Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No. It isn’t. The PRA isn’t a criminal statute. And according to the lead case on the subject, it is the President who makes the determination of which documents are Presidential records and which ones are personal or mere agency records.It is illegal for a president to take any records other than personal records.
No. It isn’t. The PRA isn’t a criminal statute. And according to the lead case on the subject, it is the President who makes the determination of which documents are Presidential records and which ones are personal or mere agency records.
Sorry, flop. The law says what it actually says; not what you have heard it says or wish it said.
No. It doesn’t.And which charge was that? Specifically.
Name the charge. The name of the charge demonstrates the absurdity of your pseudo-legal gibberish.
Oh, it does.No. It doesn’t.
I’m sorry you aren’t able to follow along. That speaks to the fact that you’re Tom ignorant to discuss this matter intelligently.
Try the first 31 counts, you dolt:
Willful Retention of National Defense Information
(18 U.S.C. § 793(e))
That charge comes UNDER the ESPIONAGE ACT.
Get an adult to assist you, Skylar.
Anything marked classified, you moron.
Zzz. Highlighting your lack of grasp on what is required and from whom and who gets to decide.Yeah, Trump, Pence, Hillary and Biden are held to the ACTUAL law. Not your imaginary version of it. Here's the windshield that bug of pseudo-legal gibberish splatters upon:
"....did willfully retain documents and fail to deliver them to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive them;"
Maybe you should call Smith and tell him how indifferent you are again? I'm sure that will make this portion of the indictment disappear.
The documents Trump should have taken are personal documents only as defined in the PRA. For most presidents the actual transition is pretty simply. Personal document are generally kept in the residence. The president (or his staff) are responsible for categorizing all created or received documents as presidential or personal at the time of receipt or creation. Typically when the president leaves office there is no decision to be made as to what document goes where. However, Donald Trump's exit was far from typically. He was telling his staff not to worry we are staying thus packing had to be pretty haphazard as much of it was done at the last minute.We have absolutely a valid basis to claim that any documents he had were “illegally taken” until TheTrumpHoax proves they weren't
Zzz. Highlighting your lack of grasp on what is required and from whom and who gets to decide.
Helpful. Just not to your position.
Keep in mind that there are really two trials.Trump can lie all he wants, and the Trumpsters can truly believe and spread it all over the internet, but his attorneys are not going to try to present stupid stuff with out evidence in court because that would make them MAGA, or making attorneys get attorneys.
The PRA was passed as a law not a resolution. It establishes in law that presidential records belong to the U.S. government, not the president personally, and must be preserved. When you violate a law you are committing an illegal act regardless of whether there is any punishment for doing so or weather it is a criminal act. Like parking violations, the PRA is not a criminal act but violations are certainly is illegal. This was discussed at some length in congress a few years but they left the law as it is.No. It isn’t. The PRA isn’t a criminal statute. And according to the lead case on the subject, it is the President who makes the determination of which documents are Presidential records and which ones are personal or mere agency records.
Sorry, flop. The law says what it actually says; not what you have heard it says or wish it said.
Supposedly there is a case brewing in Bedministers or however you spell that in New Jersey. If I thought there really were smart people on the Dem side I would think they know the indictments simply cement Trump's nomination, and bet on being able to beat him in the general. Cause he is probably going to have an indictment every 4 months or so until the primaries and trials until the general.Keep in mind that there are really two trials.
Trump is on trial political. It is happening now in this forum, Facebook, Blogs, Talk Radio, living rooms, and workplaces. For him to win the majority of republicans he has to play the victim of a corrupt, unscrupulous federal government lead by an old senile criminal. This supports the belief of most of the republican party but there are a lot republican who are not enamored by Donald Trump and don't see him as the savor of the party but rather as the destroyer. Independents that he had good luck with in 2016 are generally not Trump fans in 2023. Trump as the republican nominee will insure a huge democrat turnout. When you add all this together, Biden will repeat his 2020 win.
