._


problem is, they refuse to say it's the same thing or even acknowlege "their side" ever does it.

i don't care who breaks the law. the lady outside the courtroom is blindfolded for a reason but hell, these days we prosecute on emotion, not fact.

and it's fucking us all up so badly.


----------



## iceberg

Zincwarrior said:


> You don't have any clearance level once you're Ex President. The President doesn't have a clearance level. It has to be granted by the next President.  As such, absent a specific grant he had no right to the documents, whether they were classified or not. Active attempts to hide them after subpoena is its own crime. If the Feds decide to pursue, he is in deep deep criminal trouble.
> _*Former presidents aren't subject to security clearance investigations, either. They are provided access to secrets as a courtesy, with the permission of the current president.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can ex-President Trump be trusted with America's secrets?
> 
> 
> Ex-presidents are entitled to classified briefings. Some ex-intel officials think Trump shouldn't get access to any national secrets when he leaves office.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.nbcnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *_


which means he's still "Clear" in matters he was involved in to help provide guidance as could be needed by the next administration. this worked fine til we weaponized the gov and built a "don't trust anyone but those who 100% agree with you" mentality.

they don't get to play in new matters, no. but they can and should be consulted on matters they handled while they were president.


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> and it's fucking us all up so badly.


What is fucking is up so badly is failing to acknowledge facts about how different situations are different and therefore understand why different situations are handled differently. 

The DoJ is far better at taking emotion out than we are.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> He hasn't told his story yet... maybe your favorite network MSNBC is telling his story for him... Buuuaaahahahahaha what a buffoon....



Sure he has. Repeatedly...

_I don't have any classified documents; but if I do, I declassified them when I was president; but if I didn't, I still have Executive Privilege; but if I don't, the raid of Mar-a-Lago was illegal because they took my passports; but if it wasn't, this is just a hoax, perpetrating a witch hunt by the deep state; but if it's not, the FBI, led by a man I appointed, planted the classified documents; but even if they didn't, the classified documents were just souvenirs anyway; but even if they're not, I was cooperating fully with the government; but even if I wasn't, Barack Hussein Obama did worse; but even if he didn't, I gave a standing order that all classified documents are declassified when they leave the Oval Office; but even if I didn't, I'm still the rightful president anyway because Democrats stole the 2020 election from me; but even if they didn't, I was just trolling the left; so there, neener, neener, neener! It doesn't matter because I still won't lose any support from the right._​


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> It would work like a charm. Especially if the DOJ/FBI/DNC plan is to go with a DC jury.
> 
> Why was OJ acquitted with all the evidence against him?



Reasonable doubt.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> You do not lose the clearance level you had as president unless its taken away....



Trump never had a security clearance to lose.


----------



## Faun

Rambunctious said:


> What goods?... did that picture work on you?....



That picture revealed they confiscated top secret documents from Trump's residence.


----------



## Dekster

skews13 said:


> To sum it up, Trump took plainly marked classified records to [Mar-a-Lago], he delayed, obstructed and resisted Government efforts to recover them, he (or his staff) concealed the records from investigators, and they got caught doing so," Moss explained.
> 
> One of his lawyers actually told a Washington Post reporter she “reviewed” the material.
> 
> I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?



Okay butthat is not the special master's job.  It is to separate the privileged evidence if any from the fair game evidence.


----------



## airplanemechanic

Golfing Gator said:


> I love how many on the right were all it an utter disgrace for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an perfectly fine for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing



I'm pretty sure you got that ass backwards.

It was the left that didn't give a rats ass about Hillary mishandling classified documents but want Trump strung up by his balls for doing the same thing.


----------



## bravoactual

Faun said:


> That picture revealed they confiscated top secret documents from Trump's residence.



As you look at the picture, all you are seeing are the Cover Sheets, meaning the Traitor did have Secret/Top Secret/SCI documents.  You do not see any of the documents themself. 

As you look at the picture, what see is the F.B.I. documenting the presense of T.S./SCI material.  The F.B.I. documenting, cataloging and verifying the presence  T.S./SCI documents.  The Cover Sheets themself are proof of classified material.  You DONOT SEE THE MATERIAL ITSELF.

When the T.S/SCI documents were discovered, the Agents present had suspend the search until Agents with proper clearance could be brought in and the search then continued.

Yes, there was classified material at Shit-A-Lago, and yes that material was illegally handled and maintained.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Rambunctious said:


> but we don't know what they were and if they were declassified...


A silly lie. We know they were classified documents. These are publicly available facts.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

airplanemechanic said:


> I'm pretty sure you got that ass backwards.
> 
> It was the left that didn't give a rats ass about Hillary mishandling classified documents but want Trump strung up by his balls for doing the same thing.


Aww, you poor baby. Has the mean old left hurt your feelings again? Do you think your constant grievances will help Trump?


----------



## Marener

airplanemechanic said:


> I'm pretty sure you got that ass backwards.
> 
> It was the left that didn't give a rats ass about Hillary mishandling classified documents but want Trump strung up by his balls for doing the same thing.


Clinton was investigated at length and no one on the left was calling the FBI Nazis for doing so.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> I eagerly await the evidence that the documents were planted. There is none and Trump would never use that as a defense.
> 
> Especially not after this:
> View attachment 690014


I don't think they will explicitly make that claim and neither did OJ's lawyers. They only had to show how corrupt and utterly untrustworthy the LAPD was and the jury disregarded murder evidence consisting of a literal trail of blood connecting the victim to the defendant.

With the FBI having complete control over what to show and not show, their evidence' credibility relies on their own credibility. A shaky foundation for a federal case.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Rambunctious said:


> The special master would have stopped the release of the picture... and a special master would also have every document that does belong to Trump back at Mar a Lago....


Yes!

This idea that the special master is only to prevent what is too late to prevent is another DOJ/FBI/DNC invention.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> And it is too late to stop the release of the picture and the stuff is being sent back to Trump now that they have separated it all.
> 
> Thus no need for it


It's needed to prevent the next planned violation of due process and civil rights.


----------



## iceberg

Marener said:


> What is fucking is up so badly is failing to acknowledge facts about how different situations are different and therefore understand why different situations are handled differently.
> 
> The DoJ is far better at taking emotion out than we are.


except you say EVERYTHING on the left is "different"

it ain't. it's just being anally stupid and a refusal to accept common standards and laws both sides must adhere to.

to sit there and say the DoJ is acting in a non targeted manner is just you taking your emotions out for a drive.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> They only had to show how corrupt and utterly untrustworthy the LAPD was and the jury disregarded murder evidence consisting of a literal trail of blood connecting the victim to the defendant.


We that's false. They also had to show the glove did not fit, which was much more important.

Fail post.


----------



## Golfing Gator

airplanemechanic said:


> I'm pretty sure you got that ass backwards.
> 
> It was the left that didn't give a rats ass about Hillary mishandling classified documents but want Trump strung up by his balls for doing the same thing.



Yep, you are correct.  And the right wanted her strung up by her tits while not giving a rats ass about Trump.

Two sides, one coin


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> I don't think they will explicitly make that claim and neither did OJ's lawyers. They only had to show how corrupt and utterly untrustworthy the LAPD was and the jury disregarded murder evidence consisting of a literal trail of blood connecting the victim to the defendant.
> 
> With the FBI having complete control over what to show and not show, their evidence' credibility relies on their own credibility. A shaky foundation for a federal case.


Sounds a little desperate. Documentary evidence speaks for itself. What isn’t credible is trying to pretend that the photos don’t show what they clearly show or that their lawyers didn’t understand what they were signing.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> The only known fact at this time is that Trump had documents that were marked as classified.  That much is beyond dispute.  If I were found with documents that were marked as classified, the burden to prove they were not actually classified would fall on me.
> 
> The same holds true for anyone.


You're not the president, who has power to reclassify at will.

Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."

Should you be convicted if you publish it?


----------



## iceberg

Zincwarrior said:


> No I don't get where you think that.  His ability to review or own government documents, much less secret ones, ENDS when Biden is sworn in. Anything after that has to be through permission of the Federal government.
> 
> More fun: seems like Trump's own attorney is now a potential subject. She signed and affadavit that she had searched the locations in response to the NY suit. Unless she has a security clearance she potentially saw lthese documents in violation of law, or lied to the NY AG.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Days before Mar-a-Lago subpoena, Trump lawyer claimed she scoured his office, closets and drawers
> 
> 
> A filing by Alina Habba in the case over Trump’s business empire could create exposure in the matter of classified information being stored at the ex-president’s home.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


because it's commonly done. lets say our government wasn't at such odds and biden needed some info before pulling out of afganistan. he could talk to trump and trump could relay what he knew *from his time in office*. why? because he was a part of those decisions and logic leading up to them.

now yes, the current president can do what they want with clearances. i never said otherwise. but given that the president can "do what they want' - a standard you are advocating to go after trump, by that same logic, trump can declassify EVERYTHING while president and then it simply doesn't matter.

here is where partisan hacks cry foul. 

so, what are you going to do? allow both sides the ability to function by the same logic, or twist this shit up cause "orange man bad" n shit?


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> it ain't. it's just being anally stupid and a refusal to accept common standards and laws both sides must adhere to.


I can point out the very real and important differences. Are you going to refuse to acknowledge it?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> The only known fact at this time is that Trump had documents that were marked as classified.  That much is beyond dispute.  If I were found with documents that were marked as classified, the burden to prove they were not actually classified would fall on me.
> 
> The same holds true for anyone.


You're not the president, who has power to declassify at will.

Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."

Should you be convicted if you publish it?


skews13 said:


> You just changed your story again.
> 
> Now he’s a private citizen.
> 
> Well, you just sunk your own case. If he’s a private citizen, he has committed multiple felonies being in possession of, and handling classified information. If it is proven he sold any of it, now we’re talking firing squad at Leanworth.
> 
> Your orange messiah is dead meat son. You might want to start coming to grips with that fact.


Sit at my feet and learn, my daughter.*

 He was the president when he declassified the documents. Now he's a private citizen being harassed by a rogue government.

See the difference now?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to reclassify at will.
> 
> Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."
> 
> Should you be convicted if you publish it?



Nope, but I would sure make sure there was some record of it, be it a recording or an official signed document because if I was charged, I would be the one that has to prove it had been declassified.  Same holds true for the POTUS, no matter how much you wish them to be, they are not above the law

What exactly is the point of declassifying something if nobody else knows it has been done?


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> He was the president when he declassified the documents.



So he claims, yet there is no evidence this took place....thus the quandary we are now in


----------



## iceberg

Zincwarrior said:


> But not this time. Can be is not did.  Also by deduction Trump wouldn't be shouting on LiesSocial that he had declassified before he left if that were the case.


yawn.

again for the seemingly terminally dense, if biden can revoke and do what he wants with this right as president, then if trump said "i declassify all this crap im taking home" then it's declassified.

i am not playing your 3rd grade "this is different" crap. im using the same rules for both parties and your emo-asshurt-whining doesn't change a thing.


----------



## iceberg

Marener said:


> I can point out the very real and important differences. Are you going to refuse to acknowledge it?


if it's emotionally based, yes. if it's an attempt to apply the rules in your favor for a bullshit reason you never hold your own side to, yes.

but have at it, spanky.


----------



## rightwinger

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to declassify at will.
> 
> Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."
> 
> Should you be convicted if you publish it?
> 
> Sit at my feet and learn, my daughter.*
> 
> He was the president when he declassified the documents. Now he's a private citizen being harassed by a rogue government.
> 
> See the difference now?


Try to keep up

Trumps lawyers are now saying those documents are classified but that it expected for ex Presidents to maintain such documents

I feel sorry for you. With Trump, it is so difficult to keep up with the latest lies


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> then if trump said "i declassify all this crap im taking home" then it's declassified.



OK
Can you point to where Trump actually said that?

Declassify does not mean you can take them home..It means that information is now available to anyone


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> OK
> Can you point to where Trump actually said that?
> 
> Declassify does not mean you can take them home..It means that information is now available to anyone


if available to anyone, what the fuck difference does it make where it is?

lord you doosh it up and cross over yourself far too easily.


----------



## rightwinger

iceberg said:


> if available to anyone, what the fuck difference does it make where it is?
> 
> lord you doosh it up and cross over yourself far too easily.



Absolutely

If Trump had declassified those Top Secret Documents, they would become public record

They are not


----------



## iceberg

rightwinger said:


> Absolutely
> 
> If Trump had declassified those Top Secret Documents, they would become public record
> 
> They are not


more circles from you.

knock yourself out, fartboy.


----------



## Marener

iceberg said:


> if it's emotionally based, yes. if it's an attempt to apply the rules in your favor for a bullshit reason you never hold your own side to, yes.
> 
> but have at it, spanky.


No emotion needed. 

For starters, Trump’s documents were unmistakably classified. The cover sheets, headings, giant red letters scream classified. 

As opposed to Clinton. At worst, you can say three emails contained (c) indicating confidential and even then the info wasn’t even confidential when the email was sent. No giant red letters. Nothing of the sort. 

This is a really important difference.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to declassify at will.
> 
> Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."
> 
> Should you be convicted if you publish it?



The president has the power to declassify at will, but with some caveats.
First, documents can't be declassified en-masse, the supreme courts, federal and state, have repeatedly said that acts of the chief executive have to be on a case by case basis.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> That act cannot defeat the claim that the President has the unilateral authority to declassify a classified document. What the AG allegedly “believes” has literally nothing at all to do with it.


Really?  The AG is the top cop in the nation.  The US Code names The United States as the sole owner of secrets.  It does not name The President, the AG or you.

That you wishfully believe The Donald is the Sole Person - not the current president - and believe trump is a King, a God or The United States you are too dumb to convince anyone but a trumpanzee.


----------



## postman

iceberg said:


> if available to anyone, what the fuck difference does it make where it is?


You don't see a problem with it being available to Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, and every terrorist in the world?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> Clinton was investigated at length and no one on the left was calling the FBI Nazis for doing so.


Right!

Not even after the DOJ sent agents to ransack Hillary's home and sniff Bill's boxer shorts.

Oh wait. . . .

Trump fired Comey for his biased and unprofessional treatment of Hillary.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to declassify at will.
> 
> Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."
> 
> Should you be convicted if you publish it?
> 
> Sit at my feet and learn, my daughter.*
> 
> He was the president when he declassified the documents. Now he's a private citizen being harassed by a rogue government.
> 
> See the difference now?


No, only a real biddable fool believes this.


----------



## rightwinger

Conservatives and surprisingly, the RW Media have a twisted view of what declassification means
They point out that Trump had the power to declassify anything he wants but seem to think it only means he can take stuff home and not have to worry about protecting it.

If Trump declassifies a document, that means it is available to everyone, even our enemies. 
And not just that document, but the secret information that makes it a Secret Document in the first place


----------



## Seymour Flops

Rye Catcher said:


> The US Code names The United States as the sole owner of secrets.


No. It does not say that. Whoever told you that made it up.


Rye Catcher said:


> It does not name The President, the AG or you.


The USSC ruled that the president has sole authority over classification and declassification.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Right!
> 
> Not even after the DOJ sent agents to ransack Hillary's home and sniff Bill's boxer shorts.
> 
> Oh wait. . . .
> 
> Trump fired Comey for his biased and unprofessional treatment of Hillary.



Trump fired Comey for not locking up Hillary.


----------



## rightwinger

Trump wants the My Pillow Guy appointed as his Special Master


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Trump fired Comey for not locking up Hillary.


Now you're just lying.

Trump fired Comey at the recommendahion of Rod Rosenstein who stated in his letter that opposition to what Comey did to Clinton at the end of the investigation was nearly universally condrmned and that Comey refused to acknowledge his mistake.

But you knew that I hope.


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> No. It does not say that. Whoever told you that made it up.
> 
> The USSC ruled that the president has sole authority over classification and declassification.



The president also has sole authority over granting pardons and reprieves.  But the supreme court said, the president wanting to pardon somebody means nothing until all the paperwork to officiate the pardon is delivered into the hands of the person being pardoned, the presidents intentions mean nothing,.

A pardon is a process, not a statement.


----------



## Foolardi

postman said:


> We're talking documents "marked" classified.   And the law says that unless somebody marks them otherwise, they are legally treated according to their classification markings.


Trump has the Constitution on his side.While President he has the
 ultimate authority { over and above some National Archivist }
    to deem any and all documents in his White House as Declassified }
    The second he vacates the White House he must start reviewing all
    Docs with a National Archivist.That he did.That is not some procedure that
  takes a few weeks.It could and does take years.Sometimes decades.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Really?


Yes 


Rye Catcher said:


> The AG is the top cop in the nation.


Well, the top law enforcement official. 


Rye Catcher said:


> The US Code names The United States as the sole owner of secrets.


No. The US is the sole owner of state secrets. So what?


Rye Catcher said:


> It does not name The President, the AG or you.


I never claimed anything to the contrary. 


Rye Catcher said:


> That you wishfully believe The Donald is the Sole Person - not the current president - and believe trump is a King, a God or The United States you are too dumb to convince anyone but a trumpanzee.



You’re busy arguing against a straw-man of your own simple minded plodding creation. I have never claimed that Trump was the “sole person” of anything. When he was President, however, he *was* the sole person who could unilaterally declassify any classified documents. 

I haven’t ever contended or even implied that he was a king or at all akin to a god. Again, that’s just your simple minded straw-man concoction. 

Your  last paragraph is largely unintelligible, anyway. Coming, as it does, from someone who is extraordinarily unintelligent, that’s not surprising. 

Suffice it to say:  you are babbling, frothing at the lips, straining against your own feeble straw-man argument and all for no purpose. 

Carry on. 🤣


----------



## postman

Seymour Flops said:


> The USSC ruled that the president has sole authority over classification and declassification.


Now think about the president having the authority to classify information.

Can the president order something "classified", without letting anybody know, save the AG, who now goes around locking people up for possessing classified information.


----------



## Foolardi

Seymour Flops said:


> Now you're just lying.
> 
> Trump fired Comey at the recommendahion of Rod Rosenstein who stated in his letter that opposition to what Comey did to Clinton at the end of the investigation was nearly universally condrmned and that Comey refused to acknowledge his mistake.
> 
> But you knew that I hope.


Plus Comey is a hypocrite.He himself leaked Classified docs.
   Plus was Not present when Hillary was allowed to decide on what
  day { a saturday } and time she will sit down with the FBI for a 
    Meeting.There was no video of the meeting,Clinton was allowed
   to have her Lawyer present and No Transcript of the meeting was
  formally made.Or available.


----------



## postman

Foolardi said:


> Trump has the Constitution on his side.While President he has the
> ultimate authority { over and above some National Archivist }
> to deem any and all documents in his White House as Declassified }


And courts have repeatedly ruled that chief executives powers and authorities have to be wielded on a case by case basis.  
So Trump could certainly declassify documents, one at a time.  Letting people know the specific documents he's declassifying.
He does not have the power to declassify en-masse, or without telling anybody.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Right!
> 
> Not even after the DOJ sent agents to ransack Hillary's home and sniff Bill's boxer shorts.
> 
> Oh wait. . . .
> 
> Trump fired Comey for his biased and unprofessional treatment of Hillary.


Why would they have reason to have agents “ransack” Clinton’s home?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to declassify at will.


Trumpers seem to think that includes just shouting into the void that documents were Declassified a year and a half ago. It doesn't. You guys are all delusional.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> When he was President, however, he *was* the sole person who could unilaterally declassify any classified documents.


But not by shouting on his social media litterbox that he did so. That's why every court filing refers to them as classified materials. Even Trump's. He is filling your head with lies while saying something different in court. As usual. Because that's what he thinks of his cult. He thinks you guys are fucking morons.


----------



## rightwinger

The scariest part about Trump is how flippant he is about declassifying Top Secret information

He only speaks about declassifying because he is taking it with him. “Everything I take is automatically declassified”

He makes no mention of why specific Top Secret information is no longer relevant. 
Top Secret means revealing it would jeopardize the country or specific lives. 
Why would it go directly from Top Secret to releasable in a matter of months?


----------



## Rye Catcher

Seymour Flops said:


> No. It does not say that. Whoever told you that made it up.
> 
> The USSC ruled that the president has sole authority over classification and declassification.


The US Code states otherwise.


----------



## Lastamender

Rye Catcher said:


> The US Code states otherwise.


Quote it for us. Thanks.


----------



## rightwinger

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Because that's what he thinks of his cult. He thinks you guys are fucking morons.



They prove him right every day


----------



## Lastamender

rightwinger said:


> They prove him right every day


The same way the media proves you are?


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> But not by shouting on his social media litterbox that he did so.


They were declassified when as then still President he declassified them. You idiot. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> That's why every court filing refers to them as classified materials.


Actually, they don’t. You don’t know how to read with discernment. They have been described as “marked” as classified. There’s a difference, you little twit. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Even Trump's. He is filling your head with lies while saying something different in court.


He hasn’t said anything different in court. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> As usual. Because that's what he thinks of his cult. He thinks you guys are fucking morons.


So a retard like you falsely claims. But, Farty, YOU are the known liar and you ARE a fucking moron.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Lastamender said:


> The same way the media proves you are?


^^

The sound of a shoe, fitting


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> They prove him right every day


No. Reality proves that morons like you and Farty are incapable of grasping the truth. It doesn’t help, of course, that you are overtly hostile to truth.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> They were declassified when as then still President he declassified them.


Not per Trump's court filings or the sworn statement he directed, wherein he calls them classified material.  Looks like Trump's assumptions about his cult morons are spot on. Please, continue the demonstration.


----------



## Golfing Gator

rightwinger said:


> The scariest part about Trump is how flippant he is about declassifying Top Secret information



The scariest part is actually how the Trumpers are ok with the notion of him declassifying an entire box of documents without even know what was in the box and without telling a single soul they were not declassified.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> The president also has sole authority over granting pardons and reprieves.  But the supreme court said, the president wanting to pardon somebody means nothing until all the paperwork to officiate the pardon is delivered into the hands of the person being pardoned, the presidents intentions mean nothing,.
> 
> A pardon is a process, not a statement.


What case was that?

The court did NOT say anything about a process to classify or declassify.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Golfing Gator said:


> What vault?  There was not vault at MLG and there were not guards watching the classified documents.


/——-/ No dimwit. The vault in the White House that holds the secret documents. He grabbed a bunch and shoved them in his pants and ran out to the chopper to fly to Mar a Largo.  Geeeze


----------



## Foolardi

postman said:


> And courts have repeatedly ruled that chief executives powers and authorities have to be wielded on a case by case basis.
> So Trump could certainly declassify documents, one at a time.  Letting people know the specific documents he's declassifying.
> He does not have the power to declassify en-masse, or without telling anybody.


I don't think there is some basis for that.As Potus a President has
   complete authority over White House Documents.As far as 
     Declassifying them.Once he leaves the White House he doesn't.
   There is no standard to be used as formal argumentation as
  to Presidential Records act.It basically details how records are to be
    filed after a Potus leaves office.No President has even faced any legal
   troubles due to the Presidential Records act.
    WHY now/


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Not per Trump's court filings or the sworn statement he directed, wherein he calls them classified material.


The reference was to some documents that were returned. Maybe that set included some materials which he hadn’t declassified?  I don’t know. Neither do you. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Looks like Trump's assumptions about his cult morons are spot on.



No. Nothing “looks like” what you falsely claim are his assumptions.  You’re just lying again. And you’re too simple minded to even recognize that your own beliefs are without valid basis. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Please, continue the demonstration.


I’m happy to continue to demonstrate that you, Farty, are a liar and an imbecile. Really. It’s my pleasure. 😎


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> You’re busy arguing against a straw-man of your own simple minded plodding creation. I have never claimed that Trump was the “sole person” of anything. When he was President, however, he *was* the sole person who could unilaterally declassify any classified documents.



Yet you are unable to provide any documentation that Trump actually declassified anything
Trump claims he declassified everything but does not claim he actually authorized anything officially.

If he had, there would be signed records of those documents no longer being classified 

So you claim Trump “Can” declassify information but you can’t claim that he did.

Even Trumps lawyers don’t claim that


----------



## Foolardi

Seymour Flops said:


> What case was that?
> 
> The court did NOT say anything about a process to classify or declassify.


Then ask said brainiac how come Governors can grant last minute
    stays of execution just before the Midnight hour.
   Same rationale a President can use to pardon someone.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Cellblock2429 said:


> /——-/ No dimwit. The vault in the White House that holds the secret documents. He grabbed a bunch and shoved them in his pants and ran out to the chopper to fly to Mar a Largo.  Geeeze



Well, depending upon which story you believe he had them sent by the by the boxload to MLG, saying "this box is now declassified" without even knowing what was in the box or telling anyone else that they were declassified. 

Do you really think Trump even knew where the classified vault was in the White House? He had people fetch him what he wanted.


----------



## Cellblock2429

Seymour Flops said:


> What case was that?
> 
> The court did NOT say anything about a process to classify or declassify.


/——-/ 
*The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy vs. Egan — which addressed the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance — addresses this line of authority.*

*"The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the USSC’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."  1988 USSC Ruling.*


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> The reference was to some documents that were returned.


Funny, he said they were all declassified. All the docs he took. Now you can't even keep his lies straight. 

Notice he isn't telling his lie in court. He's just feeding it to his moron cult. The rest of the world laughs at it and you. 

Sorry whiners, Trump and his big idiot mouth have castrated all of your talking points.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> Yet you are unable to provide any documentation that Trump actually declassified anything


I didn’t bring up documentation. None required. 


rightwinger said:


> Trump claims he declassified everything but does not claim he actually authorized anything officially.


That’s ^ certainly a stupid sentence. His say so was the official act, you imbecile. 


rightwinger said:


> If he had, there would be signed records of those documents no longer being classified


No. If he said so, they were declassified. If additional paperwork wasn’t completed, that doesn’t change the fact that he had declassified them. 


rightwinger said:


> So you claim Trump “Can” declassify information but you can’t claim that he did.


I do claim that he can declassify. And I do claim that he did. His say so suffices despite your unsupported quibbles. 


rightwinger said:


> Even Trumps lawyers don’t claim that


Trump’s lawyers haven’t addressed it yet.  That comes later when it’s pertinent to the legal matters then at hand.


----------



## rightwinger

Golfing Gator said:


> The scariest part is actually how the Trumpers are ok with the notion of him declassifying an entire box of documents without even know what was in the box and without telling a single soul they were not declassified.



Not to mention storing that box at Mara Lago with unsecured guests and foreign visitors


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> Yet you are unable to provide any documentation that Trump actually declassified anything
> Trump claims he declassified everything but does not claim he actually authorized anything officially.
> 
> If he had, there would be signed records of those documents no longer being classified
> 
> So you claim Trump “Can” declassify information but you can’t claim that he did.
> 
> Even Trumps lawyers don’t claim that


   Due to the unbelievable amount of Docs that are made during
     a Presidency { virtually Milllions upon millions } it is hardly feasible 
     to start authorizing new ways to have fishing expeditions over 
     classified vs. Unclassified docs.Hillary set the example.
     By just Bleach biting docs that she wanted made disappear.
    LIke her Blackberry's.And she was never even a V.P, at the
  time but a Secretary-of-State.


