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.
What is demonstrably false? What is a red herring and hypocrisy? You throw terms around without proving anything.Kyzr, I understand that you want to change the subject when you claim something demonstrably false. Here's the thing. It's a red herring, and an appeal to hypocrisy.
So what?11th Circuit Vacates Cannon’s Order to Appoint a Special Master in Mar-a-lago Investigation
What is demonstrably false? What is a red herring and hypocrisy? You throw terms around without proving anything.
1. There is a Tape of Trump discussing classified documents that is available, see below.
2. There is a tape of Biden's interview with Hur that is hidden by the DOJ, even though it was subpoenaed.
That claim. The only claim I replied too. And the claim you want to distract from by posing a red herring, with the appeal to hypocrisy of "what about Biden."Trump prosecuted even though he may have presidential immunity or declassified those documents?
So what?So what?
All the special master was supposed to do was separate classified documents from attorney-client privileged documents.
That was then, this is now, Smith was not appointed legally. Do try to keep up.
1. Trump was given bad advice from Judicial Watch based on the Clinton "sock drawer" tapes precedent. The case will proceed in due time after the legal issues like presidential immunity and Smith's credentials are resolved. Voters are well aware of the issues.Did Trump declassify those documents? We don’t know. The voters should know these facts before the election but we have been deprived of this knowledge.
Also, you totally skipped over the very serious obstruction issues with Trump’s case that are unique to him. Voters deserve to know if they’re electing a president guilty of obstruction of justice.
www.cbsnews.com
Normally I would agree, given this Court's history. The fact that the basis of the issue before them could be invalid rather supercedes the issue itself. It is not in the People's or government's interest to continue if there is no basis.
That claim. The only claim I replied too. And the claim you want to distract from by posing a red herring, with the appeal to hypocrisy of "what about Biden."
I'll tell you what. I'm more than happy to discuss Biden, if you at least concede that Trump most definitely didn't declassify the documents found in his possession. Fair?
Your hypocrisy and partisan bias has a great deal to do with the current conversation. You only care about Trump or want to talk about Trump, because that's who you hate and want to see destroyed. If one of your own is doing the same or worse, you label it a lie, and turn the other way when there are no consequences. It speaks to your character and integrity, proving you have neither. You're a waste of time to 'discuss' anything with.
I think offering to discuss Biden by itself in exchange for a simple concession that a person has to make if they're simply willing to listen isn't unfair.I'll tell you what. I'm more than happy to discuss Biden, if you at least concede that Trump most definitely didn't declassify the documents found in his possession. Fair?
1. Tom Fitton isn’t even a lawyer and Trump never sought advice on the issue from the OLC who would have told him how stupid Tom Fitton is. Either way, blaming other people is a terrible defense.1. Trump was given bad advice from Judicial Watch based on the Clinton "sock drawer" tapes precedent. The case will proceed in due time after the legal issues like presidential immunity and Smith's credentials are resolved. Voters are well aware of the issues.
2. What "obstruction issues"? The FBI was at MAL and could have taken any classified documents they wanted. The "negotiations" over the classified documents went on for 2-years.
Timeline: The Justice Department's prosecution of the Trump documents case
The 37-count indictment against former President Donald Trump marks the first time a former president faces federal criminal charges.
I think offering to discuss Biden by itself in exchange for a simple concession that a person has to make if they're simply willing to listen isn't unfair.
What I won't to is having the discussion as a distraction from Trump.
It’s a delaying tactic meant to keep the convicted felon and rapist out of court a little longer. It’s OK, given his poor election chances, it’s only a matter of time.Why is the LAW bullshit?
Because I'm sick and tired of jumping from one thing to the fucking next following one red herring after another.Why does there need to be a concession by them first? You know you're a hypocrite and you will continue being one even after the 'concession'. If you think things are bad for your side now, just go ahead and find Trump guilty on the classified documents case when there is a clear and straight forward comparison to Biden doing not only the same thing, but absolutely illegal in his case, and see where that gets you. You're all partisan fools.
And it's not a distraction from Trump, it's a clear cut apples to apples comparison that you refuse to acknowledge because it completely destroys your 'argument', and you know it.
Because I'm sick and tired of jumping from one thing to the fucking next following one red herring after another.
It get very tiresome.
You can see what I write on this board. There's dozens of instances of me conceding stuff. While most of you simply... don't. Not anything, not even when it is absolutely clear you're wrong.
See. I love you making the inference that I'm a hypocrite for demanding that someone else show they aren't.
YepIs Cannon still on Smith's classified documents case, yes or no?
I'll admit it looks bad for Trump. AG Barr said he's toast. I don't know how the declassifying process works regarding the president, that's why we have a court system. So let's say its 70-30 that Trump didn't declassify the documents properly, but as president he may have some relief either from presidential immunity or the Presidential Records Act when moving out of the WH.That claim. The only claim I replied too. And the claim you want to distract from by posing a red herring, with the appeal to hypocrisy of "what about Biden."
I'll tell you what. I'm more than happy to discuss Biden, if you at least concede that Trump most definitely didn't declassify the documents found in his possession. Fair?
1. Convicted felon only until the appeals process plays out.It’s a delaying tactic meant to keep the convicted felon and rapist out of court a little longer. It’s OK, given his poor election chances, it’s only a matter of time.
#PRISONER45
1. Fitton was pissed that his FOIA didn't work.1. Tom Fitton isn’t even a lawyer and Trump never sought advice on the issue from the OLC who would have told him how stupid Tom Fitton is. Either way, blaming other people is a terrible defense.
2. The FBI could not have taken”any classified documents” they wanted. Trump’s lawyers wouldn’t allow it and they had no legal authority to search the premises until they came back with a search warrant. The fact you believe this is proof that the voters are being deprived of information necessary to make a judgement on Election Day.
All of the cases will dry up ...I'll admit it looks bad for Trump. AG Barr said he's toast. I don't know how the declassifying process works regarding the president, that's why we have a court system. So let's say its 70-30 that Trump didn't declassify the documents properly, but as president he may have some relief either from presidential immunity or the Presidential Records Act when moving out of the WH.
That said, he didn't necessarily steal them like Biden obviously had to do.
So Trump probably didn't declassify the documents properly for other people to view, but its not clear if his "crime" is as bad as Biden's regarding his possessing them.
