Over and over I read Trump's defenders, in effect, justify their continued support.......

[Aldo Raine]

What do you mean, by that?


Thats on you, pal. Not me. I merely asked to join a bet that you had already challenged someone to.
You never listed a wager --so I wasnt concerned about it. I just know you are using a flawed foundation to bet with so I want to be able to exploit it!

Ok pal if ByeDon is convicted of a crime I will leave the board for good. If he is not you leave for good. I can't wait to exploit your excuses for not leaving!
MAGA

 

[Phactotum]

If he is not you leave for good. I can't wait
MAGA

You'd better speak to a few mods here first, about me lol they'll likely recommend you find a more wholesome wager, no doubt indeed

 

[Aldo Raine]

You'd better speak to a few mods here first, about me lol they'll likely recommend you find a more wholesome wager, no doubt indeed

So you are pussing out! Like everyone on here didn't see that coming!
MAGA

 

[berg80]

They’ll continue to support Trump even after a criminal conviction; they’ll continue to support Trump even after the convictions are upheld on appeal – this thread has proven that to be true.

Remember, Trump is a product of the GOP, a product of the fear, ignorance, and hate that is conservativism – Trump is the prefect representative of Republicans, conservatives, and others on the right, and they will continue to support and defend the malignancy they created, no matter how reprehensible and wrong.

Much to the country's loss, the GOP has been coopted by the POT. It's Trump's party lock, stock, and barrel. Even to the extent that he's using donor money sent in to help with the campaign for his own legal defense and you don't hear a peep out of anyone in the party.

 

[Independent thinker]

That might be right. But only because Trump is successfully delaying the trials getting started. Holding out hope he will be re-elected so he can prevent the trials from happening, thereby denying justice being served.

LOL. So, you have already found him guilty? Your post only proves that you want to give him a "fair" trial, after which he will be found guilty.

 

[BackAgain]

Trump is not claiming that he declassified all the documents in his court case defense for the trial, so why are YOU making this claim?

Please cite your link for the proposition that Trump somehow concedes that some of the documents hadn’t been declassified.

 

[Lesh]

Reported!

For what?

 

[BackAgain]

Nah. That’s far from the reason. And you know it.

The real reasons include: you can’t criminally prosecute a sitting President.

Also, of course, the system is rigged in favor of the Dims.

They occasionally will burn one of their own- as a matter of public relations. Poor Sen. Menendez. But that’s it.

 

[Care4all]

Please cite your link for the proposition that Trump somehow concedes that some of the documents hadn’t been declassified.

Trump Claims He Declassified Documents. Why Don’t His Lawyers Say So in Court? (Published 2022)

Judges this week highlighted the gap between Mr. Trump’s public claims that he declassified everything and his lawyers’ reluctance to repeat that claim in a courtroom.

www.nytimes.com

Trump Claims He Declassified Documents. Why Don’t His Lawyers Say So in Court?​

Judges this week highlighted the gap between Mr. Trump’s public claims that he declassified everything and his lawyers’ reluctance to repeat that claim in a courtroom.

WASHINGTON — Former President Donald J. Trump claimed on Wednesday that when he was in the White House, his powers were so broad he could declassify virtually any document by simply “thinking about it.”

That argument — which came as he defended his decision to retain government documents in his Florida home in an interview with the Fox host Sean Hannity — underscored a widening gap between the former president and his lawyers. By contrast, they have so far been unwilling to repeat Mr. Trump’s declassification claim in court, as they counter a federal investigation into his handling of government documents.

Over the past week, a federal appeals court in Atlanta — along with Mr. Trump’s choice for a special master to review the documents seized last month — undermined a bulwark of his effort to justify his actions: Both suggested that there was no evidence to support the assertion that Mr. Trump had declassified everything — in writing, verbally or wordlessly — despite what the former president may have said on TV.