----------



## Golfing Gator

rightwinger said:


> Not to mention storing that box at Mara Lago with unsecured guests and foreign visitors



you know, when Trump said this people thought he was just being flippant.  Damn, how well did he know his cult members?


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> Now think about the president having the authority to classify information.
> 
> Can the president order something "classified", without letting anybody know, save the AG, who now goes around locking people up for possessing classified information.


Decent question but no. There would be no criminal intent since the person didn't know. Just like Trump had no criminal intent since he declassified the documents.

Suppose the president told his staff that he declassified the FBI blackmail files on MLK. Is it a crime to release them absent some process that is not spelled out in any law?

He actually did reclassify the Crossfire Hurricane documents but the FBI refused to release them. Would it be a crime for Trump to release them? If they are among the files the Raiders took, should the special master give them back to Trump?


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> didn’t bring up documentation. None required.



That is probably the dumbest thing you ever posted

We are talking TOP SECRET information
Information that is crucial to our nations security 
Information that is dangerous if our enemies see it

Yet, in your world, Trump can just declassify it without having to tell anyone

In your world, how does Trump go about declassifying Top Secret so that every user knows they can now release it?


----------



## Foolardi

rightwinger said:


> Not to mention storing that box at Mara Lago with unsecured guests and foreign visitors


 At least we KNOW where they are.Where are All Obama's 
    Docs { classified and unclassifed. } Somewhere in or around Chicago.
    I doubt every last one is in some special vault in his Monstrous
     Presidential Library.But we don't know because Obama will NEVER
  as much as be pestered about it.There's the difference.
    Obama and Hillary get treated with Kid Gloves while Trump
    is treated with the Latest Junkyard Car crushing machine in the
  state.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Funny, he said they were all declassified. All the docs he took. Now you can't even keep his lies straight.


You’re the asshole who keeps making shut up about what he “said.”  He declassified the documents — according to Patel — which he was taking to Mar A Lago. How many prior documents had he taken to his Florida residence over his first term?  I don’t know. Neither do you. 

Maybe some of *them* were classified and were not the subject of his subsequent declassification order. Your  problem is  that _you_ can’t keep your own lies or other alleged “thoughts” straight. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Notice he isn't telling his lie in court. He's just feeding it to his moron cult. The rest of the world laughs at it and you.


He hasn’t lied at all. Certainly nothing you’ve claimed is a lie. Nothing you can substantiate. And he hasn’t even changed any story. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Sorry whiners,


It’s funny to see you apologizing to yourself. 😂


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Trump and his big idiot mouth have castrated all of your talking points.


Nothing said by Trump is contradictory,  in any of this.  Your trouble is that you make grandiose claims out of thin air (or based on your own misconception about what has been said).  You are very much an imbecile. But you have no ability to persuade.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> That’s ^ certainly a stupid sentence. His say so was the official act, you imbecile.



How does the rest of the country find out what Trumps ”say so” is without a formal declassification being issued?


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> I do claim that he can declassify. And I do claim that he did. His say so suffices despite your unsupported quibbles.


if he did, there would be a record somewhere that it had been done 

This is not his order for McDonalds, this is an order to declassify Top Secret information. 
It is not done flippantly


----------



## Golfing Gator

rightwinger said:


> How does the rest of the country find out what Trumps ”say so” is without a formal declassification being issued?



Weird how this "because he said so, even though nobody heard him" only works for classified documents.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> His say so suffices



Why?


----------



## skews13

Seymour Flops said:


> Where do you get the idea that there aren't lawyers with security clearances or that they'd be too busy to work on a case of this importance?
> 
> These guys I found in less than a minute:
> 
> gibsondunn.com
> 
> Plus you forget we're talking about declassified not classified documents here.



What were talking about here is the property of the United States of America.

Nothing that is the property of Donald Trump.

Who did not then, and does not now have the power to declassify anything.

And even when he was still in office, has no power to declassify SCI level material.

There is nobody in that Florida courthouse that has the power to decide anything regarding the material.

The DOJ has honored the courts request for a motion, and should now take the material back to Washington, as there is no enforcement mechanism the court has.

Donald  Trump and his attorneys are toothless dogs with no power.

This is over. It’s just a matter of time for everyone else that hasn’t figured that fact out yet to get a clue.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> How does the rest of the country find out what Trumps ”say so” is without a formal declassification being issued?


The ^ “question” is beside the point. If he hadn’t declassified the documents, the rest of the country would neither know nor care. And the fact that he did declassify some documents and it may not have been promptly known to the “rest of the country,” remains something they  likely neither know nor care about. 

I mean, stop huffing and puffing. You don’t know when *any* classified documents have been declassified except n very rare circumstances like when the government allows us to learn tidbits about rhe JFK assassination and about some military UFO videos.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> No. If he said so, they were declassified. If additional paperwork wasn’t completed, that doesn’t change the fact that he had declassified them.



Can you explain how this process works in your mind?

Trump wants to take Top Secret Documents home, so he just says……These documents are now declassified

What happens next?


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> if he did, there would be a record somewhere that it had been done


Not necessarily. He declassified those documents yet apparently there was a failure to create the record. It doesn’t change what he did: he declassified. 


rightwinger said:


> This is not his order for McDonalds, this is an order to declassify Top Secret information.


And?


rightwinger said:


> It is not done flippantly


Not normally. But if this one was kind of rushed, last minute and a bit haphazardly, so what!  Declassified is still declassified.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> If he hadn’t declassified the documents, the rest of the country would neither know nor care



Those of us who do not worship him do care that he kept them at his house


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Why?


Because he was, at the time, the Chief Executive.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> Not necessarily. He declassified those documents yet apparently there was a failure to create the record. It doesn’t change what he did: he declassified.
> 
> And?
> 
> Not normally. But if this one was kind of rushed, last minute and a bit haphazardly, so what!  Declassified is still declassified.



Explain how the process would work once Trump says……Declassify this

Your version makes no sense


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Because he was, at the time, the Chief Executive.



But he did not say at the time he had done so. He did not say he had till he was no longer the Chief Executive, and when his ass could be on the line if he does not say that he did it.


----------



## Golfing Gator

rightwinger said:


> Explain how the process would work once Trump says……Declassify this
> 
> Your version makes no’s sense



To them there is no process after that, nothing else matters to them.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> Can you explain how this process works in your mind?


The process isn’t a thing that occurs in my mind. And your question continues to show that you’re unable to distinguish the way the process may ordinarily take place from how it may have taken place here. 


rightwinger said:


> Trump wants to take Top Secret Documents home, so he just says……These documents are now declassified


Ok. That works. 


rightwinger said:


> What happens next?


What does happen or what ordinarily should happen?  Two different questions. 

What apparently did happen was that he proceeded to take home the now declassified documents. Ordinarily, there would have been some record keeping entries made, it seems. And evidently, here, for whatever reason or reasons, those entries weren’t made. 

So what?  For, again, and either way, the previously classified documents were no longer classified.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> But he did not say at the time he had done so.


He did not ”say” what?  


Golfing Gator said:


> He did not say he had till he was no longer the Chief Executive,


He said it *then, when he was still President. *That suffices. 


Golfing Gator said:


> and when his ass could be on the line if he does not say that he did it.


He declassified it when he declassified it. That you didn’t learn about it at that time is of no import. I doubt you know about any documents he declassified from the first day of his Administration. Again. So what?


----------



## Rye Catcher

Lastamender said:


> Quote it for us. Thanks.


18 U.S. Code § 1924​
And especially this link which is long and clearly notable"






						Presidential Records (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22)
					

(44 U.S.C. Chapter 22) § 2201. Definitions § 2202. Ownership of Presidential records § 2203. Management and custody of Presidential records § 2204. Restrictions on access to Presidential records § 2205. Exceptions to restricted access § 2206. Regulations § 2207. Vice-Presidential records § Note...




					www.archives.gov
				




Please peruse this link ^^^ and the link below. 
Presidential Records (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22)​


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> For, again, and either way, the previously classified documents were no longer classified.



If he really declassified them when he said he did....which is the $1000 question.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> He did not ”say” what?



He did not tell anyone they were declassified. 



BackAgain said:


> He said it *then, when he was still President. *That suffices.



Did anyone hear him?  How do you know he said it?



BackAgain said:


> I doubt you know about any documents he declassified from the first day of his Administration. Again. So what?



But we know about these and where they were being kept.  That makes these different.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> Explain how the process would work once Trump says……Declassify this
> 
> Your version makes no sense


It makes perfect sense. Not making sense to YOU is a different issue. I can’t help you with your mental deficits.

You keep babbling about “process.” As if you’d know.  When the President says, I’m declassifying these documents, they are declassified.  That’s it. No further process  is needed to declassify them.

A process to alert the relevant agencies to the change in their status?  Good idea. Part of the normal procedure, too, I’ve read.

But that the “process” to alert the relevant agencies may not have taken place, in this instance, doesn’t change the fact that declassified is still declassified.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> If he really declassified them when he said he did....which is the $1000 question.


It’s a two cent question for you. You’re not inclined to believe him. Ok. So, don’t. Your disbelief changes nothing. 

If the dopey Brandon Maladministration makes the political determination to criminally charge former President Trump under the Espionage Act, then it *isn’t* President Trump who will have to prove *anything*.  I’m curious as to how the US Attorney would even be able to try to disprove it. That would be *their* burden.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> He did not tell anyone they were declassified.


Of course he did. I keep telling you does about Kash Patel. There may have been others. Not all has yet been revealed, Gigi. 


Golfing Gator said:


> Did anyone hear him?  How do you know he said it?


Kash Patel. Maybe others. 


Golfing Gator said:


> But we know about these and where they were being kept.  That makes these different.


Huh?


----------



## postman

Foolardi said:


> .No President has even faced any legal
> troubles due to the Presidential Records act.
> WHY now/


Because Trump has been violating the PRA from his first days in office.  
Trump would rip up presidential papers, forcing his aides to scotch tape them back together before sending them to the National Archives, to comply with the requirements of PRA.

There was evidence of Trump "flushing records down the toilet".  A flagrant violation of the PRA.

The list goes on and on.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> The ^ “question” is beside the point. If he hadn’t declassified the documents, the rest of the country would neither know nor care. And the fact that he did declassify some documents and it may not have been promptly known to the “rest of the country,” remains something they  likely neither know nor care about.
> 
> I mean, stop huffing and puffing. You don’t know when *any* classified documents have been declassified except n very rare circumstances like when the government allows us to learn tidbits about rhe JFK assassination and about some military UFO videos.


Yes
Those who are controlling Top Secret documents, storing them in safes, inventorying them, filing reports on them care if they are still Classified. The agency that classified it in the first place cares if Trump has said it is now releasable 

So does someone who is fired or arrested for improperly handling those documents. How are they supposed to know that Trump had declassified them?


----------



## bravoactual

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> A silly lie. We know they were classified documents. These are publicly available facts.



The "*Cover Sheets*", prove there were Classified Documents illegally being held at Shit-A-Lago.

In fact, at one point the search had to be suspened until Agent with the proper clearance could be found to document the classified material at Shit-A-Lago.  Those agents (with proper clearance) then collected, documented and inventoried the classified material.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> You’re not inclined to believe him



I have no reason to believe him, nor do you or anyone else.  



BackAgain said:


> If the dopey Brandon Maladministration makes the political determination to criminally charge former President Trump under the Espionage Act, then it *isn’t* President Trump who will have to prove *anything*. I’m curious as to how the US Attorney would even be able to try to disprove it. That would be *their* burden



Yes, Trump that will have to prove something.  The only known fact right now is that he had documents marked as classified in his possession.  it is now on him to show they are not actually classified, just as it would be for you or me if we were found with them.

If the IRS says you did not file your taxes last year, who do you think has to prove you did?


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Of course he did. I keep telling you does about Kash Patel.



Who oddly enough never said anything about it till after the search.


----------



## Faun

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> We that's false. They also had to show the glove did not fit, which was much more important.
> 
> Fail post.



Even worse than the glove not fitting was the lead detective who "found" a matching glove on OJ's property who pleaded the 5th Amendment when asked if he planted the glove there.

That was the end of the prosecution's case.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> Yes
> Those who are controlling Top Secret documents, storing them in safes, inventorying them, filing reports on them care if they are still Classified


Yea. Those guys. But without the notice that certain documents have in fact gotten declassified, those guys will keep the other copies (and indices) secured as though they were still classified. 

And?


rightwinger said:


> So does someone who is fired or arrested for improperly handling those documents. How are they supposed to know that Trump had declassified them?


Why would anyone be handling them?  And he use of the record keeping system, the ones making the arrest or doing the firing would see that the last one to have authorized access was … President Trump!  So, they’d probably ask him “whatever happened to the copy you had which hasn’t been returned?”  And then they would learn that he had declassified them. No big whoop.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> Not necessarily. He declassified those documents yet apparently there was a failure to create the record. It doesn’t change what he did: he declassified.


So you are claiming that with 25 separate Top Secret Documents, Trumps staff failed to make a record and document what was being declassified and why?

Does Trump have any staff members who will cover for him and say……The President ordered these documents but I failed to do so?

What you have is yet another Trump lie to cover his ass and no proof to support his lie

Even Trump’s lawyers will not swear in court that those documents had been declassified


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> It makes perfect sense. Not making sense to YOU is a different issue. I can’t help you with your mental deficits.
> 
> You keep babbling about “process.” As if you’d know.  When the President says, I’m declassifying these documents, they are declassified.  That’s it. No further proceeds is needed to declassify them.
> 
> A process to alert the relevant agencies to the change in their status?  Good idea. Part of the normal procedure, too, I’ve read.
> 
> But that the “process” to alert the relevant agencies may not have taken place, in this instance, doesn’t change the fact that declassified is still declassified.


STATEMENT:  "You keep babbling about “process.” As if you’d know. When the President says, I’m declassifying these documents, they are declassified. That’s it. No further proceeds is needed to declassify them."

RESPONSE:  Common Sense and the links below suggest you are a fool, a fool who believes he makes an effort to make others believe his posts:






						Presidential Records (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22)
					

(44 U.S.C. Chapter 22) § 2201. Definitions § 2202. Ownership of Presidential records § 2203. Management and custody of Presidential records § 2204. Restrictions on access to Presidential records § 2205. Exceptions to restricted access § 2206. Regulations § 2207. Vice-Presidential records § Note...




					www.archives.gov
				












						The reason why presidents can't keep their White House records dates back to Nixon
					

Congress changed the law in the 1970s when President Nixon prepared to leave with his documents — and infamous tape recordings.




					www.npr.org
				




And below:  Trump's storage of documents was no 'cause for alarm' by Justice Department, his lawyers say






There is too much evidence to support The Donald's corruption and law violations:  No man Is Above The Law.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> You're not the president, who has power to reclassify at will.
> 
> Suppose you are a White House reporter and the president hands you a document marked classified but says "I hereby declassify it so you can print it."
> 
> Should you be convicted if you publish it?



Trump didn't even do that in regard to these documents.  In this case, Trump didn't say a word to anybody that he was declassifying them. He never once said a word about declassifying them *until* he got caught being in possession of them illegally.


----------



## postman

Foolardi said:


> At least we KNOW where they are.Where are All Obama's
> Docs { classified and unclassifed. } Somewhere in or around Chicago.
> I doubt every last one is in some special vault in his Monstrous
> Presidential Library.


Actually when the national archives picked up Obama's papers, they separated the classified from the unclassified.  Sent the unclassified to Chicago, and the classified to their office in Washington DC, that's a repository of classified materials.


----------



## Marener

BackAgain said:


> Of course he did. I keep telling you does about Kash Patel.


Kash Patel running his mouth in an interview with right wing media means nothing. 

Hell, Trump running his mouth on social media about “declassifying” documents was also meaningless. 









						Trump's Own Chief Of Staff Debunked 'Declassification' Tweets In 2020 Court Filing
					

Years-old testimony from Mark Meadows contradicts the claim that Trump had previously declassified documents seized in the FBI's Mar-a-Lago raid.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## bravoactual

Marener said:


> Clinton was investigated at length and no one on the left was calling the FBI Nazis for doing so.



So, you ain't got nothing.  We know you have nothing because you inject Clitnon into the discussion.  In the case HRC, she has been the subject of years of ReThuglican investigations and you people came up with zip.

When all else fails.  When you have no argument left to make.  You have absolutely nothing at all...bring up HRC.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Marener said:


> Kash Patel running his mouth in an interview with right wing media means nothing.
> 
> Hell, Trump running his mouth on social media about “declassifying” documents was also meaningless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump's Own Chief Of Staff Debunked 'Declassification' Tweets In 2020 Court Filing
> 
> 
> Years-old testimony from Mark Meadows contradicts the claim that Trump had previously declassified documents seized in the FBI's Mar-a-Lago raid.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.huffpost.com



It will be interesting to see if this ever goes to court (and I do not think it will) if Patel would be willing to make the same statements under oath.


----------



## rightwinger

BackAgain said:


> Why would anyone be handling them? And he use of the record keeping system, the ones making the arrest or doing the firing would see that the last one to have authorized access was … President Trump! So, they’d probably ask him “whatever happened to the copy you had which hasn’t been returned?” And then they would learn that he had declassified them. No big whoop.



Once again, you are displaying your ignorance about how classification works

Trump cannot just declassify the document he is holding

The information on that document needs to be declassified and releasable. It is the specific information on that document that makes it Top Secret, not the document itself.

Anyone having documents with that Top Secret information would have to be notified that the information is no longer classified and can be released 

Declassifying a Top Secret Document has far reaching implications beyond just allowing Trump to take documents home


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> I have no reason to believe him, nor do you or anyone else.


I don’t care about your opinion. But you don’t get to speak for me. In fact, I do have reason to believe him: Kash Patel. 


Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, Trump that will have to prove something.


Not just wrong. But very fully wrong. 


Golfing Gator said:


> The only known fact right now is that he had documents marked as classified in his possession.


Nope. That’s not the only known fact. 


Golfing Gator said:


> it is now on him to show they are not actually classified, just as it would be for you or me if we were found with them.


I’d I had a document still marked “classified” I’d probably have no reason to be holding it. And I doubt that I’d have a copy still *marked* “classified” after the President had declassified it. So, yeah, I might have some ‘splainin’ to do. Not so for the President. 


Golfing Gator said:


> If the IRS says you did not file your taxes last year, who do you think has to prove you did?


I’d show them my receipt. But you’re otherwise wrong. If they charged me, I’d have absolutely NO burden of any kind in court. The burden of proof is always on the government and *never* shifts. 

Naturally, of course, in this instance, Trump would probably choose to enter his defense position which is “the classified materials had been declassified by the President.”  But Trump wouldn’t even have to testify, himself. 😎


----------



## Faun

rightwinger said:


> Trump wants the My Pillow Guy appointed as his Special Master


----------



## postman

Do you know what would throw a real monkey wrench into all this.
If Biden recalls how his handlers had him read off a cue card that said "As president I am hereby reclassifying every declassified document taken from the white house.  Now wave at the camera."


----------



## rightwinger

postman said:


> Do you know what would throw a real monkey wrench into all this.
> If Biden recalls how his handlers had him read off a cue card that said "As president I am hereby reclassifying every declassified document taken from the white house.  Now waive at the camera."



One of Biden’s first acts as President was to deny Trump access to Classified information


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Nope. That’s not the only known fact.



Yes, it is.   Everything else is at best hearsay.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> I’d show them my receipt.



Thus showing the burden is on you.



BackAgain said:


> But you’re otherwise wrong. If they charged me, I’d have absolutely NO burden of any kind in court.



Simply not true as they would not take you to court, just garnish your wages, for which they do not need anything other than their say so.


----------



## bravoactual

House Committee Reaches Deal To Get The Traitor's Financial Records.









						House committee reaches deal to get Trump financial records
					

WASHINGTON (AP) — A House committee seeking financial records  from former President Donald Trump has reached an agreement that ends litigation on the matter and requires an accounting firm to turn over some of the material, the panel's leader announced  Thursday.




					apnews.com
				




WASHINGTON (AP) — A House committee seeking financial records from former President Donald Trump has reached an agreement that ends litigation on the matter and requires an accounting firm to turn over some of the material, the panel’s leader announced Thursday.

The long-running case began in April 2019, when the House Committee on Oversight and Reform first subpoenaed a wealth of records from Trump’s then-accounting firm, Mazars USA. The committee cited testimony from Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, that it said raised questions about the president’s representation of his financial affairs when it came to seeking loans and paying taxes.

Under the agreement, Trump has agreed to end his legal challenges to the subpoena and Mazars USA has agreed to produce responsive documents to the committee as expeditiously as possible, said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., who heads the committee.


----------



## Rye Catcher

bravoactual said:


> So, you ain't got nothing.  We know you have nothing because you inject Clitnon into the discussion.  In the case HRC, she has been the subject of years of ReThuglican investigations and you people came up with zip.
> 
> When all else fails.  When you have no argument left to make.  You have absolutely nothing at all...bring up HRC.


Keep in mind, not only did Hillary Clinton spend 11 hours answering on Benghazi but on the missing e mails and never once using the 5th Amendment.  The Donald when under oath, used the 5th Amendment ad nausea.


----------



## Faun

Foolardi said:


> Then ask said brainiac how come Governors can grant last minute
> stays of execution just before the Midnight hour.
> Same rationale a President can use to pardon someone.



Meaning said governor had to tell someone to stay the execution.

A pity Trump never told a soul he declassified those documents *until* he got caught being in possession of government documents illegally.


----------



## postman

rightwinger said:


> One of Biden’s first acts as President was to deny Trump access to Classified information


If Trump had to go through an FBI background check for a security clearance, they would have laughed him out of the office.
Trump is a poster child for people who get denied a clearance.
He had huge financial debts,  He doesn't pay his creditors.  His adultery and affair with a porn star, make him a blackmail risk. And over half his spouses were foreign born.


----------



## Faun

rightwinger said:


> That is probably the dumbest thing you ever posted
> 
> We are talking TOP SECRET information
> Information that is crucial to our nations security
> Information that is dangerous if our enemies see it
> 
> Yet, in your world, Trump can just declassify it without having to tell anyone
> 
> In your world, how does Trump go about declassifying Top Secret so that every user knows they can now release it?



Fortunately, Trump's flippant disregard to national security will ultimately keep him out of the White House. Even if he manages to avoid the arm of the law, he's utterly destroyed the publics' trust in him.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Foolardi said:


> Then ask said brainiac how come Governors can grant last minute
> stays of execution just before the Midnight hour.



If the Governor stayed the execution and did not tell anyone, what would happen?


----------



## Faun

Foolardi said:


> At least we KNOW where they are.Where are All Obama's
> Docs { classified and unclassifed. } Somewhere in or around Chicago.
> I doubt every last one is in some special vault in his Monstrous
> Presidential Library.But we don't know because Obama will NEVER
> as much as be pestered about it.There's the difference.
> Obama and Hillary get treated with Kid Gloves while Trump
> is treated with the Latest Junkyard Car crushing machine in the
> state.



Fail.

Obama turned over his documents in accordance with the law.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Foolardi said:


> Where are All Obama's
> Docs { classified and unclassifed. }



In a National Archives controlled warehouse. 



Foolardi said:


> I doubt every last one is in some special vault in his Monstrous
> Presidential Library.


He does not have a Presidential Library yet.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> Not necessarily. He declassified those documents yet apparently there was a failure to create the record. It doesn’t change what he did: he declassified.



What a shame you have absolutely no proof of that.


----------



## postman

Golfing Gator said:


> The only known fact right now is that he had documents marked as classified in his possession.  it is now on him to show they are not actually classified,





BackAgain said:


> I’d show them my receipt. But you’re otherwise wrong. If they charged me, I’d have absolutely NO burden of any kind in court. The burden of proof is always on the government and *never* shifts.


I guess this is like the person with a beard in the ladies room, because they were born XX.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Foolardi said:


> Then ask said brainiac how come Governors can grant last minute
> stays of execution just before the Midnight hour.
> Same rationale a President can use to pardon someone.


You're both fools, and the current process to declassify was actually laid out by Obama. Haha, that must sting.


----------



## Faun

Golfing Gator said:


> But he did not say at the time he had done so. He did not say he had till he was no longer the Chief Executive, and when his ass could be on the line if he does not say that he did it.



There is a reoccurring theme among the TDS Trumptards... Trump says something with zero evidence to back it up and these TDS Trumptards believe it whole heartedly and defend his lies to the extreme.

It started from day one when he falsely claimed his inauguration crowd was bigger than Obama's. Despite photographic evidence to the contrary, they fought to defend that lie until it blew over to his next lie.

It continued through the entirety of his one and only term, culminating with his Big Lie which they still believe and still defend with every ounce of iniquity they can muster; despite there being no proof of wide spread fraud after nearly 2 years so far and counting.

Now we see this psychosis of these TDS Trumptards extending at the risk of national security.



Spoiler



_#becauseitsacult_


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> He said it *then, when he was still President. *That suffices.....



.... to his sycophants.


----------



## postman

Faun said:


> Fortunately, Trump's flippant disregard to national security will ultimately keep him out of the White House. Even if he manages to avoid the arm of the law, he's utterly destroyed the publics' trust in him.


Republicans would still vote for him.


----------



## BackAgain

rightwinger said:


> So you are claiming that with 25 separate Top Secret Documents, Trumps staff failed to make a record and document what was being declassified and why?


I’m not “claiming” anything. I wasn’t there.  However, since it may have been done just before he ceased being President, maybe (?) only an hour or so before exiting the White House for all we know, I’d say that may very well be what happened. 


rightwinger said:


> Does Trump have any staff members who will cover for him and say……The President ordered these documents but I failed to do so?


Other than Mr. Patel, I don’t know. I don’t speak with our former President much less *for* him. I guess you’ll just have to wait and see. 


rightwinger said:


> What you have is yet another Trump lie to cover his ass and no proof to support his lie


Wrong. What *you* claim, yet again, is your predetermined and biased speculation stated incorrectly as a  “fact” which it isn’t. 


rightwinger said:


> Even Trump’s lawyers will not swear in court that those documents had been declassified


Lawyers generally don’t swear to anything in court. They ain’t witnesses. And what you mean, however ignorantly you’ve couched it, is that, so far, his lawyers haven’t yet  *addressed* the claim of declassification.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> It’s a two cent question for you. You’re not inclined to believe him. Ok. So, don’t. Your disbelief changes nothing.
> 
> If the dopey Brandon Maladministration makes the political determination to criminally charge former President Trump under the Espionage Act, then it *isn’t* President Trump who will have to prove *anything*.  I’m curious as to how the US Attorney would even be able to try to disprove it. That would be *their* burden.



