Should Pelosi be removed from office? After violating 18 U.S. Code 2071

[Syriusly]

Yes. She destroyed a historical document that was supposed to be archived in The House records as all SOTU speeches are.

Except of course- there is no actual requirement to do any such thing.

But I do find it fascinating how Nancy Pelosi has managed to completely obscure Trump's speech by the simple act of tearing a piece of paper up.

What is everyone talking about? Not your Dear Leader's speech- but your whining about how mean Pelosi was to your Dear Leader.

It was an act of surrender by Pelosi. After disgracing herself and her Party with the faux impeachment, she tore up the speech to acknowledge she has no answer to President Trump's success and his increasing popularity.

LOL sure- thats what it was.

And her simple gesture deflated Trump's entire speech.

It was masterful.

The President's speech was masterful, and it left Nancy nothing to do but mumble to herself and take out her shame and frustration on some papers. It was a powerful gesture of defeat.

It was a gesture of disdain
Well deserved

If Pelosi had refused to shake Trump's hand, his Trumpskies would be claiming she broke the law for that.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

You have provided the law in detail several times now- except you forget some of the little details each time don't you?
Fact check: Did Pelosi break the law by ripping up Trump's speech? :: WRAL.com
"Her copy of the State of the Union address is not a government record or government property at all," said Douglas Cox, professor of law at the City of New York University School of Law and an expert in the laws governing the preservation of government records. "It is personal property."

Under House rules, members of Congress are encouraged to preserve records or donate them to a research institution for historical study, Cox said. Unlike congressional committees, members are not legally required to hold onto their office’s files.

"They can keep them private, they can destroy them, or they can rip them up," he said.

"The State of the Union is a presidential record, which must go to the National Archives under the Presidential Records Act," Nourse said "(Pelosi) did not mutilate the record that is filed with the Archives."

The purpose of the records law "is to prevent someone from depriving the government from the use of its documents," so Pelosi’s move "doesn’t fit within the statute," added Kathleen Clark, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis.

There are probably countless copies of Trump’s address, such as the version the White House posted online. Pelosi’s action doesn’t preclude future generations from accessing one.

"If the statute were not read this way, then any copy of the State of the Union held by anyone could never be destroyed," Nourse said.

"I take it that this is a printout of the Trump speech, in which case it is absurd to suggest that Pelosi can be prosecuted for doing with it whatever she pleases," said Heidi Kitrosser, a law professor at the University of Minnesota.

For what it’s worth, Trump has a habit of ripping up papers when he’s done with them. According to Politico, staff members have had to tape Trump’s shredded files together in order to send them to the Archives and avoid crossing the Presidential Records Act.

"The point of the statute is to prevent people from destroying records in official repositories like the National Archives or in courts," said Georgetown Law professor Victoria Nourse.

"The State of the Union is a presidential record, which must go to the National Archives under the Presidential Records Act," Nourse said "(Pelosi) did not mutilate the record that is filed with the Archives."

The purpose of the records law "is to prevent someone from depriving the government from the use of its documents," so Pelosi’s move "doesn’t fit within the statute," added Kathleen Clark, professor of law at Washington University in St. Louis.

Laurence Tribe, the Carl M. Loeb University Professor at the Harvard Law School of Harvard University, told Law and Crime:

What a dumb idea! Not even Bill Barr would fall for that ludicrous misapplication of the federal law criminalizing mutilation of government records. The copy was the Speaker’s own, it wasn’t a government record to begin with, and her action was purely symbolic expression well within the protection of both the speech and debate clause and the first amendment.

Jonathan Turley, a professor at the George Washington University Law School who also served as a Republican witness during a congressional hearing on President Trump’s impeachment, said

That last act (tearing her copy of the speech) has led some to allege that she also violated 18 U.S.C. §2071 in the destruction of an official document. That claim is dubious.......The main problem is that I am not convinced that this is a covered document. The law does not prevent the destruction of any government document in any form. If so, we would have nothing but warehouses from sea to sea. I cannot find any source that stipulates the preservation of this document or even requires that it be given to the Speaker.

As usual- you are just a gullible fool parroting what the Trump propaganda machine put out.

As usual you are not gullible since you are in fact, willful, in your lust for the deceit which embodies Dem's politrix.

