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.
Let's stop at that last sentence.Except, we are not talking about clowns at a circus, we are talking about Hillary Clinton.
The documents or emails, were subpoenaed. Instead of complying with a subpoena Hillary Clinton destroyed the emails. The fact that she destroyed emails does not change the fact that she committed a crime by not obeying a subpoena.
we would have to have access to the documents the grand jury keeps in order to answer that question.Then votes to indict on various charges, no?
which subpoena did Trump not obey?Let's stop at that last sentence.
Trump also didn't obey a subpoena.
The difference at this point is that it's too late to charge Hillary (Trumps DOJ failed to do that in time) while the current DOJ is making the charge within the statute of limitations.
Trump is not a Conservative.If Trump is found guilty in the documents case with Cannon presiding, will you agree the government proved its case and Trump deserves the punishment meted out?
Before the obvious question is asked, yes I will believe the government did not prove its case if he is acquitted with Cannon presiding..
Who cares?You have friends? Or are they just ALLIES?
If President Trump did not obey a subpoena, why did they not charge President Trump.Trump also didn't obey a subpoena.
Did it ever cross your mind that Biden may be at fault and should be indicted my Democrat friend?
Trump is not a Conservative.
The PRA does no such thing. You've been swallowing Trumps kool-aid that the PRA in any way applies to records retention by an ex-president.The PRA allows President Trump to physically possess the documents.
The Espionage does not apply at all. President Trump did not commit Espionage.
Who cares?
Name one, turd.Let's stop at that last sentence.
Trump also didn't obey a subpoena.
So now your argument is that it's too late. You change your argument every time you post.The difference at this point is that it's too late to charge Hillary (Trumps DOJ failed to do that in time) while the current DOJ is making the charge within the statute of limitations.
They have also not posted any TS/SCI documents, because they too would be illegal to publicly disclose.we would have to have access to the documents the grand jury keeps in order to answer that question.
Has anybody posted the grand jury documents? No, they have not posted any documents from the grand jury.
Legal Custody is not physical custody. The National Archives retains legal custody of presidential documents, even when they do not have physical custody.The PRA does no such thing. You've been swallowing Trumps kool-aid that the PRA in any way applies to records retention by an ex-president.
The PRA clearly grants "legal possession" to the National Archives.
Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.
Only the entity with "legal possession" can decide where or who has "physical possession". And the National Archives has always retained physical possession, even when they reside in a presidential library.
The Presidential Library system is composed of fourteen Presidential Libraries. These facilities are overseen by the Office of Presidential Libraries, in the National Archives and Records Administration.
This law vested the ownership and administration of Presidential records with the United States Government through NARA. This law applies to the core holdings of Presidential Libraries starting with the records from the administration of Ronald Reagan
so how do you argue what is in those documents?They have also not posted any TS/SCI documents, because they too would be illegal to publicly disclose.
Duh !!!!
I'm pointing out that accusing Hillary of not obeying a subpoena is a moot point. She can never be charged, so that under the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" that charge can never be legally proven.So now your argument is that it's too late. You change your argument every time you post.
But the National Archives did not grant physical custody to Donald Trump.Legal Custody is not physical custody. The National Archives retains legal custody of presidential documents, even when they do not have physical custody.
Because the grant jury issued an indictment based on those documents, and under color of law determined legal sufficiency based on those documents.so how do you argue what is in those documents?
Interesting that you want to prosecute someone based solely on hearsay evidence.Until they indict Biden for selling out America for millions in bribes, the DOJ has zero credibility.
Even if Trump is really guilty of the charges in indictment?