If Trump is charged with violating the Espionage Act, then it doesn't matter if he declassified them. He can still be convictedsince that act doesn't pertain to classified documents.


----------



## postman

BackAgain said:


> Lawyers generally don’t swear to anything in court. They ain’t witnesses. And what you mean, however ignorantly you’ve couched it, is that, so far, his lawyers haven’t yet  *addressed* the claim of declassification.



Yes sir-ee Bobb.
M (make)
A (attorneys)
G (get)
A (attorneys)


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Weird how this "because he said so, even though nobody heard him" only works for classified documents.


The USSC ruled that The president has sole classification authority.  Doesn't say he has to announce it. I get you don't like that because it was Trump. Why not go protest at the justices' homes?  That's illegal but the DOJ/FBI/DNC nullified that law.



You're assuming


----------



## Seymour Flops

BackAgain said:


> Of course he did. I keep telling you does about Kash Patel. There may have been others. Not all has yet been revealed, Gigi.
> 
> Kash Patel. Maybe others.
> 
> Huh?


The leftie media hasn't told them about Mr. Patel, so they don't know what you're talking about.  "He didnt tell anyone!" Is a baseless assumption.

The lefties won't know about Kash Patel until their media starts attacking him racially.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Seymour Flops said:


> The leftie media hasn't told them about Mr. Patel, so they don't know what you're talking about.  "He didnt tell anyone!" Is a baseless assumption.
> 
> The lefties won't know about Kash Patel until their media starts attacking him racially.


Kash Patel means less than nothing. You know you are lying. It's not nice to pick on the slow kids, Frannie.


----------



## bravoactual

Faun said:


> There is a reoccurring theme among the TDS Trumptards... Trump says something with zero evidence to back it up and these TDS Trumptards believe it whole heartedly and defend his lies to the extreme.
> 
> It started from day one when he falsely claimed his inauguration crowd was bigger than Obama's. Despite photographic evidence to the contrary, they fought to defend that lie until it blew over to his next lie.
> 
> It continued through the entirety of his one and only term, culminating with his Big Lie which they still believe and still defend with every ounce of iniquity they can muster; despite there being no proof of wide spread fraud after nearly 2 years so far and counting.
> 
> Now we see this psychosis of these TDS Trumptards extending at the risk of national security.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _#becauseitsacult_



The Traitor successfully turned a party that despised Russia and everything it stood for, into the party where ReThuglican Senators and Congresspeople actually traveled to Russia to grovel at the feet of Putin.

The Party of Law and Order now denounces the Federal Bureau of Investigation, attacked U.S. Capitol Hill Police and the Washington Metropolitan Police are are proud of it.

The Party Joe "*Tail Gunner Joe*" McCarthy and Roy Cohen are rolling in their respective graves with how ReThugs lavish praise on Putin.

The Party of Dwight D. Eisenhower, Thomas E. Dewy, Barry Goldwater, William E. Miller (Goldwater's Running Mate), Hugh Scott and Everett Dirksen has decended into a cult of just one man, a morally corrupt man who stood at the podium in Helsinki Finland and sided with Putin against U.S. Intelligence Services.  A man who attacks Gold Star Families. A man who called U.S Military Personnel Killed In Action "*Suckers and Losers*".  This is who the ReThugs worship.


----------



## Seymour Flops

postman said:


> If Trump had to go through an FBI background check for a security clearance, they would have laughed him out of the office.


See presidents don't need FBI approval to be president if the people duly elect them.

Trump fired Comey for preventing what might have been a Hillary victory in 2016. The DOJ/FBI/DNC cartel influenced the 2020 election against Trump.

Whose turn is next?

Lib Dems don't get that when you allow the FBI to pick the president, or veto one choice, it wont always be in their favor.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, it is.   Everything else is at best hearsay.


Nope. You’re still wrong. There are lots of known facts. And you’re also misusing the term “hearsay.”


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> The USSC ruled that The president has sole classification authority.  Doesn't say he has to announce it. I get you don't like that because it was Trump. Why not go protest at the justices' homes?  That's illegal but the DOJ/FBI/DNC nullified that law.
> 
> 
> 
> You're assuming



You are just being dense now out of pure worship of the man.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> STATEMENT:  "You keep babbling about “process.” As if you’d know. When the President says, I’m declassifying these documents, they are declassified. That’s it. No further proceeds is needed to declassify them."
> 
> RESPONSE:  Common Sense and the links below suggest you are a fool, a fool who believes he makes an effort to make others believe his posts:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Presidential Records (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22)
> 
> 
> (44 U.S.C. Chapter 22) § 2201. Definitions § 2202. Ownership of Presidential records § 2203. Management and custody of Presidential records § 2204. Restrictions on access to Presidential records § 2205. Exceptions to restricted access § 2206. Regulations § 2207. Vice-Presidential records § Note...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.archives.gov
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason why presidents can't keep their White House records dates back to Nixon
> 
> 
> Congress changed the law in the 1970s when President Nixon prepared to leave with his documents — and infamous tape recordings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.npr.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And below:  Trump's storage of documents was no 'cause for alarm' by Justice Department, his lawyers say
> 
> View attachment 690074
> 
> 
> There is too much evidence to support The Donald's corruption and law violations:  No man Is Above The Law.


Once again, *you,* Fly Catcher, are the fool. Since the President *is* the Executive Branch, no congressional act can constrain *his* ability to unilaterally declassify a previously classified document. 

That staged image also doesn’t demonstrate how President Trump “stored” documents, either, you doofus.  It only shows how the FBI agents chose to arrange some documents to take a pretty picture. 

Of course, *you* — of all people — should never invoke the term “common sense” since you don’t have any of that. 👍


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Nope. You’re still wrong. There are lots of known facts. And you’re also misusing the term “hearsay.”



List them.


----------



## Faun

postman said:


> Republicans would still vote for him.



The vast majority of them would. Fortunately for the USA, they're a minority.


----------



## BackAgain

postman said:


> Yes sir-ee Bobb.
> M (make)
> A (attorneys)
> G (get)
> A (attorneys)


That’s ^ the kind of “professionalism” we have sadly come to expect from some lawyers in our Department of miscarriage of Justice.


----------



## BackAgain

Seymour Flops said:


> The leftie media hasn't told them about Mr. Patel, so they don't know what you're talking about.  "He didnt tell anyone!" Is a baseless assumption.
> 
> The lefties won't know about Kash Patel until their media starts attacking him racially.


Well, sure. He is “brown” after all; and our liberal Democraps *are* racist.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Kash Patel means less than nothing. You know you are lying. It's not nice to pick on the slow kids, Frannie.


*You*, as always, mean less than nothing, Farty. Beyond that, stfu. You’re an idiot.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> See presidents don't need FBI approval to be president if the people duly elect them.
> 
> Trump fired Comey for preventing what might have been a Hillary victory in 2016. The DOJ/FBI/DNC cartel influenced the 2020 election against Trump.
> 
> Whose turn is next?
> 
> Lib Dems don't get that when you allow the FBI to pick the president, or veto one choice, it wont always be in their favor.



Bullshit.

In reality, from which you're divorced, Rod Rosenstein recommended Trump fire Comey for that reason. In a sentence put out by Trump's press secretary citing Rosenstein's recommendation as the reason Trump fired Comey. *However, shortly after that, Trump himself said he was going to fire Comey anyway.*


----------



## Batcat

iceberg said:


> problem is, they refuse to say it's the same thing or even acknowlege "their side" ever does it.
> 
> i don't care who breaks the law. the lady outside the courtroom is blindfolded for a reason but hell, these days we prosecute on emotion, not fact.
> 
> and it's fucking us all up so badly.


I worry it will lead to the breakup of our nation eventually. Hopefully that breakup will be peaceful but even if it is the world will have lost the one nation that might stop the Chinese from ruling the entire world In 20 or 30 years.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> List them.


Who died and made you emperor?

I don’t take commands from you.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> *You*, as always, mean less than nothing, Farty. Beyond that, stfu. You’re an idiot.


Baby tantrums are all you have. I understand, your orange lard and master is in some trouble. I don't take it personally.


----------



## Batcat

Marener said:


> The point you’re bringing up is entirely irrelevant.
> 
> It makes no difference whatsoever if Trump had secret service or not. Trump had no authorization to possess those documents.


That will be determined by the court system. It might end up in the Supreme Court as the case will be very important to the citizen of our nation. 

Trump has the ultimate authority over classified information. He won that battle back in 2017. Now of course a number of Republicans and all Democrats do not want to see Trump run in 2024 so it it hard to say what will happen. 

I will present both sides of the argument for a change. …









						Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence
					






					abcnews.go.com
				




_President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.

The White House called the report "false" and denied that he revealed specific information about sources, methods and military operations to Russia.

Despite the massive blowback from the intelligence community and Democratic and Republican members of Congress, Trump is right.

Executive Order 13526​As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries._









						Former DNI Chief Says Brain-Dead Biden Is America’s ‘Greatest Threat’
					

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who served in the Trump administration, is warning that Brain-Dead Biden is now America’s “greatest threat.” During an interview with Fox News host Mark Levin, Ratcliffe spoke about Biden’s disastrous handling of the U.S. withdrawal from...




					ussanews.com
				




_
*Former DNI Ratcliffe: Trump Had ‘Ultimate Declassification Authority’ and Standing Order To Declassify Documents at Mar-a-Lago*

Posted on August 17, 2022 by Constitutional Nobody
John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI), said on Friday that it is “virtually impossible” to prosecute someone for mishandling classified documents, and claimed that former President Donald Trump had the “ultimate declassification authority” in terms of classified documents.

“The president does have ultimate declassification authority. He can literally declassify—and President Trump had that authority, and could declassify anything you want while he was president,” Ratcliffe, who was a Republican member of Congress before Trump brought him on as DNI.

Documents that were unsealed last Friday, revealed that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was raided by FBI on August 8 because of several law violations including the Espionage Act of which a sitting president can not be held liable under, and Trump was president when he declassified the documents in question.

Ratcliffe told Fox News that prior to the search warrant materials being made public, he didn’t think the raid was about classified documents.

“It has to be more than that because the Department of Justice and the FBI have already set a standard that makes it virtually impossible to prosecute a case like that,” he said, citing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s possession of classified documents on her illegal private email server was handled by the FBI, and how then-FBI Director James Comey let her skate.

“As people talk about Espionage Act and classified documents and all of that, the standard was set in 2016. Remember the Department of Justice and the FBI took the official position that Hillary Clinton, who was in possession of classified documents … that [being] in possession of that, that wasn’t enough, and that being grossly negligent and being careless, Jim Comey told us, that’s not enough under the Espionage Act. You have to know you’re violating the law,” Ratcliffe explained.

“Even if you assume the worst case scenario for President Trump, that there were classified documents in his possession at Mar-a-Lago, that only puts him where Crooked Hillary Clinton was. And what the FBI and the Department of Justice would have to show is that he knew the documents were there and he didn’t think they were declassified,” he added._

To be fair I will present the other side of this debate.









						Trump didn't formally declassify Mar-a-Lago documents because he 'wanted these secrets to still have value,' legal analyst suggests
					

Trump's claim that he had broadly declassified the files, even though he didn't do so formally, amounts to a "damning admission," wrote Asha Rangappa.




					news.yahoo.com
				




A legal analyst has weighed in on Trump's claim about having declassified the Mar-a-Lago documents.

She posited that Trump didn't formally declassify them so as to retain their value as secret files.
Trump's claim amounts to an "incredibly damning admission," wrote former FBI agent Asha Rangappa.
For weeks, former President Donald Trump has defended himself by saying that he had broadly declassified the documents seized from his Mar-a-Lago home.

That claim amounts to an "incredibly damning admission," wrote Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent who is now a legal analyst and editor at Just Security, in a tweet on Wednesday.

By not adhering to the official declassification process — and there is no evidence that Trump had done so — the former president showed that he wanted to keep the secrets in these documents valuable, suggested Rangappa, who is an assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs.

"Why would you do that? Only if you wanted the secrets to have value to someone," she wrote.[/i]









						No, Trump didn’t declassify everything; it’s barred by the Nixon tapes decision
					

In the Nixon Tapes case, which I argued, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a president is bound by otherwise valid regulations … including declassification restrictions.




					thehill.com
				




***snip***

_
The problem with this alternate defense is that it is both legally inaccurate (because the relevant statutes apply, whether or not information is formally “classified”) and it actually is foreclosed by a Supreme Court case involving former president Richard Nixon,whom Trump has now eclipsed as a scofflaw.

Too many commentators have blithely accepted the underlying but false proposition that a president may declassify anything he wants simply by handing it to someone or taking it home. Even the New York Times erroneously stated that there is “no Supreme Court precedent” that would limit a president’s power to declassify any documents he chooses to release. The Times notes that, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the president is the ultimate “classifying authority” and, it is inferred, he may declassify anything, anytime. These commentators merely take issue with Trump’s contention that he did so with the files that he spirited off to Mar-a-Lago.

The crucial flaw in that analysis is that — like every other presidential power — the law may regulate the circumstances in which that power may be exercised, especially when the presidency itself has accepted those constraints. That is the situation with the process for declassifying state secrets, even by the president._


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Baby tantrums are all you have.


Another false statement from the retarded Farty. That’s all he has. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> I understand, your orange lard and master is in some trouble. I don't take it personally.


He isn’t my lord and master. He is our former President. I don’t believe he is in any true trouble, although that won’t stop our politicized DOJ from meekly bending the knee to Brandon (your demented master) and seeking to charge Trump. 

Nobody cares what *you* take personally; and yet it’s clear that you’re a full blown liar. Now, get back down and toss Brandon’s salad some more, Farty.


----------



## struth

Golfing Gator said:


> You know they added that to the picture on purpose just to poke at Trump!


which speak volumes about how corrupt they are…it’s amazing how unprofessional law enforcement is when run by the dems


----------



## struth

citygator said:


> If Trump shot someone on 5th avenue and told you that she died of a heart attack before the bullet got to her you’d believe it.


maybe but if that was the hypo it still wouldn’t clear him of murder 

so doesn’t really matter


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> Trump has the ultimate authority over classified information.


Citizen Trump has zero authority over any classified information anywhere.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> He isn’t my lord and master.


Of course he is. Look at the lies you tell and the laughably stupid things you say to protect him. Look at your behavior. You are a grown ass man. Just freakish...


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> Bullshit.
> 
> In reality, from which you're divorced, Rod Rosenstein recommended Trump fire Comey for that reason. In a sentence put out by Trump's press secretary citing Rosenstein's recommendation as the reason Trump fired Comey. *However, shortly after that, Trump himself said he was going to fire Comey anyway.*


As we see from their actions in the Carter Page warrant, misuse of government phones for personal expressions of hatred, Comey’s FBI was a disgusting cesspool of corruption.  Comey’s treatment of Hillary was more than reason enough to fire him.  That fact is not cancelled by the obvious truth that there were many, many other reasons that he was unfit to lead the FBI.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Of course he is. Look at the lies you tell and the laughably stupid things you say to protect him. Look at your behavior. You are a grown ass man. Just freakish...


Your a stupid little troll. You lie. Not me. The most laughably stupid words offered here come from you and some of your kindred spirit libtards.

And my behavior?  What are you, a pre-teen Girl Scout?

Get back to sucking random bags of cock, you imbecile troll.  And try to at least make a comment ON topic. Here, I’ll show you how.

The thread headline is misleading. And, DOJ dropped no bombshell. And DOJ doesn’t issue rulings in courts. Judges do that and didn’t do so in this matter at the time of the dishonest misleading fake thread headline.

See? Despite your tragic mental retardation, can you post on topic?  Well. Can ya, punk?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I love how many on the right were all it an utter disgrace for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an perfectly fine for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


How do you feel about Hillary wiping over 30,000 documents after rejecting a subpoena?

Actually, asked and answered.  My bad.

How angry are you that the FBI did not raid her home and take the server, plus Bill’s underpants?

You are welcome to say again how bad what Hillary did was.  You seem to never tire of bashing Trump.

Remember, the reason Comey gave for not prosecuting Hillary was that no one had been prosecuted under similar circumstances.  Senator John Kennedy (R) LA, said “and post-Hillary, still nobody has been.

Trying to prosecute Trump after having given Hillary a pass cannot be interpreted as anything other than the two-tiered justice system.

It’s actually multi-tiered with justice meted out according to various factors, such as political affiliations, importance to the Party, level of danger to the establishment and levels of donations to establishment politicians.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> Your a stupid little troll. You lie. Not me. The most laughably stupid words offered here come from you and some of your kindred spirit libtards.
> 
> And my behavior?  What are you, a pre-teen Girl Scout?
> 
> Get back to sucking random bags of cock, you imbecile troll.  And try to at least make a comment ON topic. Here, I’ll show you how.
> 
> The thread headline is misleading. And, DOJ dropped no bombshell. And DOJ doesn’t issue rulings in courts. Judges do that and didn’t do so in this matter at the time of the dishonest misleading fake thread headline.
> 
> See? Despite your tragic mental retardation, can you post on topic?  Well. Can ya, punk?


Haha... see? 

This is a grown man, folks. And cultism has turned him into a screeching toddler. 

Now go regurgitate another lie from your orange lard and master. The best is when the orange pile has already shown the world it is a lie, but you keep repeating it anyway. 

"I declassified all of them!"


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Citizen Trump has zero authority over any classified information anywhere.


Hey, retard. Yeah, you Farty. It wasn’t “citizen” Trump who declassified anything, you sub-imbecile. It was then President Trump who did so.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> Hey, retard. Yeah, you Farty. It wasn’t “citizen” Trump who declassified anything, you sub-imbecile. It was then President Trump who did so.


Go whine like a little bitch to the poster that is having trouble conjugating verbs, then.

Maybe you two freaks can exchange lies about stolen elections and decide he is still president, so his post doesn't look so dumb. Haha, kidding, that would be even dumber. 

And thanks for regurgitating the lie again to make me laugh, like I told you to do.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Haha... see?


I see I’m right and that you’re retarded. But everyone sees that. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> This is a grown man, folks. And cultism has turned him into a screeching toddler.


Only in the brain of a retard like you, Farty. And you’re still off topic, bitch. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Now go regurgitate another lie from your orange lard and master.


I don’t have any lord and masters. Suck Brandon’s colon some more, Farty. You don’t mind all of Brandon’s lies. Odd thing. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> The best is when the orange pile has already shown the world it is a lie, but you keep repeating it anyway.


Mr. Trump, of course, hasn’t shown the world any such thing. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> "I declassified all of them!"



And as always, you have no evidence to the contrary. You even suck ass as a troll, Farty!


----------



## Marener

Batcat said:


> That will be determined by the court system. It might end up in the Supreme Court as the case will be very important to the citizen of our nation.
> 
> Trump has the ultimate authority over classified information. He won that battle back in 2017. Now of course a number of Republicans and all Democrats do not want to see Trump run in 2024 so it it hard to say what will happen.
> 
> I will present both sides of the argument for a change. …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _President Trump tweeted Tuesday morning that he had the "absolute right" to share information about national security with Russian officials in the White House last week, after The Washington Post reported that the information was highly sensitive and classified.
> 
> The White House called the report "false" and denied that he revealed specific information about sources, methods and military operations to Russia.
> 
> Despite the massive blowback from the intelligence community and Democratic and Republican members of Congress, Trump is right._
> 
> 
> _Executive Order 13526_​_As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Former DNI Chief Says Brain-Dead Biden Is America’s ‘Greatest Threat’
> 
> 
> Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who served in the Trump administration, is warning that Brain-Dead Biden is now America’s “greatest threat.” During an interview with Fox News host Mark Levin, Ratcliffe spoke about Biden’s disastrous handling of the U.S. withdrawal from...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ussanews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*Former DNI Ratcliffe: Trump Had ‘Ultimate Declassification Authority’ and Standing Order To Declassify Documents at Mar-a-Lago*
> 
> Posted on August 17, 2022 by Constitutional Nobody
> John Ratcliffe, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI), said on Friday that it is “virtually impossible” to prosecute someone for mishandling classified documents, and claimed that former President Donald Trump had the “ultimate declassification authority” in terms of classified documents.
> 
> “The president does have ultimate declassification authority. He can literally declassify—and President Trump had that authority, and could declassify anything you want while he was president,” Ratcliffe, who was a Republican member of Congress before Trump brought him on as DNI.
> 
> Documents that were unsealed last Friday, revealed that Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was raided by FBI on August 8 because of several law violations including the Espionage Act of which a sitting president can not be held liable under, and Trump was president when he declassified the documents in question.
> 
> Ratcliffe told Fox News that prior to the search warrant materials being made public, he didn’t think the raid was about classified documents.
> 
> “It has to be more than that because the Department of Justice and the FBI have already set a standard that makes it virtually impossible to prosecute a case like that,” he said, citing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s possession of classified documents on her illegal private email server was handled by the FBI, and how then-FBI Director James Comey let her skate.
> 
> “As people talk about Espionage Act and classified documents and all of that, the standard was set in 2016. Remember the Department of Justice and the FBI took the official position that Hillary Clinton, who was in possession of classified documents … that [being] in possession of that, that wasn’t enough, and that being grossly negligent and being careless, Jim Comey told us, that’s not enough under the Espionage Act. You have to know you’re violating the law,” Ratcliffe explained.
> 
> “Even if you assume the worst case scenario for President Trump, that there were classified documents in his possession at Mar-a-Lago, that only puts him where Crooked Hillary Clinton was. And what the FBI and the Department of Justice would have to show is that he knew the documents were there and he didn’t think they were declassified,” he added._
> 
> To be fair I will present the other side of this debate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump didn't formally declassify Mar-a-Lago documents because he 'wanted these secrets to still have value,' legal analyst suggests
> 
> 
> Trump's claim that he had broadly declassified the files, even though he didn't do so formally, amounts to a "damning admission," wrote Asha Rangappa.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A legal analyst has weighed in on Trump's claim about having declassified the Mar-a-Lago documents.
> 
> She posited that Trump didn't formally declassify them so as to retain their value as secret files.
> Trump's claim amounts to an "incredibly damning admission," wrote former FBI agent Asha Rangappa.
> For weeks, former President Donald Trump has defended himself by saying that he had broadly declassified the documents seized from his Mar-a-Lago home.
> 
> That claim amounts to an "incredibly damning admission," wrote Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent who is now a legal analyst and editor at Just Security, in a tweet on Wednesday.
> 
> By not adhering to the official declassification process — and there is no evidence that Trump had done so — the former president showed that he wanted to keep the secrets in these documents valuable, suggested Rangappa, who is an assistant dean and a senior lecturer at Yale University's Jackson School of Global Affairs.
> 
> "Why would you do that? Only if you wanted the secrets to have value to someone," she wrote.[/i]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Trump didn’t declassify everything; it’s barred by the Nixon tapes decision
> 
> 
> In the Nixon Tapes case, which I argued, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a president is bound by otherwise valid regulations … including declassification restrictions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> 
> _The problem with this alternate defense is that it is both legally inaccurate (because the relevant statutes apply, whether or not information is formally “classified”) and it actually is foreclosed by a Supreme Court case involving former president Richard Nixon,whom Trump has now eclipsed as a scofflaw.
> 
> Too many commentators have blithely accepted the underlying but false proposition that a president may declassify anything he wants simply by handing it to someone or taking it home. Even the New York Times erroneously stated that there is “no Supreme Court precedent” that would limit a president’s power to declassify any documents he chooses to release. The Times notes that, as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the president is the ultimate “classifying authority” and, it is inferred, he may declassify anything, anytime. These commentators merely take issue with Trump’s contention that he did so with the files that he spirited off to Mar-a-Lago.
> 
> The crucial flaw in that analysis is that — like every other presidential power — the law may regulate the circumstances in which that power may be exercised, especially when the presidency itself has accepted those constraints. That is the situation with the process for declassifying state secrets, even by the president._


It’s a fine copy paste but ultimately it comes from Trump sycophants who have no problem ignoring relevant details. 

For starters, two things offset Trump’s case from Clinton’s. One is that the hundreds of documents he took were clearly marked classified. Two is that he has evidence suggesting he obstructed justice in the DoJ’s attempt to get them back. 

We can see the DoJ is crafting it’s case to avoid having to worry about whether Trump did or didn’t declassify them. The espionage act violation doesn’t say classified information, just national defense information.  Add to that obstruction of justice in their failure to turn over subpoenaed documents and evidence that their actions intended to hide documents. 

Last, whether Trump actually declassified anything may be an open question in the courts but to anyone with a lick of common sense, it fails miserably. 

There is no evidence that he ever declassified any of them and to this day I have yet to see any claim from his lawyers that he did declassify those documents.


----------



## BackAgain

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Go whine like a little bitch to the poster that is having trouble conjugating verbs, then.


Application denied. You’re just a sorry little dishonest bitch. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Maybe you two freaks can exchange lies about stolen elections and decide he is still president, so his post doesn't look so dumb. Haha, kidding, that would be even dumber.


As always, Farty I leave the lies to you. And your master Brandon. When he can remember it, he asks for you for salad tossing by name. 


Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And thanks for regurgitating the lie again to make me laugh, like I told you to do.


And thanks for staying off topic as always, despite the rules. Do you always remain off topic because you realize that you’ve got nothing of value to say? Ever?

*On* topic:  just because a retard like you labels something a “lie” doesn’t mean that it’s a lie. I mean shit, girl. It’s not like you are on speaking terms with truth. 

Do you need a tampon at this point?  😂


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

BackAgain said:


> I don’t have any lord and masters.


You clearly do. Look at your behavior. The lies and the hilariously idiotic things you say, all for dear Leader. So many just in this thread alone.

I especially liked it when trump submitted sworn statements to the court stating the docs were classified.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Once again, *you,* Fly Catcher, are the fool. Since the President *is* the Executive Branch, no congressional act can constrain *his* ability to unilaterally declassify a previously classified document.
> 
> That staged image also doesn’t demonstrate how President Trump “stored” documents, either, you doofus.  It only shows how the FBI agents chose to arrange some documents to take a pretty picture.
> 
> Of course, *you* — of all people — should never invoke the term “common sense” since you don’t have any of that. 👍


Laugh out Loud.  Your claim that Trump IS the Executive is absurd.  No one but you made the claim that "no congressional act can constrain his ability"; all one needs is to read Impeachments in COTUS:  The House Impeaches, and The Senate Tries and the Chief Justice will preside.

Are you not aware of the Separation of Powers?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Rye Catcher said:


> Laugh out Loud.  Your claim that Trump IS the Executive is absurd.  No one but you made the claim that "no congressional act can constrain his ability"; all one needs is to read Impeachments in COTUS:  The House Impeaches, and The Senate Tries and the Chief Justice will preside.
> 
> Are you not aware of the Separation of Powers?