For example, you are not parroting propaganda but you are definitely here pontificating pink-panties' poppycock considering your posted examples and exhibits which are all irrelevant to 18 U.S. Code 2017 which at no point makes the concessions nor the contingencies which you made in your examples above. See, look:

(a)
Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States 30, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, 30 shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b)
Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States 30. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person 30as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States 30.

B)

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

Trump has destroyed the Constitution

Nope.

Trump got impeached for doing his, job, in terms of our foreign policy in Ukraine specifically to annihilate corruption. You didn't care. You only cared about your hatred for Trump, as you hated him for doing what the Comstitution reqd by exposing Biden corruption in Ukraine.

You destroyed the citizenrys' voice, in politics, when you used your voice to stay silent or you cheered for the Dem's lowdown illegal acts of 1)filing false docx with the FISA Court and 2)Impeaching a President because they hated for him to obey Article II of the U.S. Constitution with respect to USA foreign policies.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

If Pelosi had refused to shake Trump's hand, his Trumpskies would be claiming she broke the law for that.

You are very deceitful here, since no has ever ever said it is illegal to refuse to shake the hand of a USA President. We saw how that nonsense is untrue, way back when those NYPD cops refused to shake Obama's hand when he came to honor their fallen comrades.

 

[Kilroy2]

How is a copy of this a breach when the original still exists ?

It would seem copies should be destroyed because how many copies of the original do you need

I guess some believe that if 50 copies were made then they should all be kept in some secure location

OKAY

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

Hmmmm

...hmmmm...

It appears you are having a good time comparing apples to oranges. No doubt indeed. See, look:

Did he brag about how she grabs women by their pussies ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he mock someone for their disability ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he tell an American vet that he was no hero because he was captured by the enemy ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he call an American judge a "Mexican" ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he have an affair with a porn star, pay her off, and lie to the American people about it ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Do you see where this is going? In terms of how you compared apples to oranges here? Where you deluded to facts which proved that Trump has never, ever disrespected any human to the degree of what we saw from Nancy at the SOTU as she shamed all 'laws of adult behavior' ...

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

There is a US Code against tearing up a Trump speech?

Yes, if the pages of the speech were issued to her as official USA Federal docx then, no doubt, she broke the law by destroying them. And she deserves to be punished.

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

No surprise that you loyal Trumpskies once again want to ignore the Constitution.

Nope, now You stop being dishonest.


Because You actually hate the Constitution. So you cheered for the Dems when they filed false docx with the FISA court to get Mueller's investigation launched. Yes. You applauded the Dems when they deceitfully protected Biden by impeaching Trump because Trump did obey, our 20yr Ukraine foreign policy, of exposing corruption by political and corporate officials.

No doubt you loathe the Constitution and the moral USA laws which it borne.

 

[Jackson]

18 U.S. Code 2071?

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

Got this off FB

By tearing up (“mutilating”) the House copy of the President’s SOTU address, Pelosi, as custodian of the record, has violated the U.S. Code, below. She has forfeited her office, should be fined, AND there should be consequences!
“18 U.S. Code § 2071:

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.”​

Well if you got it off of Facebook- it must be true.......

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys

So you now just need to prove that Pelosi unlawfully destroyed that speech.

What do you think that the rest of Congress did with their speeches?

According to Facebook- any Congressman or Senator who 'carried away' their copy of the speech is now disqualified from holding any office in the United States.

The moment she started tearing up the speech, the price went up for the remains. Hannity told anyone who could get it, he would pay $25,000 for it!. The price went up for the speech and her head.

 

[Lumpy 1]

Pelosi is ending her career as a loser and an abject failure in the history of the left wing liberal cause..

She prefers to blame Trump rather than her poor judgement and vindictive nature.

Trump wins no matter what she does and she knows it..
.

 

[JimBowie1958]

How can anyone be so gullible as to support this man-child?!

What flavor of Leftie Coolaid have you been drinking?!

When you chug it down so fast like Catcher, you dont really notice the flavor.

 

[playtime]

Yes. She destroyed a historical document that was supposed to be archived in The House records as all SOTU speeches are.

are you saying the national archives are not digital and are on paper only?

No. He was saying that she destroyed a Document.