On Thursday, the special master, Judge Raymond J. Dearie, also appeared to take aim at another one of Mr. Trump’s excuses — that federal agents had planted some of the records when they searched his Mar-a-Lago estate. In an order issued after the appellate court had ruled, Judge Dearie instructed Mr. Trump’s lawyers to let him know if there were any discrepancies between the documents that were kept at Mar-a-Lago and those that the F.B.I. said it had hauled away.

By the time the Hannity interview aired late Wednesday, a three-judge appellate panel of the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit — which included two jurists appointed by Mr. Trump — had blocked part of a lower court order favorable to the former president. The panel brushed aside the suggestion that he had declassified 100 highly sensitive documents found in his residential and storage areas as both unfounded and irrelevant.

The court wrote that there was “no evidence that any of these records were declassified” and took note of the fact that, when Mr. Trump’s lawyers appeared before Judge Dearie this week, they too “resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents.”

The appellate panel went on to declare that the declassification issue, which Mr. Trump has repeatedly thrust at the center of the case, was “a red herring” that would not have factored into its ruling even if it had been extensively argued before them. Even if Mr. Trump had in fact declassified the records, the judges wrote, he was still bound by federal law, including the Presidential Records Act, that required him to return all government documents, classified or unclassified, when he left office.

Declassifying an official document would not alone “render it personal” or turn it into a possession he could hold onto after leaving office, the court said.

The judges in Atlanta were not alone in their opinion.

One day earlier, Judge Dearie expressed a similar form of skepticism. He pointedly told Mr. Trump’s legal team that since the classified documents were clearly marked classified, he intended to consider them as classified — unless they offered evidence to the contrary.

CONTINUED AT LINK.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I'll take that as a yes to voting for a convicted criminal found liable for sexual abuse. Awesome.

You can take it however you want, I was responding to the comment of “owning the libs”, but if you want to misrepresent my statements, who am I to stand in your way. Have at it

 

[Catsnmeters]

This is a stupid thread.

The review would be a restatement of the old: “buy the premise, buy the plot.”

Since I don’t buy the premise, I don’t buy the plot.

Not one of the multiple cases against Trump makes any fucking legal sense. It’s clearly all political manipulation and abuse of our criminal justice system (except for the civil cases which are also abuses of our legal system for political purposes; except civil and not criminal).

They make legal sense to me. You sure you have read the indictments?

Do you have a specific example?

 

[BackAgain]

Trump Claims He Declassified Documents. Why Don’t His Lawyers Say So in Court? (Published 2022)

Judges this week highlighted the gap between Mr. Trump’s public claims that he declassified everything and his lawyers’ reluctance to repeat that claim in a courtroom.

www.nytimes.com

Trump Claims He Declassified Documents. Why Don’t His Lawyers Say So in Court?​

Judges this week highlighted the gap between Mr. Trump’s public claims that he declassified everything and his lawyers’ reluctance to repeat that claim in a courtroom.

WASHINGTON — Former President Donald J. Trump claimed on Wednesday that when he was in the White House, his powers were so broad he could declassify virtually any document by simply “thinking about it.”

That argument — which came as he defended his decision to retain government documents in his Florida home in an interview with the Fox host Sean Hannity — underscored a widening gap between the former president and his lawyers. By contrast, they have so far been unwilling to repeat Mr. Trump’s declassification claim in court, as they counter a federal investigation into his handling of government documents.

Over the past week, a federal appeals court in Atlanta — along with Mr. Trump’s choice for a special master to review the documents seized last month — undermined a bulwark of his effort to justify his actions: Both suggested that there was no evidence to support the assertion that Mr. Trump had declassified everything — in writing, verbally or wordlessly — despite what the former president may have said on TV.

On Thursday, the special master, Judge Raymond J. Dearie, also appeared to take aim at another one of Mr. Trump’s excuses — that federal agents had planted some of the records when they searched his Mar-a-Lago estate. In an order issued after the appellate court had ruled, Judge Dearie instructed Mr. Trump’s lawyers to let him know if there were any discrepancies between the documents that were kept at Mar-a-Lago and those that the F.B.I. said it had hauled away.