Yes, Trump is the executive.  I am embarrassed to be a public school teacher in a country where some people actually do not know that.

Yes, by all means, impeach Trump again.  There is zero evidence of a crime, but impeachments are entirely political, so you might succeed this time.  In getting a conviction I mean.  You will succeed for sure in making yourselves laughing stocks.


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> Trying to prosecute Trump after having given Hillary a pass cannot be interpreted as anything other than the two-tiered justice system.


But these are not similar circumstances. 

Comey said this:
In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.

In Trump’s case, the mishandling is clearly intentional. Those documents are absolutely unambiguously labeled classified. The second is that we see efforts to obstruct justice. 

These are critical factors that Comey clearly indicated could lead to charges that are absent for Clinton and present for Trump.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Who died and made you emperor?
> 
> I don’t take commands from you.



In other words, there are no other known facts.

Why did you not just say so to start with.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> How do you feel about Hillary wiping over 30,000 documents after rejecting a subpoena?
> 
> Actually, asked and answered. My bad.



Correct, I have said 100 or more time times on this forum that she should be in jail, if I had done what she did, I would still be in jail for it.



Seymour Flops said:


> How angry are you that the FBI did not raid her home and take the server, plus Bill’s underpants?
> 
> You are welcome to say again how bad what Hillary did was. You seem to never tire of bashing Trump.



The topic of the thread is Trump.  Anything Hillary did has no impact on Trump.  Do you point at Ted Bundy and go "well, he is not all that bad, at least he did not eat his victims like Dahmer did"?



Seymour Flops said:


> Trying to prosecute Trump after having given Hillary a pass cannot be interpreted as anything other than the two-tiered justice system.



Trump changed the rules because Hillary was given a free pass.  Now he has to abide by that as well.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Seymour Flops said:


> Yes, Trump is the executive.  I am embarrassed to be a public school teacher in a country where some people actually do not know that.
> 
> Yes, by all means, impeach Trump again.  There is zero evidence of a crime, but impeachments are entirely political, so you might succeed this time.  In getting a conviction I mean.  You will succeed for sure in making yourselves laughing stocks.


Mea culpa, I left out Executive Branch!  He's not the entire population of the Executive Offices.  Your claim that both of his Impeachments were political, no more so than the one that was the impeachment of President Clinton. 

As to the Executive Branch, consider the fact that the Vice President was granted the power to unseat The Donald. 

Trying to defend trump is an impossible effort.  But feel free to insult all of us who post facts and not ad hominems.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> In other words, there are no other known facts.
> 
> Why did you not just say so to start with.


Those aren’t other words for anything I said. See?  Your kind can’t help lying. 

As Col. Jessup might put it, “ … you’ll have to ask me nicely.”  You fell completely short of that goal line. About 99 yards short.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Those aren’t other words for anything I said. See?  Your kind can’t help lying.
> 
> As Col. Jessup might put it, “ … you’ll have to ask me nicely.”  You fell completely short of that goal line. About 99 yards short.


Trying to defend trump is an impossible effort.  But feel free to insult all of us who post facts and not ad hominems.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Mea culpa, I left out Executive Branch!  He's not the entire population of the Executive Offices.  Your claim that both of his Impeachments were political, no more so than the one that was the impeachment of President Clinton.
> 
> As to the Executive Branch, consider the fact that the Vice President was granted the power to unseat The Donald.
> 
> Trying to defend trump is an impossible effort.  But feel free to insult all of us who post facts and not ad hominems.


Silly ignorant you. The President IS the Executive Branch. Yes, of course he has many people under his charge. They all work in and for the Executive Branch. In other words, they do his bidding. It is a shame that you don’t grasp this.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Silly ignorant you. The President IS the Executive Branch. Yes, of course he has many people under his charge. They all work in and for the Executive Branch. In other words, they do his bidding. It is a shame that you don’t grasp this.


As to the Executive Branch, consider the fact that the Vice President Pence was granted the power to unseat The Donald.

BTW:  Most every post of yours has somewhere in your pedestrian words an ad hominem.

Q.  Are you PoliticalChic when wearing a dress?


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Those aren’t other words for anything I said. See?  Your kind can’t help lying.



Sure they are, you just lack the balls to admit it.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Trying to defend trump is an impossible effort.  But feel free to insult all of us who post facts and not ad hominems.


He has no need of a “defense,” stupid. You may not have realized it in your partisan zeal, but he’s not charged with anything. 

On the assumption that the disgraceful  Brandon malAdministration does seek to indict him, however, then yes; he will need a defense.  And it isn’t “impossible” to defend him, despite your ignorant and baseless contention. 

I *always* feel free to insult you. You do much the same thing, you dishonest poseur.  

You don’t post facts, by the way.  You generally post opinions and falsely declare them to be “facts.” But your ignorance or dishonesty notwithstanding, there is a difference. 

Also, my disagreement with another poster doesn’t actually require that you ignorantly insert your valueless opinion. Thought you should know.  👍


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> As to the Executive Branch, consider the fact that the Vice President Pence was granted the power to unseat The Donald.


No. He wasn’t. You don’t even know what you’re talking about. If you’re attempting to somehow babble about the 25th Amendment, then (as usual) you are far from accurate.


Rye Catcher said:


> BTW:  Most every post of yours has somewhere in your pedestrian words an ad hominem.


False. I will certainly concede that I have little compunction about returning what I get. But then I don’t expect honesty from you.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> Sure they are, you just lack the balls to admit it.


No. Unlike you, I’m just honest and accurate. You dispense with those notions.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

Marener said:


> it makes no sense to say that Trump had his documents secure but he also had them declassified.


Nothing Trump does makes any sense.


----------



## BackAgain

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Nothing Trump does makes any sense.


To you, Adam_Clayton. 

But nothing makes sense to you.


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> No. Unlike you, I’m just honest and accurate. You dispense with those notions.



If you were either then you would be able to offer some examples of other known facts...but you have none even tough you lied about it.

You sir, are a fraud


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> If you were either then you would be able to offer some examples of other known facts...but you have none even tough you lied about it.
> 
> You sir, are a fraud


Wrong. My “ability” is only “doubted” by *you* because I am not playing games with you. 

If you care to ask politely, the outcome could be different. Otherwise, your bloviation is, as always, of no importance to me. 

You, ma’am, are a hack.


----------



## bravoactual

Batcat said:


> Trump has the ultimate authority over classified information.



WRONG....The Traitor has zero authority to declassify any U.S. Government material.  There policies, procedures, rules and reglations that must be followed for purposes of declassification.

The lies you Cons believe...


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. My “ability” is only “doubted” by *you* because I am not playing games with you.
> 
> If you care to ask politely, the outcome could be different. Otherwise, your bloviation is, as always, of no importance to me.
> 
> You, ma’am, are a hack.



that is a lot of words to avoid just admitting you lied


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> No. He wasn’t. You don’t even know what you’re talking about. If you’re attempting to somehow babble about the 25th Amendment, then (as usual) you are far from accurate.
> 
> False. I will certainly concede that I have little compunction about returning what I get. But then I don’t expect honesty from you.


LOL, it seems you are unwilling to argue who counted the votes from each of the states in the 2020 election.

I admit I could not find an written part of the Constitution that the VP counts the votes from the several states, however, here is a link:









						How the Electoral College Votes and How the Votes are Counted
					

It’s practically impossible to miss a Presidential election in the United States. By contrast, the meetings of the Electoral College electors across the country and the official counting of their votes probably pass by most people without much notice. Today, casting and counting Electoral...



					www.congressionalinstitute.org
				




_The new Congress is sworn in on January 3, and their first order of business is organizing the Chamber, electing their officers, and, in the House, passing the rules by which they will be governed.  The Code states that the Congress must convene in a joint session on at 1:00 pm on January 6 following the meetings of the Electors. The House, with its more spacious Chamber, must host the meeting. This creates a somewhat unusual parliamentary situation: Normally, as the House of Representatives hosts the joint session, the Speaker would preside, *but since the Constitution requires the Vice President to count the votes,* *he does*. The Code, in fact, goes so far as to prescribe that the President of the Senate is to be seated upon the Speaker’s chair during the counting of the votes, and that the Speaker is to be seated to his left. It also specifies that Senators are to be seated to his right and Representatives are seated in the remainder of the Hall. The tellers, the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate are seated at the Clerk’s desk, and the other officers of the two Houses are seated in front of them.

When the time comes for the Joint Session to start, the House has already been gathered in its Chamber. The House Sergeant-at-Arms addresses the Speaker, announcing the arrival of the President of the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate and the Senate. The Senate’s pages precede the party, bearing the electoral vote certificates in wooden chests. They place these on the middle-tier of the rostrum, to the Speaker’s right. *Then the Vice President and the Senate file in and take their places. *(If you watch a recording, you’ll notice that attendance at this joint session is higher than for a typical House or Senate debate, but not as high as it normally is for something like the annual State of the Union address.)

Each House appoints two tellers to count the votes. Contemporary practice is that the chairmen and ranking members of the Committee on House Administration and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration serve as tellers. (These two committees have jurisdiction over Federal elections; hence, the designation of their chairmen and ranking members as tellers.) The President of the Senate opens the certificates of the states in alphabetical order, starting with Alabama. Immediately after he opens a certificate, he hands it, along with any accompanying papers, to the tellers. In recent elections, the tellers have simply noted that the certificates appear valid and read the votes, but previously, they would read the entire certificate. The Senate Rules Committee chairman reads the first certificate, followed by the House Administration chairman who reads the second, followed by their respective ranking members who read the third and fourth. This order continues for the rest of the states.

As they read the certificates, they make a list of the votes. Once this process is done, they give the list of votes and the tally to the President of the Senate, who announces the result. After announcing the result, he states that the results, along with a copy of the tally, will be entered into the Journals of the House and Senate. After that, the joint session ends, and the Senate departs from the House Chamber._

Thus, there are enough facts that VP's announce the winner over time.


----------



## Wballz49

Rambunctious said:


> Not if they were generated in Mar a Lago while Trump worked from home... Idiot..... biden has a cabinet at his home full of documents... he admitted it.... so sorry but you are just wrong... turn off MSNBC and CNN and get caught up.... kid.....


Its clear you have never worked for the Federal Government or handled Classified documents.  They could not be generated at Mar Largo 🤦‍♂️


----------



## Rambunctious

Wballz49 said:


> Its clear you have never worked for the Federal Government or handled Classified documents.  They could not be generated at Mar Largo 🤦‍♂️


Really?... you don't know what you are talking about... I have had to view and secure classified documents many times in Afghanistan... I've spent hours at shredders tired as hell...
When a president works anyplace papers are created by that work being done... copies are made signatures are signed and Top secret jackets are put on those documents and then filed away....
Biden admitted he has classified documents in his home..... wherever a president is that's the oval office...


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> that is a lot of words to avoid just admitting you lied


I didn’t. But you’re too stubborn to even admit that you didn’t ask civilly.


----------



## Indeependent

BackAgain said:


> I didn’t. But you’re too stubborn to even admit that you didn’t ask civilly.


You're expecting a *Libertarian* to act civilly?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Marener said:


> But these are not similar circumstances.
> 
> Comey said this:
> In looking back at our investigations into mishandling or removal of classified information, we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts. All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here.
> 
> In Trump’s case, the mishandling is clearly intentional. Those documents are absolutely unambiguously labeled classified. The second is that we see efforts to obstruct justice.



But Hillary's was not?

Are you saying that she _*accidentally*_ set up a server that was less secure than gmail in the bathroom of her home and then sent and received highly classified documents on it, making them available to foreign hackers?

Or are you claiming that the Secretary of State did not know that her work-related emails frequently contain highly classified information?  

I'm not sure what crime you allege that Trump intended, other than mishandling of classified information (if  they can prove it was not declassified).  If that's the crime, Hillary was as clearly guilty of it as Trump.  If intent is the important factor, Trump was no more intentional in committing a crime than Hillary.  Unless you are seriously using the Hillary-as-naive-bumpkin defense.


----------



## lantern2814

Rambunctious said:


> They got nothing again... you know that right?.... this is the same bunch that ran Russia gate....


These people desperate to defend this forget that the FBI has already admitted they staged that photo. Meaning they did not find what they claim to have found in that room. That word staged has meaning.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> LOL, it seems you are unwilling to argue who counted the votes from each of the states in the 2020 election.


Nice wall of words. 🙄 By the way, you didn’t ask any such question. Each of the states counted their own votes. By any chance are you attempting to grunt something about Electoral College votes?  You dopes need to try to be coherent. 


Rye Catcher said:


> I admit I could not find an written part of the Constitution that the VP counts the votes from the several states, however, here is a link:


Are you continuing some conversation you and I hadn’t been a part of?


Rye Catcher said:


> How the Electoral College Votes and How the Votes are Counted
> 
> 
> It’s practically impossible to miss a Presidential election in the United States. By contrast, the meetings of the Electoral College electors across the country and the official counting of their votes probably pass by most people without much notice. Today, casting and counting Electoral...
> 
> 
> 
> www.congressionalinstitute.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The new Congress is sworn in on January 3, and their first order of business is organizing the Chamber, electing their officers, and, in the House, passing the rules by which they will be governed.  The Code states that the Congress must convene in a joint session on at 1:00 pm on January 6 following the meetings of the Electors. The House, with its more spacious Chamber, must host the meeting. This creates a somewhat unusual parliamentary situation: Normally, as the House of Representatives hosts the joint session, the Speaker would preside, *but since the Constitution requires the Vice President to count the votes,* *he does*. The Code, in fact, goes so far as to prescribe that the President of the Senate is to be seated upon the Speaker’s chair during the counting of the votes, and that the Speaker is to be seated to his left. It also specifies that Senators are to be seated to his right and Representatives are seated in the remainder of the Hall. The tellers, the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate are seated at the Clerk’s desk, and the other officers of the two Houses are seated in front of them._


_Are you offering this trivia for any particular reason?_


Rye Catcher said:


> _When the time comes for the Joint Session to start, the House has already been gathered in its Chamber. The House Sergeant-at-Arms addresses the Speaker, announcing the arrival of the President of the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate and the Senate. The Senate’s pages precede the party, bearing the electoral vote certificates in wooden chests. They place these on the middle-tier of the rostrum, to the Speaker’s right. *Then the Vice President and the Senate file in and take their places. *(If you watch a recording, you’ll notice that attendance at this joint session is higher than for a typical House or Senate debate, but not as high as it normally is for something like the annual State of the Union address.)_


_So far, so dull. _


Rye Catcher said:


> _Each House appoints two tellers to count the votes. Contemporary practice is that the chairmen and ranking members of the Committee on House Administration and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration serve as tellers. (These two committees have jurisdiction over Federal elections; hence, the designation of their chairmen and ranking members as tellers.) The President of the Senate opens the certificates of the states in alphabetical order, starting with Alabama. Immediately after he opens a certificate, he hands it, along with any accompanying papers, to the tellers. In recent elections, the tellers have simply noted that the certificates appear valid and read the votes, but previously, they would read the entire certificate. The Senate Rules Committee chairman reads the first certificate, followed by the House Administration chairman who reads the second, followed by their respective ranking members who read the third and fourth. This order continues for the rest of the states._


Still dull. 



Rye Catcher said:


> _As they read the certificates, they make a list of the votes. Once this process is done, they give the list of votes and the tally to the President of the Senate, who announces the result. After announcing the result, he states that the results, along with a copy of the tally, will be entered into the Journals of the House and Senate. After that, the joint session ends, and the Senate departs from the House Chamber._


_Some things get duller the further you delve into them. _


Rye Catcher said:


> Thus, there are enough facts that VP's announce the winner over time.


So?  

Is there any chance at all that you think you’re making any point?


----------



## lantern2814

Marener said:


> A picture is worth a thousand words, friend.
> 
> Those documents didn’t belong in Trump’s closet. The government was right to try to retrieve them. They tried doing it nicely. Trump decided to fuck around and so he found out.
> 
> What was unconstitutional about it?


Your photo isn’t worth shit. An admittedly STAGED photograph. Seems you don’t know the meaning of that word. Too bad for you there’s also a letter from NARA thanking Trump for cooperating with them.


----------



## Batcat

bravoactual said:


> WRONG....The Traitor has zero authority to declassify any U.S. Government material.  There policies, procedures, rules and reglations that must be followed for purposes of declassification.
> 
> The lies you Cons believe...


You must watch MSNBC.

The question will likely be decided in the courts.

You might learn something if you take the time to read this article. It deals with an incident in2017. The source is ABC news (not a real conservative site.)









						Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence
					






					abcnews.go.com
				




***snip***

_Executive Order 13526_​_As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries.

At the White House today, Trump's national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, defended Trump's disclosure and said it "is wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information he thinks is necessary to advance the security of the American people."

The 1978 Presidential Records Act, which requires presidents to turn over documents to the National Archives at the end of their administration, lacks an enforcement mechanism, but there are multiple federal laws regarding the handling of classified documents. Trump signed one such law in 2018, increasing the penalty for "unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material" from one year to five years in prison. 

But those in Trump’s orbit say that no president is personally bound by the removal and retention rules governing classified documents, which can be declassified if the president simply says they are, according to Ric Grenell, who was Trump’s acting director of national intelligence and who handled highly classified information.

“There is no approval process for the president of the United States to declassify intelligence. There is this phony idea that he must provide notification for declassification but that’s just silly. Who is he supposed to notify? I think it’s the height of swampism to think the president should seek bureaucrats’ approval,” Grenell told NBC News, emphasizing that he wasn’t personally speaking for the president.

Trump himself said on his Truth Social platform Friday, "It was all declassified."_

But as with many issues there are good arguments on both sides. That’s why I predict this will be decided in the courts and quite possibly the Supreme Court.







​


----------



## lantern2814

Care4all said:


> it was an evidence photo, with a ruler in lower part to scale the size of items retrieved in the search, WHICH IS DONE IN ALL SEARCHES.....
> 
> I almost choked from laughing while watching Hannity and f ox hosts claiming the photo was for show, or Trump claiming that he would never have them on the floor spread out like that, for guests to see....
> 
> Well duh, no one put them on the ground to make you look untidy Donald....   They are evidence photos, done with all search warrants.


HEY dumbfuck, that photo was STAGED. By the FBI’s own admission. Meaning they didn’t find what they claim to. That is not done all the time as that could damage any real evidence (which you don’t have).  Of course idiots like you and Gator swallow the crap you’re fed like good little lemmings.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Rye Catcher said:


> Mea culpa, I left out Executive Branch!  He's not the entire population of the Executive Offices.


He has the entire power.  You really don't know this?  Ok, not your fault, it's the education system.

Here you go:

*Article II, Section 1*

*Section 1*​*The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.*

That is *a* President . . . period.  No "and . . . "  The president has the executive Power.  The rest of the "branch" derives any power they have from his delegation of it.

I usually link to any quote, but since this is (supposedly) common knowledge, I won't.  I recommend that you search on "U.S. Constitution" and see it for yourself, so you do not suspect that I'm using some right-wing edited version.



Rye Catcher said:


> * Your claim that both of his Impeachments were political, no more so than the one that was the impeachment of President Clinton.*


Which was highly political and incredibly stupid.  As was the impeachment of Andrew Johnson.  You can tell when an impeachment was incredibly stupid:  The guy who got impeached winds up still being president.  Now you've just made him a persecuted hero, galvanizing his supporters and made him feel invincible since you did your worst and he's still standing.  That was true for Johnson, for Clinton, and twice as true for Trump. 

Moral of the stories:  Don't impeach a guy because you hate or because you cannot believe his supporters still support him even though ___________________ .  Impeach a guy because there is bipartisan agreement that he is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and the conviction is a near certainty.


Rye Catcher said:


> *As to the Executive Branch, consider the fact that the Vice President was granted the power to unseat The Donald.*


Only the Donald?  Because if you mean the 25th amendment, if Harris hasn't taken out Biden for being incapacitated, talking about it for the Donald is ludicrous. 

BTW, more constitution for you.  Here is what happens right after the VP and a majority of executive officers make the VP acting president (not the president as happens when a president dies):

*Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.*

Theoretically, if Harris could convince a majority of heads of executive departments, she could become the acting president.  But the process that follows stacks the deck heavily in favor of the elected president, as it should. 

Notice also that this is what a process looks like.  Many on here (and I don't know if you were one) have stated as a fact that there is a process for the president to declassify documents.  But they can never show the process as I just did for my claim.  Because them wanting there to be a process is not the same as one existing.


Rye Catcher said:


> *Trying to defend trump is an impossible effort.  But feel free to insult all of us who post facts and not ad hominems.*



Never my intention to insult.  Well, rarely anyway. 

If I insulted you, my apologies.  I'll scroll up and if I see what you mean I'll apologize specifically.  If I can't find it, my apology still stands as a goodwill gesture.

EDIT:  I did see what you mean.  My apologies for saying "you" will succeed in making yourselves laughing stocks.  I should have said that the _Dems in congress_ will succeed in making themselves laughing stocks.


----------



## Esdraelon

skews13 said:


> I wonder if she understands the implications of that admission?


Likely better than YOU.  The bottom line, despite your hysteria is Trump doesn't have to PROVE he declassified that material.  He had an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to do so and no bureaucrat can stand in the way.  The case will have to go to SCOTUS because once again DC will scream like the world is ending because they know he can win again.  

They plan to indict and convict him (if the trial can be kept in DC) and then use that criminal statute to say he's disqualified from running.  Except that statute doesn't apply to the one person who has the right to declassify ANYTHING AT ANY TIME.   So, we're off to the races again and while you will lose, the fact that SCOTUS has to intervene will enable the scum in DC and their media whores to stir up even more hate and violence from idiots like you.


----------



## Batcat

Marener said:


> It’s a fine copy paste but ultimately it comes from Trump sycophants who have no problem ignoring relevant details.
> 
> For starters, two things offset Trump’s case from Clinton’s. One is that the hundreds of documents he took were clearly marked classified. Two is that he has evidence suggesting he obstructed justice in the DoJ’s attempt to get them back.
> 
> We can see the DoJ is crafting it’s case to avoid having to worry about whether Trump did or didn’t declassify them. The espionage act violation doesn’t say classified information, just national defense information.  Add to that obstruction of justice in their failure to turn over subpoenaed documents and evidence that their actions intended to hide documents.
> 
> Last, whether Trump actually declassified anything may be an open question in the courts but to anyone with a lick of common sense, it fails miserably.
> 
> There is no evidence that he ever declassified any of them and to this day I have yet to see any claim from his lawyers that he did declassify those documents.


I have this suspicion that the documents deal with how the DOJ and the FBI handled the Trump/Putin investigation. Trump hoped to use them to teach the American public just how corrupt our government is. The information might b so damning that our wonderful corrupt government had to get those records back at any and all cost. 









						Trump Associate's Stated Plan to Publicly Release "Declassified" Documents
					

New revelations "could have significant legal implications for the Justice Department’s ongoing criminal investigation."




					www.justsecurity.org
				




***snip***

_
*The Dissemination Plan*​When news of the Mar-a-Lago documents began heating up in May 2022, Patel spoke with right-wing media outlets about Trump’s objectives in retaining these documents. He began laying out the defense that the documents had been “declassified,” and specifically identified Trump’s goal to release the information publicly. He described the content of the documents to include matters related to the FBI’s Russia investigation (Crossfire Hurricane), but also a much broader range of issues.

“It’s information that Trump felt spoke to matters regarding everything from Russiagate to the Ukraine impeachment fiasco to major national security matters of great public importance — anything the president felt *the American people had a right to know* is in there and more,” Patel told Breitbart on May 5. He also said, “Trump declassified whole sets of materials in anticipation of leaving government that *he thought the American public should have the right to read themselves*.”

That same day, Patel spoke with a right-wing video show and discussed Trump’s goal of “transparency” in releasing such information. He said:




			“Part of that transparency comes in the form of, you know, *providing the American public with information that should never have been classified or kept from them in the first place*. And what he did was on his way out of the White House, he declassified — made available to every American citizen in the world — large volumes of information relating, *not just to Russiagate, but to national security matters, to the Ukraine impeachment, to his impeachment one, impeachment two*.”
All things that deep-staters, as you know, Buck, in government go in there and get their hands on and classify ’cause they don’t want the truth to get out ’cause it’s gonna make Trump look good ’cause he always supported the truth and the facts. And that’s what we have here is *a whole slew of documents and information that President Trump wanted to put out*.”
		
Click to expand...

“We’re hoping to get this information out soon,” he added._


----------



## Golfing Gator

BackAgain said:


> I didn’t. But you’re too stubborn to even admit that you didn’t ask civilly.



did I hurt your wittle feelings?


----------



## Esdraelon

skews13 said:


> One of the important details is that these documents were found not in the storage room... but in a desk in Donald Trump's office,"
> 
> View attachment 689524


The fact that you continue to cite this info like it matters, just means you refuse to accept that every document he had possession of, he considered private documents THAT HAD BEEN DECLASSIFIED.  

The disconnect with you people is clear.  You NEVER accepted him as being a legitimate president and because of that you are easily convinced, time after time, that he did not have the powers invested in that office.  It gets tiresome.  It's like trying to convince a child that they're wrong.

If he runs and is re-elected he needs to GUT DHS and CIA top down to mid-level of all execs.  Let the media melt down, fok 'em.  The FBI is irretrievably corrupt and needs to be disbanded.  The CIA needs to be drastically reined in.  Of course, if he actually tried that, he'd be killed in record time.  We no longer can control these behemoths but we CAN expose them for the corrupt filth that they have become and convince Americans to resist them in every conceivable way short of violence.


----------



## Esdraelon

Batcat said:


> We’re hoping to get this information out soon,” he added.


If/when they convict him of this bullshit, he should have a "poison pill" or "dead man switch" to dump every one of those documents, Assange-style into the public realm.


----------



## BackAgain

Indeependent said:


> You're expecting a *Libertarian* to act civilly?


I know some libertarians. Some are cool. But some (and I won’t mention any names) are not so cool — or civil.


----------



## Batcat

Esdraelon said:


> If/when they convict him of this bullshit, he should have a "poison pill" or "dead man switch" to dump every one of those documents, Assange-style into the public realm.


Oh, come on man. I must have read 1000 predictions that Trump was going to be convicted and it never happens. 

You would think that after a while you would begin to realize that your wonderful liberal media thinks you are a sucker.