Speaking of destroying a document. I don't remember any of you Trumpskyites stomping your feet about your Dear Leader destroying official documents

Richard Nixon Is the Reason President Trump's Aides Have to Repair Documents He Rips Up
President Trump reportedly has a habit of ripping up documents after he’s done with them, a tendency that has sent aides scrambling to quite literally pick up the pieces.

“I had a letter from [Senate Minority Leader Chuck] Schumer — he tore it up,” Solomon Lartey, one of the officials in record management who restored the documents but was terminated this past spring, told Politico. “It was the craziest thing ever. He ripped papers into tiny pieces.”

Trump is required by law to preserve all documents he handles during his presidency. The Presidential Records Act mandates that presidents retain all “documentary material,” which includes documents, papers, books, pamphlets, audiotapes and videos, so that

Or Trump's head of EPA destroying documents
EPA chief of staff under investigation in document destruction

CNN Source? Or is it MSDNC?

politico.

Politico
Share:

LEAST BIASED
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes). The reporting is factual and usually sourced. These are the most credible media sources. See all Least Biased Sources.

• Overall, we rate Politico Least Biased based on balanced coverage of news stories and High for factual reporting due to proper sourcing and a clean fact check record.
  Politico - Media Bias/Fact Check

 

[playtime]

Except of course- there is no actual requirement to do any such thing.

But I do find it fascinating how Nancy Pelosi has managed to completely obscure Trump's speech by the simple act of tearing a piece of paper up.

What is everyone talking about? Not your Dear Leader's speech- but your whining about how mean Pelosi was to your Dear Leader.

It was an act of surrender by Pelosi. After disgracing herself and her Party with the faux impeachment, she tore up the speech to acknowledge she has no answer to President Trump's success and his increasing popularity.

It was not an act of surrender by Pelosi, saying so is one more BIG LIE echo by stupid people who can't think for themselves. Attacking the character of those who stood up to the President, whose character flaws are well known and easily observed, takes courage. The Bully has already attacked Speaker Pelosi as he is want to do to everyone who has the guts and facts to put him down.

Clearly it was an act of surrender by Pelosi. If she had felt like a winner, she wouldn't have had the need for such adolescent gestures.

As I just stated, "It was not an act of surrender by Pelosi, saying so is one more BIG LIE echoed by stupid people who can't think for themselves." Trump is a damn liar, and he lied throughout the speech. How can anyone be so gullible as to support this man-child?!

You're just being silly now, but who can blame you when you see the Speaker reduced to adolescent gestures of powerlessness by the President's speech?

2 words:

twitter


rants.

 

[playtime]

AP FACT CHECK: Ripping up copy of Trump's speech not illegal

But it hurt Trumps feelings
There has to be some law against that

He didn't even notice it. What she did was disgraceful and beyond the office of the Speaker. Why don't you guys admit it. Never before has a speaker sat there and made faces while the president was giving his address to the nation, and then got up and ripped the speech. Every president gives their (and their party's) point of view and perspective during the state of union. The opposing party then responds either in the Response or by other methods. Perhaps she lost it completely because Trump was telling the truth about his achievements and the economy.

he didn't notice it cause she was behind him & he was soaking in the accolades by all his flying monkeys... but he sure saw it afterwards on video. why do you think he has been having a hissy fit about her ever since? lol... what a little whiney orange diaper baby he is.

 

[playtime]

Hmmmm

...hmmmm...

It appears you are having a good time comparing apples to oranges. No doubt indeed. See, look:

Did he brag about how she grabs women by their pussies ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he mock someone for their disability ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he tell an American vet that he was no hero because he was captured by the enemy ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he call an American judge a "Mexican" ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he have an affair with a porn star, pay her off, and lie to the American people about it ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Do you see where this is going? In terms of how you compared apples to oranges here? Where you deluded to facts which proved that Trump has never, ever disrespected any human to the degree of what we saw from Nancy at the SOTU as she shamed all 'laws of adult behavior' ...

^^^

 

[The Original Tree]

Is that your Trollholio?

Hmmmm

...hmmmm...