Trump of course, has legal trials. I expect he is going to do better than people expect. His will be on trial in Miami or close to it which has a lot of Trump supporters, a republican mayor, and governor. Plus he has a republican judge who he appointed that has ruled in his favor already. Although the indictment is filled with damning evidence, there are a lot of opportunities for the defense to exclude evidence. The judge is likely to delay the trial probably until after the primaries which would likely guarantee Trump the nomination. Also the trial could be delayed till after the election which would give a republican winner the opportunity to stop the trial. The New York case is weak comparted to the federal case and the 911 grand jury and Georgia grand jury are question marks.
That’s what you tend to do when you’ve been exposed as a simpleton.Laughing......
Not in the slightest. Now you’re just changing the subject by flat out lying.and you just completely abandoned your claims about willful retention.
Another manifestly dishonest assertion by you. No surprise, there.So much for those charges against Hillary, Pence, or Biden.
False again, you moron. Once declassified, no documents were national security documents. Go ahead. Name one which actually was. You can’t do it. I know.Leaving you with the dogshit legal argument that classified national security documents were 'personal records'.
Luck has nothing to do with your lack of comprehension of your ceaseless dishonesty.Good fucking luck in court with that one.
Not a part of any dispute.The PRA was passed as a law not a resolution.
It leaves to the President to make the call as so which documents are Presidential records. Otherwise I’m sure you’d point out the sentence anywhere in that non criminal statute which leaves such decisions to anyone else.It establishes in law that presidential records belong to the U.S. government, not the president personally, and must be preserved.
When is the operative word. And there’s zero evidence that President Trump ever violated that act.When you violate a law you are committing an illegal act regardless of whether there is any punishment for doing so or whether it is a criminal act.
Nope. One can be sanctioned for a violation of a driving law. There is no sanction for any alleged “violation” of the PRA.Like parking violations, the PRA is not a criminal act but violations are certainly is illegal.
They sure did. And?This was discussed at some length in congress a few years but they left the law as it is.
What ARE presidential records? Who decides? The amusing part is that the DOJ argued Bubba Clinton’s position when he had material in his sock drawer.Since presidential records are government property, I suppose taking the records might be covered by criminals statues.
Their legal argument, at that time, prevailed. It is only being flipped and flipped by them this time because they no like Trump.
Presidential Records are not the focus of the indictment. In fact, the only mention of them in the indictment is in the description of what was found in boxes and some background information. All charges in the indictment arise from the classified documents, not presidential records. The issue of Presidential Records are just a red herring meant to distract attention from the indictment and for good reason.Not a part of any dispute.
It leaves to the President to make the call as so which documents are Presidential records. Otherwise I’m sure you’d point out the sentence anywhere in that non criminal statute which leaves such decisions to anyone else.
When is the operative word. And there’s zero evidence that President Trump ever violated that act.
Nope. One can be sanctioned for a violation of a driving law. There is no sanction for any alleged “violation” of the PRA.
They sure did. And?
What ARE presidential records? Who decides? The amusing part is that the DOJ argued Bubba Clinton’s position when he had material in his sock drawer.
www.businessinsider.in
Presidential Records are not the focus of the indictment. In fact, the only mention of them in the indictment is in the description of what was found in boxes and some background information. All charges in the indictment arise from the classified documents, not presidential records.
Jack Smith, special counsel that headed the Trump investigation and who lead the Grand Jury, and will probably prosecute Trump is about as smart as they come and about as non-partisan as you will find anywhere. He graduated from the most prestigious law school in the country in the top 95% of his class. He has convicted as many democrats as republicans and has always been registered to vote as an independent.Supposedly there is a case brewing in Bedministers or however you spell that in New Jersey. If I thought there really were smart people on the Dem side I would think they know the indictments simply cement Trump's nomination, and bet on being able to beat him in the general. Cause he is probably going to have an indictment every 4 months or so until the primaries and trials until the general.