----------



## bravoactual

Batcat said:


> You must watch MSNBC.
> 
> The question will likely be decided in the courts.
> 
> You might learn something if you take the time to read this article. It deals with an incident in2017. The source is ABC news (not a real conservative site.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> _Executive Order 13526_​_As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries.
> 
> At the White House today, Trump's national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, defended Trump's disclosure and said it "is wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information he thinks is necessary to advance the security of the American people."
> 
> The 1978 Presidential Records Act, which requires presidents to turn over documents to the National Archives at the end of their administration, lacks an enforcement mechanism, but there are multiple federal laws regarding the handling of classified documents. Trump signed one such law in 2018, increasing the penalty for "unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material" from one year to five years in prison.
> 
> But those in Trump’s orbit say that no president is personally bound by the removal and retention rules governing classified documents, which can be declassified if the president simply says they are, according to Ric Grenell, who was Trump’s acting director of national intelligence and who handled highly classified information.
> 
> “There is no approval process for the president of the United States to declassify intelligence. There is this phony idea that he must provide notification for declassification but that’s just silly. Who is he supposed to notify? I think it’s the height of swampism to think the president should seek bureaucrats’ approval,” Grenell told NBC News, emphasizing that he wasn’t personally speaking for the president.
> 
> Trump himself said on his Truth Social platform Friday, "It was all declassified."_
> 
> But as with many issues there are good arguments on both sides. That’s why I predict this will be decided in the courts and quite possibly the Supreme Court.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​



I sure as shit don't watch Fux Snooze, OWNED or read Breitfart.  I think for myself.  

Congress wrote the laws governing declassification.  The Traitor does get to wave his baby 2-month old hands decide what is and what is not declassified.  He ain't got that power.


----------



## BackAgain

Golfing Gator said:


> did I hurt your wittle feelings?


No ma’am. I’m just trying to train you. 

Sit!  Good girl!


----------



## BackAgain

bravoactual said:


> I sure as shit don't watch Fux Snooze, OWNED or read Breitfart.  I think for myself.
> 
> Congress wrote the laws governing declassification.  The Traitor does get to wave his baby 2-month old hands decide what is and what is not declassified.  He ain't got that power.


You don’t think at all. You can’t. 

The President, in fact, has plenary power to declassify any classified document. Congress lack the ability to constrain that power. It’s called Separation  of Powers.  

Your infantile mind just doesn’t comprehend adult matters. Go toddle off now, child. Be a good little libtard and play in heavy traffic. 😎


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Golfing Gator said:


> that is a lot of words to avoid just admitting you lied


but hE iS hOnEsT and aCcUrAte


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> You must watch MSNBC.
> 
> The question will likely be decided in the courts.
> 
> You might learn something if you take the time to read this article. It deals with an incident in2017. The source is ABC news (not a real conservative site.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump has legal authority to declassify intelligence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> abcnews.go.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***snip***
> 
> _Executive Order 13526_​_As president, Trump has the legal power to declassify information. He also has the authority to share information with whomever he wants, including foreign adversaries.
> 
> At the White House today, Trump's national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, defended Trump's disclosure and said it "is wholly appropriate for the president to share whatever information he thinks is necessary to advance the security of the American people."
> 
> The 1978 Presidential Records Act, which requires presidents to turn over documents to the National Archives at the end of their administration, lacks an enforcement mechanism, but there are multiple federal laws regarding the handling of classified documents. Trump signed one such law in 2018, increasing the penalty for "unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material" from one year to five years in prison.
> 
> But those in Trump’s orbit say that no president is personally bound by the removal and retention rules governing classified documents, which can be declassified if the president simply says they are, according to Ric Grenell, who was Trump’s acting director of national intelligence and who handled highly classified information.
> 
> “There is no approval process for the president of the United States to declassify intelligence. There is this phony idea that he must provide notification for declassification but that’s just silly. Who is he supposed to notify? I think it’s the height of swampism to think the president should seek bureaucrats’ approval,” Grenell told NBC News, emphasizing that he wasn’t personally speaking for the president.
> 
> Trump himself said on his Truth Social platform Friday, "It was all declassified."_
> 
> But as with many issues there are good arguments on both sides. That’s why I predict this will be decided in the courts and quite possibly the Supreme Court.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ​


Irrelevant


----------



## Marener

Seymour Flops said:


> But Hillary's was not?
> 
> Are you saying that she _*accidentally*_ set up a server that was less secure than gmail in the bathroom of her home and then sent and received highly classified documents on it, making them available to foreign hackers?
> 
> Or are you claiming that the Secretary of State did not know that her work-related emails frequently contain highly classified information?
> 
> I'm not sure what crime you allege that Trump intended, other than mishandling of classified information (if  they can prove it was not declassified).  If that's the crime, Hillary was as clearly guilty of it as Trump.  If intent is the important factor, Trump was no more intentional in committing a crime than Hillary.  Unless you are seriously using the Hillary-as-naive-bumpkin defense.


Im saying it’s harder to prove she mishandled classified information when it was labeled after the fact in a small portion of her emails. 

It’s much easier to say Trump knowingly mishandled classified information because of the nature of the documents. He clearly intended to retain them knowing they were highly classified. 

But the real problems seem to be that he was probably attempting to obstruct justice by lying about having returned them.


----------



## Marener

lantern2814 said:


> Your photo isn’t worth shit. An admittedly STAGED photograph. Seems you don’t know the meaning of that word. Too bad for you there’s also a letter from NARA thanking Trump for cooperating with them.


Trump clearly didn’t cooperate or else the photo would have never been possible.


----------



## Batcat

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Irrelevant


Far from irrelevant.


----------



## Batcat

bravoactual said:


> I sure as shit don't watch Fux Snooze, OWNED or read Breitfart.  I think for myself.
> 
> Congress wrote the laws governing declassification.  The Traitor does get to wave his baby 2-month old hands decide what is and what is not declassified.  He ain't got that power.


Actually Obama wrote the rules for handling classified data in an executive order. 






						Executive Order 13526 - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




_*Executive Order 13526* was issued on December 29, 2009, by United States President Barack Obama.[1] It is one of a series of executive orders from US Presidents outlining how classified information should be handled. It revokes and replaces the previous Executive Orders in effect for this, which were EO 12958 (text) and EO 13292 (text)._

You can read the Executive Order at …









						Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
					






					obamawhitehouse.archives.gov
				




A fair discsusion of the Mar-a-Lago issue is at this link. …









						The Classification Status of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Documents
					

Why classification status matters for 18 U.S.C. § 793 and what limitations may exist for a president’s declassification authorities.




					www.lawfareblog.com


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> Far from irrelevant.


No, sorry, that's why it's not at issue in any forum but your mind.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> Nice wall of words. 🙄 By the way, you didn’t ask any such question. Each of the states counted their own votes. By any chance are you attempting to grunt something about Electoral College votes?  You dopes need to try to be coherent.
> 
> Are you continuing some conversation you and I hadn’t been a part of?
> 
> _Are you offering this trivia for any particular reason?
> 
> So far, so dull. _
> 
> Still dull.
> 
> 
> _Some things get duller the further you delve into them. _
> 
> So?
> 
> Is there any chance at all that you think you’re making any point?


Yeah, the one on the top of your head.  See I can give what you do to, making a stupid attack.


----------



## BackAgain

Rye Catcher said:


> Yeah, the one on the top of your head.  See I can give what you do to, making a stupid attack.


You always do. And the difference is, I don’t wet myself over an internet message board comment. You’re really quite lame. And you are also off topic. 

What’s the matter can’t defend the nonsense OP. No matter. Nobody could.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> As we see from their actions in the Carter Page warrant, misuse of government phones for personal expressions of hatred, Comey’s FBI was a disgusting cesspool of corruption.  Comey’s treatment of Hillary was more than reason enough to fire him.  That fact is not cancelled by the obvious truth that there were many, many other reasons that he was unfit to lead the FBI.



Page had virtually nothing to do with Trump. And it's beyond reason Trump fired Comey for helping him win the election. Trump fired Comey for not being loyal to Trump. You'd know that if you were even slightly connected to reality.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> No. Unlike you, I’m just honest and accurate. You dispense with those notions.



LOLOL 

If you were actually honest and accurate, you wouldn't be posting on this site after losing a bet where the loser of the wager was to leave this forum forever. Idn't that right, *Welshy*?


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> But Hillary's was not?
> 
> Are you saying that she _*accidentally*_ set up a server that was less secure than gmail in the bathroom of her home and then sent and received highly classified documents on it, making them available to foreign hackers?
> 
> Or are you claiming that the Secretary of State did not know that her work-related emails frequently contain highly classified information?
> 
> I'm not sure what crime you allege that Trump intended, other than mishandling of classified information (if  they can prove it was not declassified).  If that's the crime, Hillary was as clearly guilty of it as Trump.  If intent is the important factor, Trump was no more intentional in committing a crime than Hillary.  Unless you are seriously using the Hillary-as-naive-bumpkin defense.


----------



## Faun

lantern2814 said:


> HEY dumbfuck, that photo was STAGED. By the FBI’s own admission. Meaning they didn’t find what they claim to. That is not done all the time as that could damage any real evidence (which you don’t have).  Of course idiots like you and Gator swallow the crap you’re fed like good little lemmings.



Yes, of course it was staged. No one said otherwise. Just like photos like this are staged...


----------



## San Souci

Batcat said:


> Cover sheets are not classified. You didn’t see what was in the documents in the picture just the cover sheets.
> 
> Note the statement just above the bottom Top Secret. “This cover sheet is unclassified.”
> 
> View attachment 689935


So what? It was a political photo OP.


----------



## Batcat

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, sorry, that's why it's not at issue in any forum but your mind.


It has been discussed all day in the news. You have your head stuck in the sand again as usual.


----------



## Batcat

San Souci said:


> So what? It was a political photo OP.


You asked …
If those "Documents" were Secret , why does the DOJ put pictures of them on Public Media? Just another "Russia Collusion".

I answered your question. You only saw unclassified cover sheets. 

Of course it was a political photo op.


----------



## Rye Catcher

BackAgain said:


> You always do. And the difference is, I don’t wet myself over an internet message board comment. You’re really quite lame. And you are also off topic.
> 
> What’s the matter can’t defend the nonsense OP. No matter. Nobody could.


Burp.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana

Batcat said:


> It has been discussed all day in the news. You have your head stuck in the sand again as usual.


No it has not. In fact, when you typed that post, I guarantee you don't even remember what you were talking about.


----------



## Rye Catcher

Batcat said:


> You asked …
> If those "Documents" were Secret , why does the DOJ put pictures of them on Public Media? Just another "Russia Collusion".
> 
> I answered your question. You only saw unclassified cover sheets.
> 
> Of course it was a political photo op.


It seems you and others who continue to support Donald Trump are so far out of touch with reality with the large population of American citizens***. Time to recognize trump is corrupt, and the documents he kept might have been sold to Putin, XI or even his lover, Kim.

***Yahoo! has posted editorials written in magazines and newspapers and sought remarks from the readers.  The responses are at least 10 to 1 that the Republican Party is corrupt and opposed to democracy in America.  This is a clear and concise response to have far this party has moved far away from IKE and even Nixon and both Bushes.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> Page had virtually nothing to do with Trump.


Then Why did the people who vowed to stop his election as president go after Page with lies and fake documents.


Faun said:


> And it's beyond reason Trump fired Comey for helping him win the election. Trump fired Comey for not being loyal to Trump. You'd know that if you were even slightly connected to reality.


I don't know how you are reading Trump's mind. You should read career professional Rosenstein's letter laying out the reasons for firing Comey.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> Then Why did the people who vowed to stop his election as president go after Page with lies and fake documents.



Because there was suspicion that Page had connections to Russia. Still, Page was not attached to Trump's campaign.



Seymour Flops said:


> I don't know how you are reading Trump's mind. You should read career professional Rosenstein's letter laying out the reasons for firing Comey.



Again, Trump said he was planning on firing Comey anyway. And it was no secret Trump demanded loyalty and Comey was not loyal to Trump.


----------



## Wballz49

What does Q and Cosmic Pizza say


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> Because there was suspicion that Page had connections to Russia. Still, Page was not attached to Trump's campaign.


They knew he was connected to Russia serving U.S. intell as a source. Why did they lie and fake documents to get a warrant and is it always OK to do that?


Faun said:


> Again, Trump said he was planning on firing Comey anyway. And it was no secret Trump demanded loyalty and Comey was not loyal to Trump.


Nor to Clinton. Hated them both.  Comey would have hated any duly elected president. FBI directors are noted for blackmailing them. 

So at the next Disgraced FBI Director Fan Club y'all should write and advise him not to give an excuse to fire him to someone who already wants to fire him.


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> They knew he was connected to Russia serving U.S. intell as a source. Why did they lie and fake documents to get a warrant and is it always OK to do that?
> 
> Nor to Clinton. Hated them both.  Comey would have hated any duly elected president. FBI directors are noted for blackmailing them.
> 
> So at the next Disgraced FBI Director Fan Club y'all should write and advise him not to give an excuse to fire him to someone who already wants to fire him.



Of course it's not ok and the piece-of-shit who did that was rightfully convicted for doing that.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> Of course it's not ok and the piece-of-shit who did that was rightfully convicted for doing that.


What was his motive for the crime?

You think it was a one off for the FBI? The one guy that ever did that got caught?

Was his sentence of nothing and no public frog march and no raid on his house enough to deter others?


----------



## Faun

Seymour Flops said:


> What was his motive for the crime?
> 
> You think it was a one off for the FBI? The one guy that ever did that got caught?
> 
> Was his sentence of nothing and no public frog march and no raid on his house enough to deter others?



His motive appears to obtain a FUSA warrant. Were others involved? Seems not as this has been thoroughly investigated for years by Horowitz and then Durham and that one perp is all they found.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Faun said:


> His motive appears to obtain a FUSA warrant. Were others involved? Seems not as this has been thoroughly investigated for years by Horowitz and then Durham and that one perp is all they found.


Well, obviously it was to get the warrant. Why did he want a Pfizer warrant so bad on a man who was serving his country by being a confidential source for us intelligence? Was he some kind of foreign agent trying to disrupt our intelligence operations? What could it have been? What could have motivated such a crime?


----------



## Delldude

postman said:


> I believe the judge has the clearance, or would not have been assigned to the case.


 Fed judges aren't required if it has bearing on the case before them.
Besides, I think she is only ruling for a special master.


----------



## Delldude

postman said:


> It's not easy to find somebody with those security clearances, that isn't busy doing something more important.



Doubt that.

More than a million people have Top Secret clearance​Analysis: The number of people with Top Secret clearance will shock you


----------



## Catman51

skews13 said:


> One of the important details is that these documents were found not in the storage room... but in a desk in Donald Trump's office,"
> 
> View attachment 689524


Then why was the picture taken in a storage room?  Did they have to move them there, thus destroying the chain of "evidence?"


----------



## Catman51

occupied said:


> I'm just guessing here but the few who know all the details of this case are not inclined to give him any special favors because Russian agents have already infiltrated Mar-a-lago and obtained copies of all of it.


Cue the theme from the Twilight Zone.


----------



## MagicMike

Seymour Flops said:


> A "container?"
> 
> Like a Tupperware container?
> 
> Any lib on here know what they meant by "a container?"
> 
> It was a safe, of course.  If it were anything less, they would have said so.  Don't be so gullible, McFly.


Whatever this said "container" was it was insufficient enough to generate a search warrant.

Nough said.

Anybody still trying to make excuses for the orange shit-stain at this point obviously HATES their country!


----------



## Catman51

MagicMike said:


> Whatever this said "container" was it was insufficient enough to generate a search warrant.
> 
> Nough said.
> 
> Anybody still trying to make excuses for the orange shit-stain at this point obviously HATES their country!


Or loves their country and hates what the demon democrats are trying to pull.


----------



## Seymour Flops

MagicMike said:


> Whatever this said "container" was it was insufficient enough to generate a search warrant.
> 
> Nough said.
> 
> Anybody still trying to make excuses for the orange shit-stain at this point obviously HATES their country!


The sufficiency of the container did not generate a search warrant.  How could it, if they didn't see the container until they searched the house?  Unless they had Fang Fang or some other Democrat spy in the house.

The search warrant was generated by the DOJ/FBI/DNC and their TDS.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Unless they had Fang Fang or some other Democrat spy in the house.



Or perhaps a member of the Secret Service detail that was concerned with the lax way the classified documents were being treated. 

Or perhaps a member of the MLG staff that came upon them just laying about and was concerned with the lax way the classified documents were being treated. 

The possibilities are almost endless. 

But your version of TDS will not allow you to see anything but that Trump is your god and incapable of ever being wrong.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> Or perhaps a member of the Secret Service detail that was concerned with the lax way the classified documents were being treated.
> 
> Or perhaps a member of the MLG staff that came upon them just laying about and was concerned with the lax way the classified documents were being treated.


Convict him on "perhaps!"

That's your plan?

How do you know that the documents were being treated in a lax way?  What is the sum-total of evidence for that?

Is it testimony?  Sworn statements?  Body-cam video of the documents as the agents came upon them?

Go ahead.  Articulate the evidence you've seen so far.



Golfing Gator said:


> The possibilities are almost endless.


They are, aren't they?

That's why we are on "THIS TIME WE'VE GOT HIM!" - Number 4,697.


Golfing Gator said:


> But your version of TDS will not allow you to see anything but that Trump is your god and incapable of ever being wrong.


Are you sure you want to be snarky?  You got your snark right back last night and it seemed to upset you.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Seymour Flops said:


> Convict him on "perhaps!"
> 
> That's your plan?



I do not have a plan since I am not the DOJ.  

I am merely offering suggestions that you are incapable of thinking of yourself due to your devotion to your god.



Seymour Flops said:


> How do you know that the documents were being treated in a lax way? What is the sum-total of evidence for that?
> 
> Is it testimony? Sworn statements? Body-cam video of the documents as the agents came upon them?
> 
> Go ahead. Articulate the evidence you've seen so far.



I have not seen any evidence as I am not part of the DOJ nor am I a judge that looked at what has been presented.  



Seymour Flops said:


> Are you sure you want to be snarky? You got your snark right back last night and it seemed to upset you.



I love snark, you are free to be snarky all you like.  I just pointed out that your stories sounded a lot like BS.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I do not have a plan since I am not the DOJ.
> 
> I am merely offering suggestions that you are incapable of thinking of yourself due to your devotion to your god.


I would not have thought of "perhaps this, perhaps that," but then I'm not desperately seeking some way for Trump to be guilty of something.



Golfing Gator said:


> I have not seen any evidence as I am not part of the DOJ nor am I a judge that looked at what has been presented.


Then you are not talking about something you know.  You're guessing/hoping.

You're basing it on that staged picture, right?


Golfing Gator said:


> I love snark, you are free to be snarky all you like.  I just pointed out that your stories sounded a lot like BS.


You seemed a little upset when you stormed off last night.

Or maybe I misinterpreted.  I'll look again.



> It is sort of cute how you think keeping track of classified materials is a joke.
> 
> Makes me think you never seen one or worn a uniform.
> 
> Have a great night


I took that to mean "please stop being snarky with me."  I always respect such requests, but now you're back for more, so . . .


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> I do not have a plan since I am not the DOJ.
> 
> I am merely offering suggestions that you are incapable of thinking of yourself due to your devotion to your god.
> 
> 
> 
> I have not seen any evidence as I am not part of the DOJ nor am I a judge that looked at what has been presented.
> 
> 
> 
> I love snark, you are free to be snarky all you like.  I just pointed out that your stories sounded a lot like BS.


You admit that you are not DOJ, yet claim to speak with authority on all of their procedures.

You are offering "suggestions" as to the way you desire them to go.  You have not authority and I doubt that the DOJ listens to all of y our braying.  You continue to say that you are not DOJ yet try to give them marching orders.  In fact, you are a nobody and nothing when it comes to the legal system. All of which confirms that you are worthless.

But all who have been subjected to your post know this already.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Catman51 said:


> You admit that you are not DOJ, yet claim to speak with authority on all of their procedures.



I did.  Can you give the post number I did that in?

Thanks



Seymour Flops said:


> I would not have thought of "perhaps this, perhaps that," but then I'm not desperately seeking some way for Trump to be guilty of something.



I think of "perhaps" for both sides of the equation, you do not because, well Trump is your god and can never do wrong. 



Seymour Flops said:


> Then you are not talking about something you know. You're guessing/hoping.



I am basing it on common sense.  None of us have any real details, we are all just guessing. 



Seymour Flops said:


> You seemed a little upset when you stormed off last night.
> 
> Or maybe I misinterpreted. I'll look again.



It was time to focus on the Gator game, it came down to the wire.   I do not get upset by people telling fictional stories.



Seymour Flops said:


> I took that to mean "please stop being snarky with me." I always respect such requests, but now you're back for more, so . . .



A request you will never see come from me, just your own imagination.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Catman51 said:


> ou are offering "suggestions" as to the way you desire them to go. You have not authority and I doubt that the DOJ listens to all of y our braying. You continue to say that you are not DOJ yet try to give them marching orders. In fact, you are a nobody and nothing when it comes to the legal system. All of which confirms that you are worthless.



Do you think the DOJ is reading this forum looking for ideas or "marching orders"?

Dude, are you drunk tonight?


----------



## Seymour Flops

Golfing Gator said:


> I think of "perhaps" for both sides of the equation, you do not because, well Trump is your god and can never do wrong.


I'm glad you can see both sides.

What would be a perhaps for Trump's side of the equation?


Golfing Gator said:


> I am basing it on common sense.  None of us have any real details, we are all just guessing.


Alright then.  I guess that this is yet another vain attempt to "get Trump," at huge expense to the taxpayers' pocketbooks and the DOJ/FBI reputation.  Common sense tells me that.


Golfing Gator said:


> It was time to focus on the Gator game, it came down to the wire.   I do not get upset by people telling fictional stories.


Congrats on the win, then.


Golfing Gator said:


> A request you will never see come from me, just your own imagination.


Ok, glad to hear it.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> I did.  Can you give the post number I did that in?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I think of "perhaps" for both sides of the equation, you do not because, well Trump is your god and can never do wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> I am basing it on common sense.  None of us have any real details, we are all just guessing.
> 
> 
> 
> It was time to focus on the Gator game, it came down to the wire.   I do not get upset by people telling fictional stories.
> 
> 
> 
> A request you will never see come from me, just your own imagination.


Speaking of imagination, that is all you spew, your imagination.

You reject any comment that does not agree with your imagination and claim that the other person is stupid, or at least not informed while admitting that you yourself are not informed.  That is called lying, which you seem to consistently do. BTW, it is not "common knowledge" if this many "common" folk disagree with you.  It is once again lying.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> I did.  Can you give the post number I did that in?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I think of "perhaps" for both sides of the equation, you do not because, well Trump is your god and can never do wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> I am basing it on common sense.  None of us have any real details, we are all just guessing.
> 
> 
> 
> It was time to focus on the Gator game, it came down to the wire.   I do not get upset by people telling fictional stories.
> 
> 
> 
> A request you will never see come from me, just your own imagination.


Gator, all of your posts, which you will deny over and over trying to convince yourself that this is the truth.  The actual truth is that no one believes anything you say is true.  You make assertions and hope that they will be taken as fact when in fact they are your own suppositions.  And incorrect suppositions at that, as usual.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> Do you think the DOJ is reading this forum looking for ideas or "marching orders"?
> 
> Dude, are you drunk tonight?


You must think that they are with all of your continued braying on the subject.  It must hurt your little feelings to be so ignored.  Even they know that you are an idiot.


----------



## Wballz49

Cosmic Pizza
Nunez Security Clearance 
Gen Flynns Security Clearance 
Aliens in the Ocean
Hillary Clinton Sever
Pomeos Cognac
AOCs Psychiatrist 
Hunter Biden crack pipe
Eppstein Mafia
Marjorie Greens jaw structure 
Qanon suckin Illuminati c ock
What the hell is going on today😂😂🥴


----------



## excalibur

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news




This thread didn't end well for you.


----------



## skews13

excalibur said:


> This thread didn't end well for you.



Think so? Watch carefully.


----------



## excalibur

skews13 said:


> Think so? Watch carefully.



Let us know when something turns up.


----------



## skews13

excalibur said:


> Let us know when something turns up.



It already has. Apparently, you aren't paying attention.


----------



## excalibur

skews13 said:


> It already has. Apparently, you aren't paying attention.


----------



## bravoactual

Bad new Traitor Humpers.  The DOJ has already catogorized/inventoried/recorded all the documents they have received, or much as possible.  Waiting two week was a *Huge Mistake.*


----------



## Leo123

OOPS......186 posts and now.......Never mind.   

Judge Grants Trump Request for Special Master to Review Docs Seized From Mar-a-Lago​








						Judge Grants Trump Request for Special Master to Review Docs Seized From Mar-a-Lago
					

According to a court order published on Monday, a federal judge will appoint a special master to review the documents and items seized by the FBI during the unprecedented raid on Donald Trump’s...




					pjmedia.com


----------



## Marener

Leo123 said:


> OOPS......
> 
> Judge Grants Trump Request for Special Master to Review Docs Seized From Mar-a-Lago​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Judge Grants Trump Request for Special Master to Review Docs Seized From Mar-a-Lago
> 
> 
> According to a court order published on Monday, a federal judge will appoint a special master to review the documents and items seized by the FBI during the unprecedented raid on Donald Trump’s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pjmedia.com


Trump appointed hacks are performing precisely as anticipated.


----------



## bravoactual

MagicMike said:


> Whatever this said "container" was it was insufficient enough to generate a search warrant.
> 
> Nough said.
> 
> Anybody still trying to make excuses for the orange shit-stain at this point obviously HATES their country!



More to the point, they are Traitors.


----------



## HaShev

citygator said:


> Always a tweet for that..
> 
> View attachment 689977


You jumped the gun on this one, as usual baiting everyone, so I guess this makes you
 the MASTER Baiter.


----------



## AquaAthena

AFP/NICHOLAS KAMM

A federal judge on Monday granted former President Donald Trump’s request that a special master review items the FBI seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and also halted the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) use of the items for “investigative purposes.”

Judge Suspends DOJ Investigation of Trump, Grants Special Master Request


----------



## Thunk

AquaAthena said:


> A federal judge on Monday granted former President Donald Trump’s request that a special master


----------



## MagicMike

AquaAthena said:


> AFP/NICHOLAS KAMM
> 
> A federal judge on Monday granted former President Donald Trump’s request that a special master review items the FBI seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and also halted the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) use of the items for “investigative purposes.”
> 
> Judge Suspends DOJ Investigation of Trump, Grants Special Master Request


This is actually going to work in the DOJ's favor for eventual prosecution once this formality has been done.
Granting this request won't delay the investigation much.
Once the review is completed all it will change is that Trump will have a little less whining room.


----------



## MagicMike

Thunk said:


> View attachment 692230


So what?
It's a big nothingburger.


----------



## bravoactual

A big fat juicy nothing burger at that.  With side of nothing fried and large noting milk shake.