It appears you are having a good time comparing apples to oranges. No doubt indeed. See, look:

Did he brag about how she grabs women by their pussies ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he mock someone for their disability ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he tell an American vet that he was no hero because he was captured by the enemy ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he call an American judge a "Mexican" ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Did he have an affair with a porn star, pay her off, and lie to the American people about it ---while in the camera and sitting solo directly behind Nancy? as she spoke to 147 nations? Including our enemies watching and then, salivating, at the intergalactic-disrespect being shown by our nation's 3rd-in-charge onto our nation's 1st-in-charge?

Do you see where this is going? In terms of how you compared apples to oranges here? Where you deluded to facts which proved that Trump has never, ever disrespected any human to the degree of what we saw from Nancy at the SOTU as she shamed all 'laws of adult behavior' ...

^^^

 

[Ethos Logos Pathos]

Is that your Trollholio?

No, it's his Dem tactic ---used when they can't face the embarrassment of their failed arguments.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Yes. She destroyed a historical document that was supposed to be archived in The House records as all SOTU speeches are.

Except of course- there is no actual requirement to do any such thing.

But I do find it fascinating how Nancy Pelosi has managed to completely obscure Trump's speech by the simple act of tearing a piece of paper up.

What is everyone talking about? Not your Dear Leader's speech- but your whining about how mean Pelosi was to your Dear Leader.

It was an act of surrender by Pelosi. After disgracing herself and her Party with the faux impeachment, she tore up the speech to acknowledge she has no answer to President Trump's success and his increasing popularity.

LOL sure- thats what it was.

And her simple gesture deflated Trump's entire speech.

It was masterful.

The President's speech was masterful, and it left Nancy nothing to do but mumble to herself and take out her shame and frustration on some papers. It was a powerful gesture of defeat.

The President's speech was his usual collection of boasts, lies and taking credit for what other people have done.

Really just the usual stuff.

But here we are days later- and no one is talking about his speech- we are all talking about Pelosi.

She is brilliant.

lol The President's job approval ratings continue to rise day by day, so obviously the speech is being celebrated by voters, but Democrats can only talk about Pelosi's adolescent political gesture because these days Democrats seem to be capable of nothing but blowing raspberries at Republicans.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Yes. She destroyed a historical document that was supposed to be archived in The House records as all SOTU speeches are.

Except of course- there is no actual requirement to do any such thing.

But I do find it fascinating how Nancy Pelosi has managed to completely obscure Trump's speech by the simple act of tearing a piece of paper up.

What is everyone talking about? Not your Dear Leader's speech- but your whining about how mean Pelosi was to your Dear Leader.

It was an act of surrender by Pelosi. After disgracing herself and her Party with the faux impeachment, she tore up the speech to acknowledge she has no answer to President Trump's success and his increasing popularity.

LOL sure- thats what it was.

And her simple gesture deflated Trump's entire speech.

It was masterful.

The President's speech was masterful, and it left Nancy nothing to do but mumble to herself and take out her shame and frustration on some papers. It was a powerful gesture of defeat.

It was a gesture of disdain
Well deserved

If you are a frustrated teenager, perhaps.

 

[Roudy]

AP FACT CHECK: Ripping up copy of Trump's speech not illegal

But it hurt Trumps feelings
There has to be some law against that

He didn't even notice it. What she did was disgraceful and beyond the office of the Speaker. Why don't you guys admit it..

Disgraceful?

Like bragging about grabbing women by their pussies?
Like attacking a decorated dead veteran?
Like asking a foreign government to investigate a political rival?
Like spewing profanities at an official function?
Like taking credit publicly for a law passed by the dead veteran that was attacked?
Like using a charity for a personal piggy bank?
Like lying about committing adultery with a porn star, and paying her off?

Or for using the office to publicly attack and demean everyone who is seen as a potential threat?

After three years of the disgraceful behavior by our current President of the United States, I fail to see how the Speaker of the House tearing up a piece of paper is an action that needs to be criticized.

4 years ago- maybe. But the last 3 years of disgraceful behavior by Trump

Instead of justifying everything that crazy Leftists like Pelosi do, why don't you try to focus? Non of your assertions about Trump occured DURING the State of the Union speech. Obama and other presidents before him made plenty of bullshit claims during THEIR speeches, but the speaker at the time just sat calmly and let the asshole empty-suited liar have his say.