Trump Indicted

[Lastamender]

It’s the truth. He was given ample opportunity to handle this without being a problem. He decided to make it a problem.

Stop the propaganda it does not work on me or others here. What we are seeing bears no resemblance to American justice. Period.

 

[RhinelandCityLimits]

MSNBC even has a special on right now with this thread title

 

[Lastamender]

MSNBC even has a special on right now with this thread title

Fair and balanced I bet. This is not the Biden thread. Be careful.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Hey Dante dickhead, why didn't they indict Eric Holder?

It wasn't their call. A federal judge declined the request.

You ignorant dickhead.

 

[Leo123]

Where did you get that idea?

"The classification system for national security information is principally a function of the president’s authority under the U.S. Constitution as commander in chief, which gives the president broad powers to classify and declassify such information."

"The Constitution, executive orders and case law clearly give the president broad authority to classify and declassify documents."

ABA Fact Check: Extent of Presidential Legal Authority to Declassify Materials Is Still Unclear

Most national security legal experts dismissed the former president’s suggestion that while in office he could declassify documents simply by thinking about it. But in theory, legal guidelines support his contention that a president has broad authority to formally declassify most documents that...

lawandcrime.com

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm no lawyer,

You sure aren't. You're just embarrassing yourself

 

[RhinelandCityLimits]

This is not the Biden thread. Be careful.

Careful of what? A coup ‘q’ueenie wrist flail ?

 

[Lastamender]

Careful of what? A coup ‘q’ueenie wrist flail ?

The coup happened when Congress refused to investigate the election of 2020.

 

[Skylar]

"NARA does not have the authority to designate materials as “Presidential records,” NARA does not have the tapes in question, and NARA lacks any right, 2 duty, or means to seize control of them. In other words, there has been no showing that a remedy would be available to redress plaintiff’s alleged injury even if the Court agreed with plaintiff’s characterization of the materials."

"Thus, the PRA requires the President to “maintain records documenting the policies, activities, and decisions of his administration,” but “leav[es] the implementation of such a requirement in the President’s hands.” Id., citing 44 U.S.C. § 2203"

"PRA accords the President “virtually complete control” over his records during his time in office. 924 F.2d at 290. In particular, the court stated that the President enjoys unconstrained authority to make decisions regarding the disposal of documents: “[a]lthough the President must notify the Archivist before disposing of records . . . neither the Archivist nor Congress has the authority to veto the President’s disposal decision.” Id., citing H.R. Rep. No. 95-1487, at 13 (1978), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 5744. Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records."

"Thus, a close reading of the Armstrong II decision suggests that the limited judicial review authorized by the D.C. Circuit left untouched that portion of Armstrong I that gave the President unfettered control over his own documents."

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2010cv1834-13

I'm no lawyer, but that doesn't look very good for what they're trying to do here.

Ugh. You've never read the case you're citing.

First:

"The PRA distinguishes Presidential records from “personal records,” defining personal records as “all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.” Id. § 2201(3)."


There is no interpretation of the PRA where classified national security docs are personal records. With the courts making it very clear that the president cannot designate any material he wishes as personal records.

The case was Judicial Watch trying to FORCE NARA to seize tapes from Clinton. And NARA refusing, with the courts finding that there was no provision within the PRA to compell NARA to seize records they don't consider theirs to control.

The PRA authorizes NARA to invoke the same enforcement mechanism embodied in the Federal Records Act, which begins with a request to the Attorney General to institute an action for the recovery of missing records. Compare 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) with 44 U.S.C. § 3106. The statute does not mandate that NARA invoke this enforcement scheme but rather vests complete discretion with the agency to utilize that mechanism. 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) (“When the Archivist considers it to be in the public interest, he may . . . .” (emphasis added). The Archivist has chosen to invoke the mechanism in the past when it deemed such action appropriate.


In Trump's case, the Archivist absolutely DID invoke the mechanism to recover missing records.

Try again. This time actually reading the rulings in question rather than just cutting and pasting what you found on some wordpress blog.

 

[RhinelandCityLimits]

The coup happened when Congress refused to investigate the election of 2020.

Good one, kgb ‘supremacyst’

 

[Father O'Blivion]

So what? Its still going to happen.

With your full throated support as well.

Think long and hard about what you are saying.

 

[Skylar]

The coup happened when Congress refused to investigate the election of 2020.

Nope. Congress had no constitutional obligation to investigate your fantasy. Congress DID have a constitutional obligation to count the electoral vote.

You're literally insisting Congress HAD to violate the constitution.

No. They didn't.

And please don't pretend that you give a fiddler's fuck about any investigation. You've ignored the DOJ investigation. You ignored the Attorney General. You've ignored BOTH of Trump's private investigations. You've ignored every State investigation into their own elections. You've ignored every audit, forensic audit, hand count, recount, machine count or electoral vote.

Any investigation that doesn't affirm your delusional 'big lie', you ignore. And just fold into your batshit fantasy.

 

[The Duke]

"After his presidency, Trump was not authorized to posses or retain classified documents.'" the laws are exact

It's based on the law. Read the indictment The issue is addressed, stating laws and orders that were violated.

Where's the actual statute, you pinheaded dunce?

 

[Leo123]

Ugh. You've never read the case you're citing.

First:

"The PRA distinguishes Presidential records from “personal records,” defining personal records as “all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.” Id. § 2201(3)."


There is no interpretation of the PRA where classified national security docs are personal records. With the courts making it very clear that the president cannot designate any material he wishes as personal records.

The case was Judicial Watch trying to FORCE NARA to seize tapes from Clinton. And NARA refusing, with the courts finding that there was no provision within the PRA to compell NARA to seize records they don't consider theirs to control.

The PRA authorizes NARA to invoke the same enforcement mechanism embodied in the Federal Records Act, which begins with a request to the Attorney General to institute an action for the recovery of missing records. Compare 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) with 44 U.S.C. § 3106. The statute does not mandate that NARA invoke this enforcement scheme but rather vests complete discretion with the agency to utilize that mechanism. 44 U.S.C. § 2112(c) (“When the Archivist considers it to be in the public interest, he may . . . .” (emphasis added). The Archivist has chosen to invoke the mechanism in the past when it deemed such action appropriate.


In this case, the Archivist absolutely DID invoke the mechanism to recover missing records.

Try again. This time actually reading the rulings in question rather than just cutting and pasting what you found on some wordpress blog.

The PRA has no criminal statute.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Where's the actual statute, you pinheaded dunce?

read the indictment

 

[Skylar]

The PRA has no criminal statute.

Which might explain why the indictments cited the Espionage Act. Which do.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

The PRA has no criminal statute.

doesn't apply

read the indictment

 

[Skylar]

read the indictment

Laughing.......Duke claims to have read the entire indictment, but doesn't know any of the laws being cited in it.

He's wallowing in bullshit like a pig does mud.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Where's the actual statute, you pinheaded dunce?

Trump took things after he ceased being president


Read #4

 

[Toro]

That's not the law, Toto. That is a lawyer's accusation. There is a difference.

LOL

no