----------



## bravoactual

Thunk said:


> View attachment 692230



Well dip shit, you do that the DOJ has had the files for over two weeks right?  You do know that in that time the DOJ has already cataloged/inventoried and reviewed the documents right....I mean you do know that don't you....dumb as dog shit MAGAMAGGOT.


----------



## The Duke

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


----------



## Stann

Seymour Flops said:


> That judge will almost certainly appoint the requested special master. The desperation with which the DOJ/FBI/DNC is trying to avoid one only shows how much one is needed.


I see no desperation on the part of the government agencies however trump continues to throw his usual tantrums.  The judge did appoint a special master, hopefully trump will not try to tamper with that. But the judge also said she saw no abuse of trump from the DOJ, they were doing a job that needed to be done. This was a trump-appointed judge, she did it to try to appease him. Saying it would be good to have an independent point of view of the situation. The judge's statement about Trump's claim that the DOJ treated  him unfairly is significant. It's now court-documented evidence against you. Thanks again Mr.Trump, your own mouth is the biggest adversary you have.


----------



## Seymour Flops

Stann said:


> I see no desperation on the part of the government agencies however trump continues to throw his usual tantrums.  The judge did appoint a special master, hopefully trump will not try to tamper with that. But the judge also said she saw no abuse of trump from the DOJ, they were doing a job that needed to be done. This was a trump-appointed judge, she did it to try to appease him. Saying it would be good to have an independent point of view of the situation. The judge's statement about Trump's claim that the DOJ treated  him unfairly is significant. It's now court-documented evidence against you. Thanks again Mr.Trump, your own mouth is the biggest adversary you have.


Can you quote the Judge on that statement?


----------



## Thunk

bravoactual said:


> Well dip shit, you do that the DOJ has had the files for over two weeks right? You do know that in that time the DOJ has already cataloged/inventoried and reviewed the documents right....I mean you do know that don't you....dumb as dog shit MAGAMAGGOT.



Well dip shit...you know that Trump had the files for over a year and a half don't you?  Trump cataloged/inventoried and reviewed the documents right?  I mean you DO know that don't you? 

How about those 47 empty folders???


----------



## skews13

MagicMike said:


> This is actually going to work in the DOJ's favor for eventual prosecution once this formality has been done.
> Granting this request won't delay the investigation much.
> Once the review is completed all it will change is that Trump will have a little less whining room.



It was a stupid move by the judge, with no legitimate legal basis. The only question is whether or not the search warrant is legal, and the accompanying affidavit accurate in its description of the place to be searched, and the items being searched for.

Where this is going to hurt Trump even worse, is if a third party actually verifies any of his personal belongings were stored with the incriminating items, because he won’t be able to deny he wasn’t the one that took them.


----------



## MagicMike

Thunk said:


> Well dip shit...you know that Trump had the files for over a year and a half don't you?  Trump cataloged/inventoried and reviewed the documents right?  I mean you DO know that don't you?
> 
> How about those 47 empty folders???
> 
> View attachment 692379


Why do you seem to think this is all a joke?
People can actually get killed when spies like Trump share sensitive intel with the wrong people.
This guy is a threat to our national security and you defend and make excuses for him and treat it all as if you think it is funny.

It must suck to love and worship an idol (Trump) and have to hate your own country just because he is at war with it.

Trump Worship Syndrome.


----------



## Thunk

MagicMike said:


> People can actually get killed when spies like Trump share sensitive intel with the wrong people.



Well, there is TDS and then there is YOU.  You've lost it!  I thunk cell phone radiation has cooked your brain. 

Trump had/has the goods on everybody involved with the "russia collusion" hoax and the stolen election. 

They knew damn well what was in those 47 empty folders and they're shitting bricks that they did not retrieve them...but they're not telling us are they?  

Yes, I thunk it's funny as hell when criminals go to jail.  And alot of democrats and RINOS are about to do just that!  

Now go get your 97th booster shot good little slave boy.


----------



## Care4all

skews13 said:


> It was a stupid move by the judge, with no legitimate legal basis. The only question is whether or not the search warrant is legal, and the accompanying affidavit accurate in its description of the place to be searched, and the items being searched for.
> 
> Where this is going to hurt Trump even worse, is if a third party actually verifies any of his personal belongings were stored with the incriminating items, because he won’t be able to deny he wasn’t the one that took them.


it's a delay tactic, Trump modus operandi...

as with the Mueller investigation report, he and Barr claimed the report was a nothing burger and delayed its actual 500 page release for three weeks.....in that DELAY time, Trump got to lie, and deceive the public and convince them it was nothing.

With the 1/6 insurrection/self coup detat attempt....near all republicans and Republican leadership condemned Trump and blamed him for the riot and attempt of self coup....

but then, they rejected an independent investigation, they rejected a congressional investigation, the delay giving Trump time to spin his lies to his followers, and now all Republican candidates running, support Trump's lies....every Republican who early on, condemned trump.....

Trump is a master of deceit and trickery, and has an incredible power of persuasion, and delay, time, is all he needs, to brainwash others....

This case will be no different, the judge set it up, for likely months, if not years of delay, within the court and appeals system....giving him time to spin his lies....

Rince and repeat.


----------



## BackAgain

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


Wow. Screwed really fucked up this thread headline. Typical libtard. Their shit never ages well.


----------



## struth

Care4all said:


> it's a delay tactic, Trump modus operandi...
> 
> as with the Mueller investigation report, he and Barr claimed the report was a nothing burger and delayed its actual 500 page release for three weeks.....in that DELAY time, Trump got to lie, and deceive the public and convince them it was nothing.
> 
> With the 1/6 insurrection/self coup detat attempt....near all republicans and Republican leadership condemned Trump and blamed him for the riot and attempt of self coup....
> 
> but then, they rejected an independent investigation, they rejected a congressional investigation, the delay giving Trump time to spin his lies to his followers, and now all Republican candidates running, support Trump's lies....every Republican who early on, condemned trump.....
> 
> Trump is a master of deceit and trickery, and has an incredible power of persuasion, and delay, time, is all he needs, to brainwash others....
> 
> This case will be no different, the judge set it up, for likely months, if not years of delay, within the court and appeals system....giving him time to spin his lies....
> 
> Rince and repeat.


what was in the report that you think he and Barr didn’t say?


----------



## bravoactual

Now the 11th. Circuit Court has agreed to hear the DOJ's appeal, *SCOTUS* will have to wait the the lower court to rule.  Also, the *National Archives and Records Administration* (*NARA*)is now saying the Traitor has NOT turned over all the records requested by that organization.

Regardless of the Traitor's claims, these documents do NOT belong to him.  They belong the United States Government.  There is no claim of Executive Priviledge, that Privilage remains with the current President and Mr. Biden has already stated that the Traitor no longer has that priviledge.  As President, Mr. Biden does have the authority to grant that priviledge to a former President and he has NOT done so.

Another sad attempt by the Traitor to control the message and it is failing


----------



## Cellblock2429

bravoactual said:


> Now the 11th. Circuit Court has agreed to hear the DOJ's appeal, *SCOTUS* will have to wait the the lower court to rule.  Also, the *National Archives and Records Administration* (*NARA*)is now saying the Traitor has NOT turned over all the records requested by that organization.
> 
> Regardless of the Traitor's claims, these documents do NOT belong to him.  They belong the United States Government.  There is no claim of Executive Priviledge, that Privilage remains with the current President and Mr. Biden has already stated that the Traitor no longer has that priviledge.  As President, Mr. Biden does have the authority to grant that priviledge to a former President and he has NOT done so.
> 
> Another sad attempt by the Traitor to control the message and it is failing


/———/


----------



## bravoactual

Cellblock2429 said:


> /———/
> View attachment 706912



As long it is Q-Publicans breaking the law, you Cons love it.


----------



## Cellblock2429

bravoactual said:


> As long it is Q-Publicans breaking the law, you Cons love it.


/——-/ Any fake outrage over your bad boys?


----------



## Catman51

bravoactual said:


> Now the 11th. Circuit Court has agreed to hear the DOJ's appeal, *SCOTUS* will have to wait the the lower court to rule.  Also, the *National Archives and Records Administration* (*NARA*)is now saying the Traitor has NOT turned over all the records requested by that organization.
> 
> Regardless of the Traitor's claims, these documents do NOT belong to him.  They belong the United States Government.  There is no claim of Executive Priviledge, that Privilage remains with the current President and Mr. Biden has already stated that the Traitor no longer has that priviledge.  As President, Mr. Biden does have the authority to grant that priviledge to a former President and he has NOT done so.
> 
> Another sad attempt by the Traitor to control the message and it is failing


Reality check for you...your "traitor" is actually the democrats and their desire for total power.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> Reality check for you...your "traitor" is actually the democrats and their desire for total power.


Traders use violence to try to take over the country. January 6th comes to mind. That wasn't the Democrats.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Traders use violence to try to take over the country. January 6th comes to mind. That wasn't the Democrats.


It was a setup by the democrats or the investigation would not be taking so long.  They have to get their lies just so.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> It was a setup by the democrats or the investigation would not be taking so long.  They have to get their lies just so.


LOL, I'm sure Pelosi wanted to be hung alongside Pence.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> LOL, I'm sure Pelosi wanted to be hung alongside Pence.


She may get half of her wish and be hung alone


----------



## Rust_Cohle

Stann said:


> Traders use violence to try to take over the country. January 6th comes to mind. That wasn't the Democrats.


Trader Joes tried to take over the country!?!? Certainly you meant "traitors" and that's you demonrats


----------



## Cellblock2429

Stann said:


> Traders use violence to try to take over the country. January 6th comes to mind. That wasn't the Democrats.


/———/ I’m a baseball card trader. And you? 
BWHAHAHAHA BWHAHAHAHA


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> She may get half of her wish and be hung alone


Not with those crazy trumers, they were all for blood. They drank the Kool-Aid trump spewed out at the White House and we're ready for war. Any hostages they would have captured would have surely been executed. Totally insane people just like their leader.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> Not with those crazy trumers, they were all for blood. They drank the Kool-Aid trump spewed out at the White House and we're ready for war. Any hostages they would have captured would have surely been executed. Totally insane people just like their leader.


Assuming your post is inundated with spelling errors, you’re suggesting that those ‘hostages’ would have accompanied their assailants back to their LaQuinta and Super 8 motel rooms after the ‘attack’.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Assuming your post is inundated with spelling errors, you’re suggesting that those ‘hostages’ would have accompanied their assailants back to their LaQuinta and Super 8 motel rooms after the ‘attack’.


They weren't about to take any hostages. Trump told them hang Mike pence. The gallows were built, I came with wrist restraints and all they needed was a hostage to put the hangman's noose around.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> They weren't about to take any hostages. Trump told them hang Mike pence. The gallows were built, I came with wrist restraints and all they needed was a hostage to put the hangman's noose around.


They came with wrist restraints. Thought I checked it all but this voice machine is terrible.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Not with those crazy trumers, they were all for blood. They drank the Kool-Aid trump spewed out at the White House and we're ready for war. Any hostages they would have captured would have surely been executed. Totally insane people just like their leader.


Typical TDS projection, all hate and no facts, just a bitterer imagination


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> They weren't about to take any hostages. Trump told them hang Mike pence. The gallows were built, I came with wrist restraints and all they needed was a hostage to put the hangman's noose around.


Change the channel and get some perspective. 
I’m sure any ‘gallows’ were meant in effigy and if any real ‘gallows’ were erected it was probably built by democrat operatives at the direction of Pelosi.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> Typical TDS projection, all hate and no facts, just a bitterer imagination


I know this trump derangement syndrome perfectly applies to trump supporters, they are insane.. leave it to trump and his supporters to make something up and try to turn it around calling other people deranged when they're the ones that are deranged.


RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Change the channel and get some perspective.
> I’m sure any ‘gallows’ were meant in effigy and if any real ‘gallows’ were erected it was probably built by democrat operatives at the direction of Pelosi.


Right, why the wrist restraints and the news then. Thank God those insane people didn't catch somebody.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> I know this trump derangement syndrome perfectly applies to trump supporters, they are insane.. leave it to trump and his supporters to make something up and try to turn it around calling other people deranged when they're the ones that are deranged.
> 
> Right, why the wrist restraints and the news then. Thank God those insane people didn't catch somebody.


WTF are you talking about? Didn’t you read my response? Your ilk are the deranged ones. Everything for you is about trump and nothing that’s good for America.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> WTF are you talking about? Didn’t you read my response? Your ilk are the deranged ones. Everything for you is about trump and nothing that’s good for America.


I'm telling you how ridiculous you are, trump derangement syndrome is more appropriate for defining you people than about people who oppose him for very good reasons.,


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> I'm telling you how ridiculous you are, trump derangement syndrome is more appropriate for defining you people than about people who oppose him for very good reasons.,


Tell us the good reasons to oppose him and I’ll give you reasons to support his policies. But they don’t have to be specifically trump’s policies. They could be any one’s policies as long as they’re those policies. That’s called being pro-American. You confuse that with being a _trumper._


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I'm telling you how ridiculous you are, trump derangement syndrome is more appropriate for defining you people than about people who oppose him for very good reasons.,


TDS is for those of you always looking to find hate for Trump.  What you refer to is Trump Support Syndrome (TSS) and it defeats your hated every time.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Tell us the good reasons to oppose him and I’ll give you reasons to support his policies. But they don’t have to be specifically trump’s policies. They could be any one’s policies as long as they’re those policies. That’s called being pro-American. You confuse that with being a _trumper._


There are a million different reasons. First and primary is he's a con man. Has been a crook his whole life. Republicans knew that when they nominated him but they did it anyway. He's a prolific liar. He was a very poor leader sending mixed messages about everything. Back to the line Park how do you trust or have. You don' integrity credibility all these things can are not possible with trump. Any good things half-assed hazardly. I could go on and on but you're going to deny all this s*** anyway that's what's wrong with you people. You have to accept the good with the bad whatever good there was to trump.. denying the truth serves no one well. In a world where Justice was absolute Trump wouldn't have a chance he'd be in prison.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> There are a million different reasons. First and primary is he's a con man. Has been a crook his whole life. Republicans knew that when they nominated him but they did it anyway. He's a prolific liar. He was a very poor leader sending mixed messages about everything. Back to the line Park how do you trust or have. You don' integrity credibility all these things can are not possible with trump. Any good things half-assed hazardly. I could go on and on but you're going to deny all this s*** anyway that's what's wrong with you people. You have to accept the good with the bad whatever good there was to trump.. denying the truth serves no one well. In a world where Justice was absolute Trump wouldn't have a chance he'd be in prison.


I just reread your post and in the beginning you placed a disclaimer on Trump himself you said you support his policies you didn't say anything about him and you're correct you know one in the right mind could support Trump. And his policies are very questionable in foreign relations and immigration especially. They didn't exist he simply went with his whims.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> There are a million different reasons. First and primary is he's a con man. Has been a crook his whole life. Republicans knew that when they nominated him but they did it anyway. He's a prolific liar. He was a very poor leader sending mixed messages about everything. Back to the line Park how do you trust or have. You don' integrity credibility all these things can are not possible with trump. Any good things half-assed hazardly. I could go on and on but you're going to deny all this s*** anyway that's what's wrong with you people. You have to accept the good with the bad whatever good there was to trump.. denying the truth serves no one well. In a world where Justice was absolute Trump wouldn't have a chance he'd be in prison.


Most of that is conjecture, opinion and personal.
You said nothing about policy.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Most of that is conjecture, opinion and personal.
> You said nothing about policy.


For 2 years diplomats were working out exit strategy in Afghanistan. Trump ignored that went ahead and dealt with the Taliban, excluding the legitimate Afghan government from the plans. In the end she gave them everything they wanted just so we could get out of Afghanistan with very little Carnage. He threw our allies to the wolves. Everything we achieved there was destroyed by his one act. And of course he set the date for early in Biden's administration. Normally exiting presidents start working with the incoming president in November so they could get a head start on their term in office and be up to speed on everything. trump didn't allow that to happen. That didn't help the situation either. Plus it was a setback for the covid response. He did the same thing in Syria. Throwing our allies the Kurds to the wayside and allowed the Russians to take our place. There are so many pathetic things he did it isn't funny, a lot of them were petty and egocentric. What else did you people expect. I could go on and on but again you're just going to deny this all.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> For 2 years diplomats were working out exit strategy in Afghanistan. Trump ignored that went ahead and dealt with the Taliban, excluding the legitimate Afghan government from the plans. In the end she gave them everything they wanted just so we could get out of Afghanistan with very little Carnage. He threw our allies to the wolves. Everything we achieved there was destroyed by his one act. And of course he set the date for early in Biden's administration. Normally exiting presidents start working with the incoming president in November so they could get a head start on their term in office and be up to speed on everything. trump didn't allow that to happen. That didn't help the situation either. Plus it was a setback for the covid response. He did the same thing in Syria. Throwing our allies the Kurds to the wayside and allowed the Russians to take our place. There are so many pathetic things he did it isn't funny, a lot of them were petty and egocentric. What else did you people expect. I could go on and on but again you're just going to deny this all.


Biden destroyed the afghan exit. What world do you live in? 
Trump’s action in Syria caught Russians with their pants down and sent a clear intimidating message to Putin.
Allies who support climate policy that hurts our economy are not allies.
You sound like a dem dupe.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Biden destroyed the afghan exit. What world do you live in?
> Trump’s action in Syria caught Russians with their pants down and sent a clear intimidating message to Putin.
> Allies who support climate policy that hurts our economy are not allies.
> You sound like a dem dupe.


I'm surprised more people weren't killed, Biden did the best she could with what trump left him which wasn't much at all. trump was the architect of that agreement and it wasn't a good one. I live in the real world I remember what went down and why it went down the way it did. I see you forget about the Kurds too. I guess you think like trump allies are only there to use and abuse. That doesn't work in the real world either.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> I'm surprised more people weren't killed, Biden did the best she could with what trump left him which wasn't much at all. trump was the architect of that agreement and it wasn't a good one. I live in the real world I remember what went down and why it went down the way it did. I see you forget about the Kurds too. I guess you think like trump allies are only there to use and abuse. That doesn't work in the real world either.


Are you insane? Biden botched that exit by himself.
Trump killed the bad guys and kept us safe. 
What is it about democrats that have such an aversion to prosperity and national security?


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> Are you insane? Biden botched that exit by himself.
> Trump killed the bad guys and kept us safe.
> What is it about democrats that have such an aversion to prosperity and national security?


One question, who had such a big ego that he ignored the US team that was working on an exit from Afghanistan for over 2 years, left the Afghan government out of the negotiations entirely, and struck a deal with the enemy Taliban for the US withdrawal out of Afghanistan ? Ask any expert how good a deal that was, it was the worst negotiation ever he gave them everything they wanted like the coward he is just so we could get out of there. Then you'll understand why Biden did the best he could and I'm not surprised that there's wasn't hundreds or thousands killed. The poor Afghani people believed in US and we abandoned them. Obama killed the worst of the worst of the bad guys. The military under Biden continues to kill the bad guys, which island is proud of but doesn't take credit for. Trump bragged that he killed bigger terrorists than Obama did. What a joke. Obama got bin laden. The Mastermind of 9/11. Obama made it clear that the US military achieved their goal and gave them the credit for it. Biden isn't even mentioned when the military gets  their terrorists now. That's how it should be, you don't take credits for things you didn't do. What a coward. The prosperity was eating up by the pandemic which trump totally mismanaged. So much for that. And when the tax credit for the middle class run out and the rich keep still keep getting theirs, the American people will finally realize what a bad deal they got. A pig in a poke from a pig.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> One question, who had such a big ego that he ignored the US team that was working on an exit from Afghanistan for over 2 years, left the Afghan government out of the negotiations entirely, and struck a deal with the enemy Taliban for the US withdrawal out of Afghanistan ? Ask any expert how good a deal that was, it was the worst negotiation ever he gave them everything they wanted like the coward he is just so we could get out of there. Then you'll understand why Biden did the best he could and I'm not surprised that there's wasn't hundreds or thousands killed. The poor Afghani people believed in US and we abandoned them. Obama killed the worst of the worst of the bad guys. The military under Biden continues to kill the bad guys, which island is proud of but doesn't take credit for. Trump bragged that he killed bigger terrorists than Obama did. What a joke. Obama got bin laden. The Mastermind of 9/11. Obama made it clear that the US military achieved their goal and gave them the credit for it. Biden isn't even mentioned when the military gets  their terrorists now. That's how it should be, you don't take credits for things you didn't do. What a coward. The prosperity was eating up by the pandemic which trump totally mismanaged. So much for that. And when the tax credit for the middle class run out and the rich keep still keep getting theirs, the American people will finally realize what a bad deal they got. A pig in a poke from a pig.


You’re obsessed with trump and deflect your obsession onto Americans who appreciated his policies. 
This admin completely bungled the afghan exit. No excuses.
Any tax credits or increases are nothing compared to the increased costs for all goods due to democrat AGW energy policy and excessive money-printing by democrats during the virus incident. My taxes were lower during trump.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> You’re obsessed with trump and deflect your obsession onto Americans who appreciated his policies.
> This admin completely bungled the afghan exit. No excuses.
> Any tax credits or increases are nothing compared to the increased costs for all goods due to democrat AGW energy policy and excessive money-printing by democrats during the virus incident. My taxes were lower during trump.


I'd say you're obsessed with trump, you're the one who tries to promote him despite all the problems we've had with him.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> I'd say you're obsessed with trump, you're the one who tries to promote him despite all the problems we've had with him.


I continue to point to his _policies_ and you obsess with him _personally_. Shoe on the wrong foot.


----------



## Stann

RoshawnMarkwees said:


> I continue to point to his _policies_ and you obsess with him _personally_. Shoe on the wrong foot.


Your people are crazy you can't support someone like that. Policies can be carried on by anyone you wish but do you really want such a horrible example of a human being as the leader of your party. I would hope not.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I'd say you're obsessed with trump, you're the one who tries to promote him despite all the problems we've had with him.


Amazing how it is only you who seem to have problems with Trump, while most others do not.  Hate and jealousy are your two defining traits.  Knowledge is not one of your traits at all.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Your people are crazy you can't support someone like that. Policies can be carried on by anyone you wish but do you really want such a horrible example of a human being as the leader of your party. I would hope not.


Yes we do and we want haters such as you expelled from our country.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> One question, who had such a big ego that he ignored the US team that was working on an exit from Afghanistan for over 2 years, left the Afghan government out of the negotiations entirely, and struck a deal with the enemy Taliban for the US withdrawal out of Afghanistan ? Ask any expert how good a deal that was, it was the worst negotiation ever he gave them everything they wanted like the coward he is just so we could get out of there. Then you'll understand why Biden did the best he could and I'm not surprised that there's wasn't hundreds or thousands killed. The poor Afghani people believed in US and we abandoned them. Obama killed the worst of the worst of the bad guys. The military under Biden continues to kill the bad guys, which island is proud of but doesn't take credit for. Trump bragged that he killed bigger terrorists than Obama did. What a joke. Obama got bin laden. The Mastermind of 9/11. Obama made it clear that the US military achieved their goal and gave them the credit for it. Biden isn't even mentioned when the military gets  their terrorists now. That's how it should be, you don't take credits for things you didn't do. What a coward. The prosperity was eating up by the pandemic which trump totally mismanaged. So much for that. And when the tax credit for the middle class run out and the rich keep still keep getting theirs, the American people will finally realize what a bad deal they got. A pig in a poke from a pig.


You know what they say about opinions and assholes?  You are both and worthless in any case.


----------



## RoshawnMarkwees

Stann said:


> Your people are crazy you can't support someone like that. Policies can be carried on by anyone you wish but do you really want such a horrible example of a human being as the leader of your party. I would hope not.


You just underscored my post.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> Amazing how it is only you who seem to have problems with Trump, while most others do not.  Hate and jealousy are your two defining traits.  Knowledge is not one of your traits at all.


I don't hate Trump and I'm definitely not jealous of him. Those are emotions that belong to very sad people.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I don't hate Trump and I'm definitely not jealous of him. Those are emotions that belong to very sad people.


You just admitted to what I said about you, a very sad person.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> You just admitted to what I said about you, a very sad person.


That would be you.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> That would be you.


And even more projection.  Seek help, loser.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> And even more projection.  Seek help, loser.


LOL, again with the derogatory statements. Good luck with that, you're going to need it.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> LOL, again with the derogatory statements. Good luck with that, you're going to need it.


Just following your lead.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> Just following your lead.


I seldom initiate personal attacks with derogatory terms. Unfortunately I sometimes do it in response to the attacks. At any rate it's all counterproductive. Try to have a good day I plan on it. Goodbye.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I seldom initiate personal attacks with derogatory terms. Unfortunately I sometimes do it in response to the attacks. At any rate it's all counterproductive. Try to have a good day I plan on it. Goodbye.


If you had even one active brain cell, you would gain more respect from all who view your posts.

Since you don't have one, you get no respect for all of you lies and false statements.

Keep it up and continue to bury yourself since that appears to be your goal.

BTW, typical of the coward who finds that he cannot defend his statements, cut and run.  Feeble.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> If you had even one active brain cell, you would gain more respect from all who view your posts.
> 
> Since you don't have one, you get no respect for all of you lies and false statements.
> 
> Keep it up and continue to bury yourself since that appears to be your goal.


Have it your way I'm done talking to you you're just some kind of idiot. You think I respect you calling me names all the time you're a joke a bad one.


----------



## Delldude

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.


I believe those cover sheets were empty and caused alarm among the FBI as to where the contents might be.
Actually, I think having a couple of them would be kick ass conversation pieces.
I don't think having marked, empty, classified document cover sheets is a violation of anything....except in progressive la la land.


----------



## Stann

skews13 said:


> Among the most incriminating details in the government filing is a photograph, showing a number of files labeled “Top Secret” with bright red or yellow cover sheets, spread out over a carpet. Those files were found inside a container in Trump’s office, according to the court filing. A close examination of one of the cover sheets in the photo shows a marking for “HCS,” a government acronym for systems used to protect intelligence gathered from secret human sources.
> 
> 
> The 36-page filing also reveals, for the first time, the text of a written assurance given to the Justice Department by Trump’s “custodian of records” on June 3. It says Trump’s team had done a thorough search for any classified material in response to a subpoena and had turned over any relevant documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Trump team may have hidden, moved classified papers, Justice Dept. says — The Washington Post
> 
> 
> In response to the Justice Department filing, lawyers for Donald Trump say prosecutors “significantly mischaracterized” some of their interactions with Trump’s representatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> apple.news


The far right idiots on here will downplay this just like Trump downplayed covid. We all know how well that went.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> The far right idiots on here will downplay this just like* Trump downplayed covid.* We all know how well that went.


Wonder where Trump was getting His advice on Covid?


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Wonder where Trump was getting His advice on Covid?