By the time the Hannity interview aired late Wednesday, a three-judge appellate panel of the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit — which included two jurists appointed by Mr. Trump — had blocked part of a lower court order favorable to the former president. The panel brushed aside the suggestion that he had declassified 100 highly sensitive documents found in his residential and storage areas as both unfounded and irrelevant.

The court wrote that there was “no evidence that any of these records were declassified” and took note of the fact that, when Mr. Trump’s lawyers appeared before Judge Dearie this week, they too “resisted providing any evidence that he had declassified any of these documents.”

The appellate panel went on to declare that the declassification issue, which Mr. Trump has repeatedly thrust at the center of the case, was “a red herring” that would not have factored into its ruling even if it had been extensively argued before them. Even if Mr. Trump had in fact declassified the records, the judges wrote, he was still bound by federal law, including the Presidential Records Act, that required him to return all government documents, classified or unclassified, when he left office.

Declassifying an official document would not alone “render it personal” or turn it into a possession he could hold onto after leaving office, the court said.

The judges in Atlanta were not alone in their opinion.

One day earlier, Judge Dearie expressed a similar form of skepticism. He pointedly told Mr. Trump’s legal team that since the classified documents were clearly marked classified, he intended to consider them as classified — unless they offered evidence to the contrary.

CONTINUED AT LINK.

So. No evidence that he excluded any of them from having been declassified.

And why he hasn’t said so yet in court is of no significance. He can play the cards he has at any time of his choosing.

 

[BackAgain]

They make legal sense to me. You sure you have read the indictments?

Perfectly sure.

Do you have a specific example?

Many. And I’ve already discussed several of them on numerous threads several times. Endlessly having to repeat them for the ignorant liberals is not a good way to spend my time.

Go find my prior posts. Read. Learn.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Perfectly sure.

Many. And I’ve already discussed several of them on numerous threads several times. Endlessly having to repeat them for the ignorant liberals is not a good way to spend my time.

Go find my prior posts. Read. Learn.

Conversely I have successfully refuted that claim on multiple threads. Endlessly repeating my points to ignorant conservatives is not a good way to spend my time...yet, unlike you, I was willing to do it.

Go find my prior posts. Read. Learn.

 

[BackAgain]

Conversely I have successfully refuted that claim on multiple threads.

False claim.

You couldn’t. And you haven’t.

Endlessly repeating my points to ignorant conservatives is not a good way to spend my time...yet, unlike you, I was willing to do it.

I’ve done it many times.

Go find my prior posts. Read. Learn.

Zzz. You may dull and boring but at least you’re unoriginal and lame.

 

[noonereal]

What about a criminal conviction?

We won't have one. Fl judge is hoping for a SCOTUS seat so has sat on the case.
GA case is screwed now because the fat bitch fucked her prosecutor. This will allow for her removal and a newly appointed DA will decide to not bring the case.
The DC case is in infinate limbo to protect Trump. This can't possibly be tried before the election now.
That brings us to the NY case. This is a case that should not have been brought.
Here Trump is likely to get off and this victory would prove to the cult he is innocent of everything.

Garland screwed democracy by doing nothing for two years.

 

[noonereal]

Not one of the multiple cases against Trump makes any fucking legal sense. It’s clearly all political manipulation and abuse of our criminal justice system

Sickening that you ALLOW yourself to believe this.

 

[Catsnmeters]

False claim.

You couldn’t. And you haven’t.

I did. And I have.

I’ve done it many times.

Good for you.

Zzz. You may dull and boring but at least you’re unoriginal and lame.

Of course you're bored. You won't discuss the topic you yourself broached...and after reading your response in post 132...and chuckling to myself, I can see why.

 

[eagle1462010]

Sickening that you ALLOW yourself to believe this.

Bet you still think the Steele BS was legit.

 

[noonereal]

Bet you still think the Steele BS was legit.

Large parts were and the Mueller investigation confirmed this.
Maybe the better question is, do you deny that Putin worked to help Trump and that his campaign had contacts with Russians as Mueller confirmed?