And Trump really listen to anyone's advice. Of course not, the problem was that he sent mixed messages on the issue and made it political instead of sticking with the science.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> And Trump really listen to anyone's advice. Of course not, the problem was that he sent mixed messages on the issue and made it political instead of sticking with the science.


Nice try, Stann. He followed his covid advisors advice.
The media and the left were hell bent for leather to use the pandemic to get Trump...which the left no stone unturned in doing so, making it a political pandemic.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Have it your way I'm done talking to you you're just some kind of idiot. You think I respect you calling me names all the time you're a joke a bad one.


So you prove yourself to be a liar in addition to all your other faults.

You said you were done with me, yet respond almost immediately, confirming everything that has been said about you.  You truly are feeble in addition to being stupid.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> The far right idiots on here will downplay this just like Trump downplayed covid. We all know how well that went.


In other words, you have no response to being shown to be a hater and a liar.  Got it.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> And Trump really listen to anyone's advice. Of course not, the problem was that he sent mixed messages on the issue and made it political instead of sticking with the science.


This so called "science" changed rapidly to other messages and has since proven to be false. Purely political and only idiots such as yourself believed it at the time and since.

Just for once, provide proof for any of your claims.  I will wait.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Nice try, Stann. He followed his covid advisors advice.
> The media and the left were hell bent for leather to use the pandemic to get Trump...which the left no stone unturned in doing so, making it a political pandemic.


I guess you missed all the news clips when he doubted their intelligence and said he was more intelligent about it. I know more than the experts do. I specifically remember him saying that. So much for your side of the argument. This isn't controversial you could look at all up.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I guess you missed all the news clips when he doubted their intelligence and said he was more intelligent about it. I know more than the experts do. I specifically remember him saying that. So much for your side of the argument. This isn't controversial you could look at all up.


You could also look it up and post it yet fail to do so.  Perhaps because it is a further lie from you.  That seems to be your fallback position.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> You could also look it up and post it yet fail to do so.  Perhaps because it is a further lie from you.  That seems to be your fallback position.


That's just it, every time I provide proof you guys ignore it so what the f*** is the use talking to people like you. I'm wasting my time goodbye.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> That's just it, every time I provide proof you guys ignore it so what the f*** is the use talking to people like you. I'm wasting my time goodbye.


And another lie, claiming to say goodbye.

You have provided zero proof, just your lying claims and assumptions that no one is willing to listen to or back up.

In other words, your hateful imagination is at work and you just can't stand that no one believes your lying claims.  As usual.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> And another lie, claiming to say goodbye.
> 
> You have provided zero proof, just your lying claims and assumptions that no one is willing to listen to or back up.
> 
> In other words, your hateful imagination is at work and you just can't stand that no one believes your lying claims.  As usual.


History already has recorded him as one of the worst Presidents ever. You believe whatever you want. I do not lie like trump does. And if you think trump isn't a liar after all he's put the country through, that's a recorded fact also.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> History already has recorded him as one of the worst Presidents ever. You believe whatever you want. I do not lie like trump does. And if you think trump isn't a liar after all he's put the country through, that's a recorded fact also.


And yet again you reply after saying that you would not, making you a further liar.

It has not been recorded, except by those morons who refuse to see the truth, that he is what you claim.  You, on the other hand continue to provide proof that you constantly lie and lie to yourself about lying.  You truly are pathetic and a liar first class, almost as big of a liar as Biden.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> And yet again you reply after saying that you would not, making you a further liar.
> 
> It has not been recorded, except by those morons who refuse to see the truth, that he is what you claim.  You, on the other hand continue to provide proof that you constantly lie and lie to yourself about lying.  You truly are pathetic and a liar first class, almost as big of a liar as Biden.


Your post keeps showing up on my phone stop replying and I'll stop replying too it's as simple as that I'm tired of this nonsense you're promoting.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Your post keeps showing up on my phone stop replying and I'll stop replying too it's as simple as that I'm tired of this nonsense you're promoting.


You are the one who said he was done, yet apparently you are not.  You continue to reply, even though it is with further lies, when all you have to do to stop the beatings is not respond.  And you seem incapable of doing even that simple thing correctly.  You truly are stupid.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> You are the one who said he was done, yet apparently you are not.  You continue to reply, even though it is with further lies, when all you have to do to stop the beatings is not respond.  And you seem incapable of doing even that simple thing correctly.  You truly are stupid.


No response required.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> No response required.


Yet you respond.  Classic stupid.


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> Yet you respond.  Classic stupid.


I wasn't sure, but you have confirmed it for me. You are a nasty troll willing to do anything to get your jollies off. This will be my final response to you, I'm sick of your games. I don't play well with idiots. Goodbye. I'm even going to put you on ignore so you won't show up anymore, thank God.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I wasn't sure, but you have confirmed it for me. You are a nasty troll willing to do anything to get your jollies off. This will be my final response to you, I'm sick of your games. I don't play well with idiots. Goodbye. I'm even going to put you on ignore so you won't show up anymore, thank God.


Put me on ignore, if you can figure out how.  You will continue to look at what I post because you are a masochist and just can't help yourself.  A lying idiot to the last who just can't stand that anyone challenges and defeats him on his every lie.

Additionally, you could have just stopped responding and limited the continual beatings you have taken but your ego is much to huge for that to occur to you.

I know that you will be watching, so up yours.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> I guess you missed all the news clips when he doubted their intelligence and said he was more intelligent about it. I know more than the experts do. I specifically remember him saying that. So much for your side of the argument. This isn't controversial you could look at all up.


I never saw anything you are claiming, I think you are making things up again.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> I never saw anything you are claiming, I think you are making things up again.


Thanks for the laugh. So you're deaf, dumb and blind. Sorry to be you.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Thanks for the laugh. So you're deaf, dumb and blind. Sorry to be you.


Or, sorry for you being caught in an additional lie.  Just as you always do.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> Thanks for the laugh. So you're deaf, dumb and blind. Sorry to be you.





Delldude said:


> I never saw anything you are claiming, I think you are making things up again.


And you can't back up your claims, again.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> And you can't back up your claims, again.


abcnews go.com>as Trump sends mixed messages on coronavirus, some loyal ... July 14th.,2020.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> abcnews go.com>as Trump sends mixed messages on coronavirus, some loyal ... July 14th.,2020


You originally claimed He said He knows more than FBI, CDC, etc......that does not support your original claim.......

Your 'link' does offer some interesting points, though:

_Since the early days of the virus, the president has repeatedly downplayed its impact, promised it would "disappear," incorrectly compared it to the seasonal flu multiple times and bucked wearing a mask until months into the pandemic, even mocking political opponents who did wear them._

You are aware of what Dr Fauci said in January 2020, aren't you?

_"They definitely take their sense of what is right and what is wrong, what is true and what is fake, from the president himself," Kruse told ABC News. "I think the mixed signals the president has given on the severity of the crisis, on the reliability of medical authorities, including his own CDC and Dr. Fauci, and the efficacy of wearing masks, has all been called into question in their mind because the president has cast so much doubt on them."_

Dr Fauci told us masks weren't needed, then a year or so later admitted he lied, to save masks for HC workers. 

There are many instances of the WH, CDC, WHO and Fauci saying different things daily, so it isn't all Trump.

Then you had Pelosi out parading in Chinatown, Schumer and the NY Health head urging people to go to the gay day festivities, St Patrick's Day parades and so on in mid March 2020. But it's all Trump.

Don't forget, when this virus was spooling up to speed, your party was obsessed with impeaching Trump and not focusing on protecting America from Covid-19.

CDC, Fauci, Birx have all been exposed for lying to the American people, during the pandemic. If they were lying to us, they surely were lying to Trump.

A president is only as good as His advisors.

Don't you know how to post a link to an article?


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> You originally claimed He said He knows more than FBI, CDC, etc......that does not support your original claim.......
> 
> Your 'link' does offer some interesting points, though:
> 
> _Since the early days of the virus, the president has repeatedly downplayed its impact, promised it would "disappear," incorrectly compared it to the seasonal flu multiple times and bucked wearing a mask until months into the pandemic, even mocking political opponents who did wear them._
> 
> You are aware of what Dr Fauci said in January 2020, aren't you?
> 
> _"They definitely take their sense of what is right and what is wrong, what is true and what is fake, from the president himself," Kruse told ABC News. "I think the mixed signals the president has given on the severity of the crisis, on the reliability of medical authorities, including his own CDC and Dr. Fauci, and the efficacy of wearing masks, has all been called into question in their mind because the president has cast so much doubt on them."_
> 
> Dr Fauci told us masks weren't needed, then a year or so later admitted he lied, to save masks for HC workers.
> 
> There are many instances of the WH, CDC, WHO and Fauci saying different things daily, so it isn't all Trump.
> 
> Then you had Pelosi out parading in Chinatown, Schumer and the NY Health head urging people to go to the gay day festivities, St Patrick's Day parades and so on in mid March 2020. But it's all Trump.
> 
> Don't forget, when this virus was spooling up to speed, your party was obsessed with impeaching Trump and not focusing on protecting America from Covid-19.
> 
> CDC, Fauci, Birx have all been exposed for lying to the American people, during the pandemic. If they were lying to us, they surely were lying to Trump.
> 
> A president is only as good as His advisors.
> 
> Don't you know how to post a link to an article?


www.nytimes.com " Don't be afraid of Covid. " trump says hindering public health experts. October 8th., 2020. An answer to your last question I do not know how to post a link I printed out and hope for the best. I keep meaning to ask one of the girls at work how to do it but then I get to work and I'm so busy never think about it again. We're always short-handed. Been a nurse for over 50 years and it's always been like that. But it's good honest work.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> www.nytimes.com " Don't be afraid of Covid. " trump says hindering public health experts. October 8th., 2020. An answer to your last question I do not know how to post a link I printed out and hope for the best. I keep meaning to ask one of the girls at work how to do it but then I get to work and I'm so busy never think about it again. We're always short-handed. Been a nurse for over 50 years and it's always been like that. But it's good honest work.


Those the same public health experts that are now admitting the vax didn't work as advertised?
Trump was right......there was nothing to be afraid of. No different than seasonal flu infections. You take actions to minimize your exposure......

Go click the 'reply' button, see that thingy at the top that looks like a chain?





Open it up, go to your favorite url link, copy and paste into the box for a URL.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> Those the same public health experts that are now admitting the vax didn't work as advertised?
> Trump was right......there was nothing to be afraid of. No different than seasonal flu infections. You take actions to minimize your exposure......
> 
> Go click the 'reply' button, see that thingy at the top that looks like a chain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Open it up, go to your favorite url link, copy and paste into the box for a URL.


I can't believe the garbage are hearing from your far-right sources. See if that makes your life any better. It won't, they aren't adding anything to our culture there just trying to tear it down.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I can't believe the garbage are hearing from your far-right sources. See if that makes your life any better. It won't, they aren't adding anything to our culture there just trying to tear it down.


Pissed off because you thought that was your job?


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> I can't believe the garbage are hearing from your far-right sources. See if that makes your life any better. It won't, they aren't adding anything to our culture there just trying to tear it down.


The 'garbage' from those sources were censored during the pandemic, now, in many cases, what they were reporting was true.

You are the one, as many others here do too, who buy everything put out in media as the gospel.

Hate to tell ya, you been had, in many cases.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> The 'garbage' from those sources were censored during the pandemic, now, in many cases, what they were reporting was true.
> 
> You are the one, as many others here do too, who buy everything put out in media as the gospel.
> 
> Hate to tell ya, you been had, in many cases.


Trump demanded a warp speed vaccine. Traditional vaccines take 10 to 15 years to develop. That's why they had no choice but to choose a non-traditional method. It's still quite effective, but no cure; and with all medications of course there are side effects. Minimal in this case.


----------



## Batcat

Stann said:


> Not with those crazy trumers, they were all for blood. They drank the Kool-Aid trump spewed out at the White House and we're ready for war. Any hostages they would have captured would have surely been executed. Totally insane people just like their leader.


If they were so determined and dangerous why did they not bring firearms?

Let me assure you Trump supporters have plenty of firearms and ammo.

Be aware I support PEACEFUL demonstrations but not riots. However to say the Trump supporters were ready for war but were unarmed is silly at the best.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> Trump demanded a warp speed vaccine. Traditional vaccines take 10 to 15 years to develop. That's why they had no choice but to choose a non-traditional method. It's still quite effective, but no cure; and with all medications of course there are side effects. Minimal in this case.


That nontraditional method has been used quite often previously.
Try 5-10 years.
Data is now coming out since the pandemic and it doesn't provide a reassuring picture. Don't forget, you were lied to by our healthcare professionals, who also lied to Trump.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> That nontraditional method has been used quite often previously.
> Try 5-10 years.
> Data is now coming out since the pandemic and it doesn't provide a reassuring picture. Don't forget, you were lied to by our healthcare professionals, who also lied to Trump.


I think you've got that turned around, Trump is the one who told all the lies and mistress about the vaccine.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> I think you've got that turned around, Trump is the one who told all the lies and mistress about the vaccine.


He got His info from the Covid Task Farce.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> He got His info from the Covid Task Farce.


Which as we all know he largely ignored. He said over and over again on all types of subjects that he knows more. You can delude yourself if you wish but you're not going to delude me into thinking trump did any good combating the covid pandemic.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> Which as we all know he largely ignored. *He said over and over again on all types of subjects that he knows more*. You can delude yourself if you wish but you're not going to delude me* into thinking trump did any good combating the covid pandemic.*


That is not what He said.
He got the vaccine into development.


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> That is not what He said.
> He got the vaccine into development.


Yes you did get the " novel " vaccine interdevelopment and all you guys do is complain about it ever since.


----------



## Delldude

Stann said:


> Yes you did get the " novel " vaccine interdevelopment and all you guys do is complain about it ever since.


'Novel' defines a group of coronaviruses.....










						OB/GYN laments COVID jab’s ‘massive,’ ‘unprecedented’ side effects for pregnant women, babies - LifeSite
					

Adverse events for expectant mothers and developing children are 'way off the charts.'




					www.lifesitenews.com


----------



## Stann

Delldude said:


> 'Novel' defines a group of coronaviruses.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OB/GYN laments COVID jab’s ‘massive,’ ‘unprecedented’ side effects for pregnant women, babies - LifeSite
> 
> 
> Adverse events for expectant mothers and developing children are 'way off the charts.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lifesitenews.com


Fortunately most pregnant women took the jab. That reduced the death toll among that group.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Fortunately most pregnant women took the jab. That reduced the death toll among that group.


Isn't it strange how this idiot makes up stuff to support his lies?


----------



## Catman51

Delldude said:


> 'Novel' defines a group of coronaviruses.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OB/GYN laments COVID jab’s ‘massive,’ ‘unprecedented’ side effects for pregnant women, babies - LifeSite
> 
> 
> Adverse events for expectant mothers and developing children are 'way off the charts.'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lifesitenews.com


You need to call out all of the lies this idiot provides as facts and claims "everyone" knows it.  Yet he never provides any proof that he has talked with "everyone", just goes on making stuff up.


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> If they were so determined and dangerous why did they not bring firearms?
> 
> Let me assure you Trump supporters have plenty of firearms and ammo.
> 
> Be aware I support PEACEFUL demonstrations but not riots. However to say the Trump supporters were ready for war but were unarmed is silly at the best.



Some did.


----------



## Stann

Faun said:


> Some did.


Plus they had a huge stash of weapons just across the river waiting to be used if needed. The Capitol Police practiced unbelievable restraint when faced with against these terrible odds. If they had just shot them all down as they tried to enter the Capitol I'm sure all those other weapons would have came into play. Common sense was practiced by the Capitol Police.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> Some did.


True. At least 13 people were armed. Three were arrested  the night before the riot and one individual had two hi-cap magazines but apparently no pistol. 

I find it hard to beleive that 13 armed individuals could have overthrown the government of the United States. 









						A Running List of Gun Arrests Tied to the U.S. Capitol Attack
					

Civilians didn't open fire on January 6, but that doesn’t mean the Trump supporters who congregated at the Capitol weren’t armed.




					www.thetrace.org
				




_The January 6 insurrection wasn’t explicitly billed as a Second Amendment event. But the specter of guns was everywhere: on the flags flown by rioters, in the insurrectionist theory they espoused, and the tactical gear they donned. And in some cases, despite Washington, D.C.’s unusually strict gun laws, which require firearms to be registered with local police, the Trump supporters who gathered at the U.S. Capitol were armed.

As of now, at least 13 people have been hit with illegal gun possession charges stemming from the riot, according to an analysis of arrest recordsand court documents. Two of them were detained after police noticed a bulge under their clothing. Three people were arrested the night before the riot. Another person, Proud Boys’ leader Enrique Tarrio, was found in possession of two large-capacity magazines when police arrested him for another crime on January 4. Because Tarrio planned on going to the rally, we included him in our tally.

****************

However to be fair you have to understand the Washington Metropolitan Police Department recovers illegal handguns everyday. 

https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/mpd’s-weekly-firearm-recoveries-may-24-2021-may-31-2021_


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> True. At least 13 people were armed. Three were arrested  the night before the riot and one individual had two hi-cap magazines but apparently no pistol.
> 
> I find it hard to beleive that 13 armed individuals could have overthrown the government of the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A Running List of Gun Arrests Tied to the U.S. Capitol Attack
> 
> 
> Civilians didn't open fire on January 6, but that doesn’t mean the Trump supporters who congregated at the Capitol weren’t armed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thetrace.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _The January 6 insurrection wasn’t explicitly billed as a Second Amendment event. But the specter of guns was everywhere: on the flags flown by rioters, in the insurrectionist theory they espoused, and the tactical gear they donned. And in some cases, despite Washington, D.C.’s unusually strict gun laws, which require firearms to be registered with local police, the Trump supporters who gathered at the U.S. Capitol were armed.
> 
> As of now, at least 13 people have been hit with illegal gun possession charges stemming from the riot, according to an analysis of arrest recordsand court documents. Two of them were detained after police noticed a bulge under their clothing. Three people were arrested the night before the riot. Another person, Proud Boys’ leader Enrique Tarrio, was found in possession of two large-capacity magazines when police arrested him for another crime on January 4. Because Tarrio planned on going to the rally, we included him in our tally.
> 
> ****************
> 
> However to be fair you have to understand the Washington Metropolitan Police Department recovers illegal handguns everyday.
> 
> https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/mpd’s-weekly-firearm-recoveries-may-24-2021-may-31-2021_



It wasn't the weapons that gave them the ability to overthrow the government. It was the sheer size of the crowd. Fortunately, only about a thousand actually went inside the Capitol. Had that mob surrounding it also stormed in, there's nothing police could have done. As it was, police struggled with just the ones who did go in or tried to go in.


----------



## Batcat

Stann said:


> Plus they had a huge stash of weapons just across the river waiting to be used if needed. The Capitol Police practiced unbelievable restraint when faced with against these terrible odds. If they had just shot them all down as they tried to enter the Capitol I'm sure all those other weapons would have came into play. Common sense was practiced by the Capitol Police.


You are referring to people who knew it was illegal to carry firearms in Washington D.C. but had weapons with them. They just left them in Virginia where carrying firearms is not illegal. 



			https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/ccw_reciprocity_map/va-gun-laws/
		


***snip***
_
Summary of Virginia Gun Laws​Virginia is a shall-issue state. For residents, applications are filed with the circuit court in their county of residence, and non-residents must mail their application to the State Police.

There is no permit or firearms registration required when buying a handgun from a private individual, provided the buyer and seller are both Virginia residents. However, based on SB70/HB2 being signed into law, as of July 1, 2020, all sales are required to be completed through a dealer who must submit a background check. Additionally, a one handgun per month purchase restriction is now in effect, although concealed carry permit holders are exempt.

Open carry is legal in Virginia without a permit for anyone who is at least 18 years old who can legally possess a firearm. However,  Localities, such as Alexandria and Newport News may ban the open carry of firearms in public buildings, parks and at special events.

Concealed carry is legal for residents with a Virginia Concealed Handgun Permit (CHP) and non-residents with any valid state license/permit. Virginia CHPs are issued to both residents and non-residents at least 21 years old and require a state-approved firearms training course and demonstrated competence with the firearm. Some areas are off-limits, including airport terminals and places of worship during services. In addition, municipalities may ban guns in government buildings and areas such as public parks, recreation or community centers, and outdoor areas being used during permitted events. In terms of reciprocity, Virginia honors all out-of-state concealed carry permits._


----------



## Stann

Faun said:


> It wasn't the weapons that gave them the ability to overthrow the government. It was the sheer size of the crowd. Fortunately, only about a thousand actually went inside the Capitol. Had that mob surrounding it also stormed in, there's nothing police could have done. As it was, police struggled with just the ones who did go in or tried to go in.


And since they didn't bring that stash of weapons with them that was the plan all along just to simply overwhelmed the police and force their way into the Capitol. If these were foreign enemies they would have been shot down but since they were misguided Americans, they were treated much nicer.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Trump demanded a warp speed vaccine. Traditional vaccines take 10 to 15 years to develop. That's why they had no choice but to choose a non-traditional method. It's still quite effective, but no cure; and with all medications of course there are side effects. Minimal in this case.


Some side effects have caused death.


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> Some side effects have caused death.


All medicines have side effects, study still show you're much better off to get the vaccine rather than risk getting the disease and getting sick, hospitalized and or dying from it. The side effects are within reasonable limits.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> It wasn't the weapons that gave them the ability to overthrow the government. It was the sheer size of the crowd. Fortunately, only about a thousand actually went inside the Capitol. Had that mob surrounding it also stormed in, there's nothing police could have done. As it was, police struggled with just the ones who did go in or tried to go in.


The police were armed. If there had been a actual threat the Capitol would fall to the rioters the police could have opened fire and held off the rioters until the National Guard arrived. 

There was no need to employ lethal force against the rioters as there was no chance they would take over the building. 

In passing Trump had authorized National Guard troops to protect the Capitol days before the riot. 









						Capitol Police Jan. 6 timeline exonerates Trump, says Pentagon offered National Guard four days prior
					

Despite former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund's request, the sergeants at arms in both the House and Senate, as well as DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, all turned down Trump's offer of the National Guard to enhance Capitol security




					www.lawenforcementtoday.com


----------



## Faun

Blaster said:


> Some side effects have caused death.



How many?


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> The police were armed. If there had been a actual threat the Capitol would fall to the rioters the police could have opened fire and held off the rioters until the National Guard arrived.
> 
> There was no need to employ lethal force against the rioters as there was no chance they would take over the building.
> 
> In passing Trump had authorized National Guard troops to protect the Capitol days before the riot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Police Jan. 6 timeline exonerates Trump, says Pentagon offered National Guard four days prior
> 
> 
> Despite former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund's request, the sergeants at arms in both the House and Senate, as well as DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, all turned down Trump's offer of the National Guard to enhance Capitol security
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lawenforcementtoday.com



Um, police did have to resort to lethal force at one point to keep the mob at bay. Rightards have been screaming, "murder!" ever since.


----------



## Stann

Batcat said:


> The police were armed. If there had been a actual threat the Capitol would fall to the rioters the police could have opened fire and held off the rioters until the National Guard arrived.
> 
> There was no need to employ lethal force against the rioters as there was no chance they would take over the building.
> 
> In passing Trump had authorized National Guard troops to protect the Capitol days before the riot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Capitol Police Jan. 6 timeline exonerates Trump, says Pentagon offered National Guard four days prior
> 
> 
> Despite former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund's request, the sergeants at arms in both the House and Senate, as well as DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, all turned down Trump's offer of the National Guard to enhance Capitol security
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lawenforcementtoday.com


Lethal force was deemed warranted and acceptable when the mob attempted to break into the chamber where political officials were still present. Simple rioters don't usually chant death threats. That's something terrorists do.


----------



## Blaster

Stann said:


> Lethal force was deemed warranted and acceptable when the mob attempted to break into the chamber where political officials were still present. Simple rioters don't usually chant death threats. That's something terrorists do.


Why do you hate America?


----------



## Stann

Blaster said:


> Why do you hate America?


If you're trying to defend the people that desecrated our Capitol, you are the one who hates America.


----------



## Batcat

Stann said:


> Lethal force was deemed warranted and acceptable when the mob attempted to break into the chamber where political officials were still present. Simple rioters don't usually chant death threats. That's something terrorists do.


I have no problem with the Capitol Police using lethal force to stop rioters from taking over the Capitol and killing our elected representatives. The fact lethal force was not used by most officers shows that the rioters never reached the stage where it was necessary. 

The one time lethal force was used was to shoot and kill an unarmed woman. Opinions vary on if the shooting was justified. 









						Evaluating the Police Shooting of Ashli Babbitt
					

A parsing of the legal issues at play in the police shooting in the Capitol on Jan. 6.




					www.lawfareblog.com
				












						Babbitt shooting internal police docs reveal 'no good reason for shooting,' according to Judicial Watch
					

Judicial Watch received 532 pages of documents from the DC Metropolitan Police concerning the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol on Jan. 6.




					www.foxnews.com
				




As I have noted before I am in favor of peaceful demonstrations but not riots.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> Um, police did have to resort to lethal force at one point to keep the mob at bay. Rightards have been screaming, "murder!" ever since.


The Ashley Babbit shooting is debatable. Both sides have valid pints to make. 









						Babbitt shooting internal police docs reveal 'no good reason for shooting,' according to Judicial Watch
					

Judicial Watch received 532 pages of documents from the DC Metropolitan Police concerning the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol on Jan. 6.




					www.foxnews.com
				












						Evaluating the Police Shooting of Ashli Babbitt
					

A parsing of the legal issues at play in the police shooting in the Capitol on Jan. 6.




					www.lawfareblog.com


----------



## elektra

Golfing Gator said:


> I love how many on the right were all it an utter disgrace for Hillary to have classified documents and wipe over 30,000 of unknown off an unsecured server. But suddenly they are it is an perfectly fine for Trump to have classified documents.
> The hypocrisy is just completely astonishing


The President is much different than the subordinates, such as the Secretary of state.

One could say the President is the boss of the executive branch and thus has power and priviledge nobody else in the executive branch has


----------



## Golfing Gator

elektra said:


> The President is much different than the subordinates, such as the Secretary of state.
> 
> One could say the President is the boss of the executive branch and thus has power and priviledge nobody else in the executive branch has



There is an old saying that goes just because one can, does not mean one should.


----------



## Stann

elektra said:


> The President is much different than the subordinates, such as the Secretary of state.
> 
> One could say the President is the boss of the executive branch and thus has power and priviledge nobody else in the executive branch has


Unfortunately he took those documents on January 20th., 2021. He was no longer president. Biden was.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Lethal force was deemed warranted and acceptable when the mob attempted to break into the chamber where political officials were still present. Simple rioters don't usually chant death threats. That's something terrorists do.


You should really change your screen name to Stain as that is what you do to intelligent thought.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> There is an old saying that goes just because one can, does not mean one should.


Does that apply to you and your responses?


----------



## elektra

Stann said:


> Unfortunately he took those documents on January 20th., 2021. He was no longer president. Biden was.


He is entitled, by law. All presidents take documents.


----------



## elektra

Golfing Gator said:


> There is an old saying that goes just because one can, does not mean one should.


There is also a thing called dirty corrupt democrats.


----------



## Stann

elektra said:


> He is entitled, by law. All presidents take documents.


LOL, yes you're correct presidents do take documents. They take documents that will show their achievements during their administration. These are accolades which will end up in the library dedicated to that president. They are declassified documents, like signed bills that they got to pass. They are not top secret or secret documents.


----------



## elektra

Stann said:


> LOL, yes you're correct presidents do take documents. They take documents that will show their achievements during their administration. These are accolades which will end up in the library dedicated to that president. They are declassified documents, like signed bills that they got to pass. They are not top secret or secret documents.


How do you know they are not classified?


----------



## Stann

elektra said:


> How do you know they are not classified?


There are several levels of classification with government documents. Basically all documents are classified. I never said classified documents I said top secret and secret documents. I  sorry you have a comprehension problem.


----------



## BackAgain

Thread headline is wrong. What a surprise.


----------



## elektra

Stann said:


> Unfortunately he took those documents on January 20th., 2021. He was no longer president. Biden was.


Trump was still president, on the 20th


----------



## Stann

elektra said:


> Trump was still president, on the 20th


That is the day Biden was inaugurated he was not president. What kind of idiot are you.


----------



## elektra

Stann said:


> There are several levels of classification with government documents. Basically all documents are classified. I never said classified documents I said top secret and secret documents. I  sorry you have a comprehension problem.


I am also very sorry you are a dick. How do you know there were no secret or top secret documents taken?


----------



## elektra

Stann said:


> That is the day Biden was inaugurated he was not president. What kind of idiot are you.


Biden was presudent before or after the inaugueation? 

I am the kind of idiot that asks tough questions in which, if you answer them it proves you wrong


----------



## Stann

elektra said:


> I am also very sorry you are a dick. How do you know there were no secret or top secret documents taken?


In every case with past presidents, Obama, Carter bushes and Clinton. They all worked with the national archives and declassified any information that was classified at a high level. Very little if any. I don't know the specifics but you can read about it and learn.https://www.crsreports.congress.gov...PDF the protection of classified information: the legal framework October 31st, 2029.


----------



## Golfing Gator

elektra said:


> There is also a thing called dirty corrupt democrats.



Which is just about most of them.

There is also a thing called dirty corrupt Republicans, but you do not seem to give a shit about them for some reason


----------



## elektra

Golfing Gator said:


> Which is just about most of them.
> 
> There is also a thing called dirty corrupt Republicans, but you do not seem to give a shit about them for some reason


The democrats have the ball, the game is in their court. Democrats are in charge, abusing their power.


----------



## Catman51

elektra said:


> How do you know they are not classified?


According to Stain he is all knowing, especially when he knows nothing.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> There are several levels of classification with government documents. Basically all documents are classified. I never said classified documents I said top secret and secret documents. I  sorry you have a comprehension problem.


We are all sorry that you have a truth problem and a huge ego.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> Which is just about most of them.
> 
> There is also a thing called dirty corrupt Republicans, but you do not seem to give a shit about them for some reason


They are not trying to take over the government with deceit and lies.  And making up whatever they want to remain in power.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> That is the day Biden was inaugurated he was not president. What kind of idiot are you.


As of taking the oath, he was the president, god help us all.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Catman51 said:


> They are not trying to take over the government with deceit and lies.  And making up whatever they want to remain in power.



you clearly have not been paying attention


----------



## Delldude

Catman51 said:


> You need to call out all of the lies this idiot provides as facts and claims "everyone" knows it.  Yet he never provides any proof that he has talked with "everyone", just goes on making stuff up.


All the sources are conveniently listed in the article.


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> That is the day Biden was inaugurated he was not president. What kind of idiot are you.


You’re the idiot. Even on that date, Brandon wasn’t sworn in til noon. You know shit can happen before lunchtime, don’t you?  

Gawd, you’re a hack, Stain.


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> you clearly have not been paying attention


Actually, I have and that is exactly what they are trying to do.  You agree with it, like a good little lemming so you support it without having to give it any thought.  As usual.


----------



## Catman51

Delldude said:


> All the sources are conveniently listed in the article.


Sources are not proof, witness the impeachment of Trump when they claimed to have him 100%.  And it still does not explain how he can speak for "everyone" when there is proof positive that he does not.  He is a liar.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Catman51 said:


> Actually, I have and that is exactly what they are trying to do.  You agree with it, like a good little lemming so you support it without having to give it any thought.  As usual.



Both sides of the duopoly do it, that you worship one side and blame the other side is all on you.

I know that they both suck donkey dicks


----------



## Catman51

Golfing Gator said:


> Both sides of the duopoly do it, that you worship one side and blame the other side is all on you.
> 
> I know that they both suck donkey dicks


And so do you. suck donkey dicks.  The major difference is that you enjoy it and defend it.  You attempt, unsuccessfully, to blame others for exactly what you do with y our every post.  Thus confirming that you are a liar and a fool.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> There are several levels of classification with government documents. Basically all documents are classified. I never said classified documents I said top secret and secret documents. I  sorry you have a comprehension problem.


And purposely failed to answer the question.  How do you KNOW what was taken?  I doubt that the government would let you read these so called documents or thar you have the clearance to access them.  So it appears that Stain is lying again and got caught again. As usual from this idiot nonthinker.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> In every case with past presidents, Obama, Carter bushes and Clinton. They all worked with the national archives and declassified any information that was classified at a high level. Very little if any. I don't know the specifics but you can read about it and learn.https://www.crsreports.congress.gov...PDF the protection of classified information: the legal framework October 31st, 2029.


And in this case, Trump was working with the archives on documents to return, by their own admission.  But that did not suit the democrat power4 mad idiots and they staged a raid.  What they go, no one really knows as they are not sharing, Even a skivvy such as this should be able to comprehend this, provided he is really after the truth and not just trying to be a giant hemorrhoid.


----------



## Stann

Golfing Gator said:


> Both sides of the duopoly do it, that you worship one side and blame the other side is all on you.
> 
> I know that they both suck donkey dicks


Both sides have their problems but I think the Republicans really take the cake. trump is nominating absolute horrible people to run racist and outright criminals just like himself. Even getting more rapists on board. That party is definitely on the road to hell.


----------



## Golfing Gator

Catman51 said:


> And so do you. suck donkey dicks.  The major difference is that you enjoy it and defend it.  You attempt, unsuccessfully, to blame others for exactly what you do with y our every post.  Thus confirming that you are a liar and a fool.



This is the best you can do?  Really?

Sad, you are not even worth the bandwidth.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Both sides have their problems but I think the Republicans really take the cake. trump is nominating absolute horrible people to run racist and outright criminals just like himself. Even getting more rapists on board. That party is definitely on the road to hell.


First problem, Stain, is that you claim to think.  An obvious falsehood.

Second problem is, moron, Trump is nominating no one, as he is not in office.

You truly are a stain on any thinking person with any degree of logic,


Golfing Gator said:


> This is the best you can do?  Really?
> 
> Sad, you are not even worth the bandwidth.


Not the best that I can do, it is just that you would not be able to comprehend my best, as is the case with most truths


----------



## Stann

Catman51 said:


> And purposely failed to answer the question.  How do you KNOW what was taken?  I doubt that the government would let you read these so called documents or thar you have the clearance to access them.  So it appears that Stain is lying again and got caught again. As usual from this idiot nonthinker.


I don't need to know what was in the documents and I shouldn't know what's in the documents their top secret and secret documents. You and I knew about them that would be a threat to national security. Unlike you I still have faith in our country which you seem to have totally abandoned, exchanging it for the vitrol of party affiliation. When you believe that political opposites are the enemy then you have become an extremist. That works both ways on the right and the left. Unfortunately there's a lot more people on the right that seem to think like that and most of them have guns which threatens them and the rest of US.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I don't need to know what was in the documents and I shouldn't know what's in the documents their top secret and secret documents. You and I knew about them that would be a threat to national security. Unlike you I still have faith in our country which you seem to have totally abandoned, exchanging it for the vitrol of party affiliation. When you believe that political opposites are the enemy then you have become an extremist. That works both ways on the right and the left. Unfortunately there's a lot more people on the right that seem to think like that and most of them have guns which threatens them and the rest of US.


Caught you in another lie, Stain.  You said you blocked me so you would not have to read what I posted, yet here you are.  And still spewing only what you consider to be true, despite all evidence to the contrary.  Moron.


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> The Ashley Babbit shooting is debatable. Both sides have valid pints to make.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Babbitt shooting internal police docs reveal 'no good reason for shooting,' according to Judicial Watch
> 
> 
> Judicial Watch received 532 pages of documents from the DC Metropolitan Police concerning the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt in the Capitol on Jan. 6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.foxnews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Evaluating the Police Shooting of Ashli Babbitt
> 
> 
> A parsing of the legal issues at play in the police shooting in the Capitol on Jan. 6.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.lawfareblog.com



She was warned to get back. She ignored that warning and instead, breached a police barricade set up to protect members of Congress who were still holed up inside the House chamber from a mob of a 1000 rioters who were inside the Capitol plus thousands of others just outside the Capitol's exterior doors.


----------



## Stann

Faun said:


> She was warned to get back. She ignored that warning and instead, breached a police barricade set up to protect members of Congress who were still holed up inside the House chamber from a mob of a 1000 rioters who were inside the Capitol plus thousands of others just outside the Capitol's exterior doors.


There's absolutely no case there. The police did their duty and protected the Congress. People's lives were at stake.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> There's absolutely no case there. The police did their duty and protected the Congress. People's lives were at stake.


That was their last line of defense.


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


> She was warned to get back. She ignored that warning and instead, breached a police barricade set up to protect members of Congress who were still holed up inside the House chamber from a mob of a 1000 rioters who were inside the Capitol plus thousands of others just outside the Capitol's exterior doors.


Police always shoot to kill when someone unarmed doesn’t immediately step back.


----------



## Faun

Indeependent said:


> Police always shoot to kill when someone unarmed doesn’t immediately step back.



They shoot to protect the safety of others when it's in danger.


----------



## Stann

BackAgain said:


> You’re the idiot. Even on that date, Brandon wasn’t sworn in til noon. You know shit can happen before lunchtime, don’t you?
> 
> Gawd, you’re a hack, Stain.


So you're admitting that Trump took documents that did not belong to him when he knew by the time he got to Florida he would not be president anymore and not have any rights to them.


----------



## Stann

Indeependent said:


> Police always shoot to kill when someone unarmed doesn’t immediately step back.


Little force was authorized the moment they breached the Capitol itself. Preaching the chamber was the very last line of defense. They had to use lethal Force at that point. They were beginning to break down at last line of defense. Lives were at stake. I'm surprised it wasn't a whole lot worse I would have started shooting them as I entered the door of the Capitol. Armed or not, they posed a threat to lives and property.


----------



## Stann

Stann said:


> Little force was authorized the moment they breached the Capitol itself. Preaching the chamber was the very last line of defense. They had to use lethal Force at that point. They were beginning to break down at last line of defense. Lives were at stake. I'm surprised it wasn't a whole lot worse I would have started shooting them as I entered the door of the Capitol. Armed or not, they posed a threat to lives and property.


Lethal Force, that was supposed to be the first words in the above post.


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


> They shoot to protect the safety of others when it's in danger.


She looked real tough, didn’t she.
I bet she could have beaten the crap out of you.


----------



## Faun

Indeependent said:


> She looked real tough, didn’t she.
> I bet she could have beaten the crap out of you.



I don't know Byrd saw much of Benedict Babbitt when he shot her. All he saw was someone ignoring the lawful police order to get back and some idiot breaching their barricade. He shot the moment he saw someone climbing through the window that mob had just broken out.


----------



## Stann

Faun said:


> I don't know Byrd saw much of Benedict Babbitt when he shot her. All he saw was someone ignoring the lawful police order to get back and some idiot breaching their barricade. He shot the moment he saw someone climbing through the window that mob had just broken out.


It doesn't matter what they looked like, it's what they did that got them in trouble. Attempting to breach the last line of defense the police had to guard members of Congress. That's a life-threatening situation, does lethal force was necessary and authorized .


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


> I don't know Byrd saw much of Benedict Babbitt when he shot her. All he saw was someone ignoring the lawful police order to get back and some idiot breaching their barricade. He shot the moment he saw someone climbing through the window that mob had just broken out.


She looked real tough!
If she was Black, the crowd would have burned down the building and fined $150.00


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> So you're admitting that Trump took documents that did not belong to him when he knew by the time he got to Florida he would not be president anymore and not have any rights to them.


I can’t make “admissions” for another person.

But the evidence I’m aware of says he had the documents in Mar A Lago. Some of them had previously been  marked “classified.” But he declassified them.

     Being in possession of the documents is not a crime since the PRA isn’t a criminal statute.


----------



## Care4all

Stann said:


> Unfortunately he took those documents on January 20th., 2021. He was no longer president. Biden was.


And, whatever Trump declassified by "Just thinking about it", Biden Reclassified them by _Just thinking about it._...on January 20th!!!


----------



## BackAgain

Care4all said:


> And, whatever Trump declassified by "Just thinking about it", Biden Reclassified them by _Just thinking about it._...on January 20th!!!


Link?


----------



## Faun

Indeependent said:


> She looked real tough!
> If she was Black, the crowd would have burned down the building and fined $150.00



Again, I doubt he saw much of her beyond the shoulder he shot. Regardless, she was not alone.  She was part of a violent mob that had to be stopped from breaching a police barricade.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> I can’t make “admissions” for another person.
> 
> But the evidence I’m aware of says he had the documents in Mar A Lago. Some of them had previously been  marked “classified.” But he declassified them.
> 
> Being in possession of the documents is not a crime since the PRA isn’t a criminal statute.



What a shame he admitted he knew somd documents were still classified.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> Link?



LOL

In the same link where Trump declassified every single document he took before leaving office.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> It doesn't matter what they looked like, it's what they did that got them in trouble. Attempting to breach the last line of defense the police had to guard members of Congress. That's a life-threatening situation, does lethal force was necessary and authorized .


Hey Stain. a little truth to invade your closed and wrong mind.  The guards _invited_ them in, even holding the doors open for them.

And who, to your delusional mind, authorized lethal force?  Name a name, which you can't.

Just another bigoted BS spewing rant from an idiot and a liar.


----------



## Catman51

Care4all said:


> And, whatever Trump declassified by "Just thinking about it", Biden Reclassified them by _Just thinking about it._...on January 20th!!!


You are assuming, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Biden is capable of thought.


----------



## Faun

Catman51 said:


> Hey Stain. a little truth to invade your closed and wrong mind.  The guards _invited_ them in, even holding the doors open for them.
> 
> And who, to your delusional mind, authorized lethal force?  Name a name, which you can't.
> 
> Just another bigoted BS spewing rant from an idiot and a liar.



Yeah, they just let them in.


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


> Again, I doubt he saw much of her beyond the shoulder he shot. Regardless, she was not alone.  She was part of a violent mob that had to be stopped from breaching a police barricade.


Like BLM was stopped.
Oops!
I forgot…we protect politicians, not unelected citizens.


----------



## Faun

Indeependent said:


> Like BLM was stopped.
> Oops!
> I forgot…we protect politicians, not unelected citizens.


----------



## Stann

BackAgain said:


> I can’t make “admissions” for another person.
> 
> But the evidence I’m aware of says he had the documents in Mar A Lago. Some of them had previously been  marked “classified.” But he declassified them.
> 
> Being in possession of the documents is not a crime since the PRA isn’t a criminal statute.


He says he declassified them. That is for the courts to decide, if it was actually done or not. I don't know about your logic,  if I was in possession of something that didn't belong to me, I would be charged with the crime of stealing.


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> He says he declassified them. That is for the courts to decide, if it was actually done or not.


Not necessarily. Only if our corrupt and politicized Brandon DOJ secures an indictment against him. And it will be up to the United States to DISprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. 


Stann said:


> I don't know about your logic,  if I was in possession of something that didn't belong to me, I would be charged with the crime of stealing.


The PRA is still not a criminal statute. 

If you were in possession of a public library’s book, you wouldn’t be “charged”’with anything except maybe a late fee.


----------



## Indeependent

Faun said:


>


Fascism occurs when our “Representatives” become more important than the people.


----------



## Stann

BackAgain said:


> Not necessarily. Only if our corrupt and politicized Brandon DOJ secures an indictment against him. And it will be up to the United States to DISprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
> 
> The PRA is still not a criminal statute.
> 
> If you were in possession of a public library’s book, you wouldn’t be “charged”’with anything except maybe a late fee.


Being that trump is such an unreasonable person, that should be easy to prove. Either there's evidence to back him up or there isn't. There's always a paper trail and anything the government does, probably in triplicate. Again you are making assumptions about corruption, you have to prove that. Comparing secret and top secret documents with an overdue library book is ludicrous and pitiful on your part. I wish you'd take this whole issue seriously. I know trump is a joke but you're taking this way too far.


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> Being that trump is such an unreasonable person, that should be easy to prove.


Securing an indictment charging shit about the allegedly classified papers?  Or proving a negative?  Either way, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of President Trump is beside the point entirely. 


Stann said:


> Either there's evidence to back him up or there isn't.


He said so. And he can also call Kash Patel. There’s the evidence. And once it’s in evidence, the government has to disprove it. The real question is how could the government disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt?


Stann said:


> There's always a paper trail and anything the government does, probably in triplicate.


There isn’t always a paper trail. But it seems as though the Trump failed to create one. Perhaps sloppy.  But not proof of a failure to have declassified the documents. 


Stann said:


> Again you are making assumptions about corruption, you have to prove that.


No. I don’t. You just need to open your eyes. 


Stann said:


> Comparing secret and top secret documents with an overdue library book is ludicrous and pitiful on your part.


Wrong. What’s pitiful is your ability to comprehend. Most of the documents were not marked classified. And as for those that were, if they were declassified by President Trump, then they became just mere Presidential Records. The analogy to borrowing a book from a library is spot on. And that’s the real reason you have a problem with it. 

I realize you lack the ability to answer this question, but it highlights how and why you’re wrong. *Why did the National Archives engage in any “negotiations” with the former President?*


Stann said:


> I wish you'd take this whole issue seriously.


I am the one who is.  You’re all wrapped up in fantasy. 


Stann said:


> I know trump is a joke but you're taking this way too far.


I know *you’re* a joke and you’re afraid of the truth.


----------



## Stann

BackAgain said:


> Securing an indictment charging shit about the allegedly classified papers?  Or proving a negative?  Either way, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of President Trump is beside the point entirely.
> 
> He said so. And he can also call Kash Patel. There’s the evidence. And once it’s in evidence, the government has to disprove it. The real question is how could the government disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt?
> 
> There isn’t always a paper trail. But it seems as though the Trump failed to create one. Perhaps sloppy.  But not proof of a failure to have declassified the documents.
> 
> No. I don’t. You just need to open your eyes.
> 
> Wrong. What’s pitiful is your ability to comprehend. Most of the documents were not marked classified. And as for those that were, if they were declassified by President Trump, then they became just mere Presidential Records. The analogy to borrowing a book from a library is spot on. And that’s the real reason you have a problem with it.
> 
> I realize you lack the ability to answer this question, but it highlights how and why you’re wrong. *Why did the National Archives engage in any “negotiations” with the former President?*
> 
> I am the one who is.  You’re all wrapped up in fantasy.
> 
> I know *you’re* a joke and you’re afraid of the truth.


When trump's unreasonableness become so great that it affects his judgment that's a definite problem. You know what they say in government, if it's not on paper it wasn't done. Anyway good luck with your guy's' case, not really. I believe all criminals belong behind bars.


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> When trump's unreasonableness become so great that it affects his judgment that's a definite problem.


Nonsense and babble. Your own unreasonableness affects your judgment.


Stann said:


> You know what they say in government, if it's not on paper it wasn't done.


I don’t care what “they say.”  Once the President said the documents were declassified, they were.  Just like that. The failure of his staff to then perform the ministerial work doesn’t negate the presidential order. 


Stann said:


> Anyway good luck with your guy's' case, not really. I believe all criminals belong behind bars.


I don’t need luck. And there remains no evidence at all that President Trump is a “criminal.” 

I think many criminals do belong behind bars. But “all?”  Nah. Our jails and prisons are already wickedly over populated.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> He says he declassified them. That is for the courts to decide, if it was actually done or not. I don't know about your logic,  if I was in possession of something that didn't belong to me, I would be charged with the crime of stealing.


Yet you continue to claim that there are classified documents in the theft of Mar A Logo.

Besides, Stain. you are already guilty of stealing our time with your garbage.


----------



## Stann

BackAgain said:


> Nonsense and babble. Your own unreasonableness affects your judgment.
> 
> I don’t care what “they say.”  Once the President said the documents were declassified, they were.  Just like that. The failure of his staff to then perform the ministerial work doesn’t negate the presidential order.
> 
> I don’t need luck. And there remains no evidence at all that President Trump is a “criminal.”
> 
> I think many criminals do belong behind bars. But “all?”  Nah. Our jails and prisons are already wickedly over populated.


I guess well just have to disagree. Have a good day.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> Being that trump is such an unreasonable person, that should be easy to prove. Either there's evidence to back him up or there isn't. There's always a paper trail and anything the government does, probably in triplicate. Again you are making assumptions about corruption, you have to prove that. Comparing secret and top secret documents with an overdue library book is ludicrous and pitiful on your part. I wish you'd take this whole issue seriously. I know trump is a joke but you're taking this way too far.


Stain claims that anyone e who does not do as he directs (under whose authority is always vague) is unreasonable.  Agree with him and you are always reasonable, especially when you and he are wrong.


----------



## Catman51

Stann said:


> I guess well just have to disagree. Have a good day.


Admitting defeat, Stain?  Somebody beat you up?


----------



## BackAgain

Stann said:


> I guess well just have to disagree. Have a good day.


We do disagree. 

I hope that there is hope for you, Stain. Have a good afternoon.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> Securing an indictment charging shit about the allegedly classified papers?  Or proving a negative?  Either way, the reasonableness or unreasonableness of President Trump is beside the point entirely.
> 
> He said so. And he can also call Kash Patel. There’s the evidence. And once it’s in evidence, the government has to disprove it. The real question is how could the government disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt?
> 
> There isn’t always a paper trail. But it seems as though the Trump failed to create one. Perhaps sloppy.  But not proof of a failure to have declassified the documents.
> 
> No. I don’t. You just need to open your eyes.
> 
> Wrong. What’s pitiful is your ability to comprehend. Most of the documents were not marked classified. And as for those that were, if they were declassified by President Trump, then they became just mere Presidential Records. The analogy to borrowing a book from a library is spot on. And that’s the real reason you have a problem with it.
> 
> I realize you lack the ability to answer this question, but it highlights how and why you’re wrong. *Why did the National Archives engage in any “negotiations” with the former President?*
> 
> I am the one who is.  You’re all wrapped up in fantasy.
> 
> I know *you’re* a joke and you’re afraid of the truth.



You left out the part where Trump admitted taking classified documents.


----------



## Faun

BackAgain said:


> Nonsense and babble. Your own unreasonableness affects your judgment.
> 
> I don’t care what “they say.”  Once the President said the documents were declassified, they were.  Just like that. The failure of his staff to then perform the ministerial work doesn’t negate the presidential order.
> 
> I don’t need luck. And there remains no evidence at all that President Trump is a “criminal.”
> 
> I think many criminals do belong behind bars. But “all?”  Nah. Our jails and prisons are already wickedly over populated.



Except Trump never said all classified documents he took were declassified. In fact, he admitted they weren't all declassified.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> She was warned to get back. She ignored that warning and instead, breached a police barricade set up to protect members of Congress who were still holed up inside the House chamber from a mob of a 1000 rioters who were inside the Capitol plus thousands of others just outside the Capitol's exterior doors.


If she would have been black involved in a democrat supported riot there would have been additional BLM riots about  a cop shooting an unarmed black woman.


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> If she would have been black involved in a democrat supported riot there would have been additional BLM riots about  a cop shooting an unarmed black woman.



Sounds like you should riot then.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> Sounds like you should riot then.


I personally believe in peaceful demonstrations not riots. 

I am a Constitutional conservative not a Marxist socialist democrat.


----------



## Batcat

Death Angel said:


> And then he destroyed 30,000 emails!


And smashed cell phones with a hammer!


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> I personally believe in peaceful demonstrations not riots.
> 
> I am a Constitutional conservative not a Marxist socialist democrat.



So a "pussy" in other words.


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> And smashed cell phones with a hammer!



So that nobody could ever retrieve data from them. What's wrong with that?


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> So that nobody could ever retrieve data from them. What's wrong with that?


For you or me it’s no biggie but for Hillary …






						FBI 'Unable to Acquire' Any of Clinton's 13 Mobile Devices; Aide Says He Smashed 2 With Hammer
					

.




					cnsnews.com


----------



## Faun

Batcat said:


> For you or me it’s no biggie but for Hillary …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBI 'Unable to Acquire' Any of Clinton's 13 Mobile Devices; Aide Says He Smashed 2 With Hammer
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cnsnews.com



That doesn't actually address my post. But you knew that, right?

Again, they were smashed so that nobody could ever retrieve data from them. What's wrong with that?


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> So a "pussy" in other words.


The Constitution gives me the right to peacefully protest but not to riot. If obeying the law makes me a pussy to you, so be it. 









						Is There a Right to Peaceful Protest? - FindLaw
					

A person's right to air grievances without fear of retribution or censorship is fundamental to democracy in the United States. Free expression of one's beliefs is encoded in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which generally protects free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the...




					www.findlaw.com
				




My father was a wise old man with a lot of experience and he told me when I was a teenager to avoid riots. He said, “A rioting crowd develops its own mentality so my advice is when a riot erupts just walk away.” 

I don’t consider myslef as experienced or as wise as my father but I have always tried to follow his advice. That may be because he died when I was fifteen and just reaching the point where I hated him.


----------



## Batcat

Faun said:


> That doesn't actually address my post. But you knew that, right?
> 
> Again, they were smashed so that nobody could ever retrieve data from them. What's wrong with that?


You ignored the fact that I replied that for you or me it’s no big deal. 

I probably would not use a hammer but a .44 Magnum might work well. 

You would likely think it was a big deal if Trump smashes his phones with a hammer and it interferres with the FBI’s and DOJ’s attempts to hang him high.


----------

