Two salient points by Ben Rhodes

[kyzr]

No actually they don’t. Trump does and they are being subpoenaed

Like you know what the secret service has and doesn't have. Stop talking out your ass.

 

[Lesh]

Like you know what the secret service has and doesn't have. Stop talking out your ass.

There is no indication that the Secret Service has cameras in Trump's house. It's ridiculous to think that Trump would even allow that.

On the other hand we do know that the DOJ is trying to get security tapes from Trump.

You people are batshit crazy

 

[struth]

There is no indication that the Secret Service has cameras in Trump's house. It's ridiculous to think that Trump would even allow that.

On the other hand we do know that the DOJ is trying to get security tapes from Trump.

You people are batshit crazy

they do in every other president house they protect. The president has no say. It’s required

trump has given the NA full access to his. house

 

[Lesh]

they do in every other president house they protect. The president has no say. It’s required

Link

 

[berg80]

who there viewed them?

According to this article,

Trump Attorney, Former OAN Host Christina Bobb In Spotlight Over Mar-a-Lago Trouble​

Trump Attorney, Former OAN Host Christina Bobb In Spotlight Over Mar-a-Lago Trouble

For years, attorneys for former President Donald Trump have come and gone. Some, like Michael Cohen, took a plea deal — trading three years behind bars for a new career as a minor anti-Trump media…

talkingpointsmemo.com

Evan Corcoran did at the least. To do so legally he would have needed a temporary security clearance. In any event, it looks like Bobb has some splainin' to do with the DoJ. Otherwise, she'll end up being the latest Trump attorney to be indicted.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Rhodes was an national security adviser to Obama. He noted in an interview regarding the Trump controversy over classified docs that, naturally, he lost his security clearance the moment Obama's presidency ended. He was later called upon to testify for Don's first impeachment hearing. In doing prep work for those hearings he had to get a temporary security clearance to read documents he had read while employed as a NSA. Meaning anyone who had access to the classified docs stored at MaL would have needed a security clearance to view them legally.

Secondly, he pointed out there was no national interest being served by Trump's illegal possession of classified docs. None. Trump's interests may have been served in any number of nefarious ways.......but not the country's.

Did Putin make the Hunter Biden laptop?

Why did you lie about it?

 

[Couchpotato]

Rhodes was an national security adviser to Obama. He noted in an interview regarding the Trump controversy over classified docs that, naturally, he lost his security clearance the moment Obama's presidency ended. He was later called upon to testify for Don's first impeachment hearing. In doing prep work for those hearings he had to get a temporary security clearance to read documents he had read while employed as a NSA. Meaning anyone who had access to the classified docs stored at MaL would have needed a security clearance to view them legally.

Secondly, he pointed out there was no national interest being served by Trump's illegal possession of classified docs. None. Trump's interests may have been served in any number of nefarious ways.......but not the country's.

He didn’t lose his security clearance he just lost his access. He was read out as he no longer had an agency sponsoring him for access.

The premise that the people in MAL woukd need a clearance to view the docs located there is based on the assumption they weren’t declassified. Which maybe the case. It also assumes they actually had actual access and read them. Being in the physical presence of classified documents doesn’t require a clearance.

Whether or not Trump having those documents (assuming they were declassified) would serve any national interest has nothing to do with the legality of him possessing them.

 

[Lesh]

He didn’t lose his security clearance he just lost his access. He was read out as he no longer had an agency sponsoring him for access.

The premise that the people in MAL woukd need a clearance to view the docs located there is based on the assumption they weren’t declassified. Which maybe the case. It also assumes they actually had actual access and read them. Being in the physical presence of classified documents doesn’t require a clearance.

Whether or not Trump having those documents (assuming they were declassified) would serve any national interest has nothing to do with the legality of him possessing them.

In who's presence did Trump declassify those docs?

Oh and Bobb's problem is that she signed off on the claim that there were no docs with classified MARKINGS

 

[struth]

In who's presence did Trump declassify those docs?

Oh and Bobb's problem is that she signed off on the claim that there were no docs with classified MARKINGS

1) doesn’t matter
2) required intent, she had none

 

[CrusaderFrank]

As I noted.. scifs are dismantled when a President leaves office

That was just a trolling lie

How did that work at MaL? When was that done?

 

[CowboyTed]

How's your buddy Biden doing, berg?

How does that matter to Trump breaking the law...

This is the GQP problem, they have been told everything bad in the world is Democrat fault... Everything...
So Trump being investigated must be a Democrats fault, when they finally grasp that he broke the law and have to admit it to themselves, they then try and say he is allowed to break the law.
Then it is put to them is anyone above the law, some can't say Trump above the law, cause they know they would have to say Biden is above the law too...
So then they try and say 'well person X broke the law and they were convicted' e.g. Clinton, Biden, Obama... We will politely point out they were investigated and cleared.

So the GQP haeva few in various camp and some trying to inhabit a few of them:

• No law broken
  • Law broken was only a technicality
  • Trump was in negotiations
• Trump is above the law
• Law are broken all the time

These are a stage of denial...

 

[Lesh]

1) doesn’t matter
2) required intent, she had none

What? When a lawyer signs a sworn statement that is false… someone is at fault.

Either that lawyer or that lawyer’s client.

One of them committed obstruction of justice

 

[struth]

What? When a lawyer signs a sworn statement that is false… someone is at fault.

Either that lawyer or that lawyer’s client.

One of them committed obstruction of justice

nah could of honestly believed it…got to prove intent

 

[Lesh]

nah could of honestly believed it…got to prove intent

Bullshit. When they were asked if there were docs marked classified and signed off that there weren’t either they were lying or repeating a lie told to them.

Those docs were clearly marked with classification markings

So either the lawyer lied or the client lied and whoever did that committed obstruction of justice

 

[struth]

Bullshit. When they were asked if there were docs marked classified and signed off that there weren’t either they were lying or repeating a lie told to them.

Those docs were clearly marked with classification markings

So either the lawyer lied or the client lied and whoever did that committed obstruction of justice

There is no way to show intent...the docs were all declassified by President Trump.

The markings don't matter.

 

[Lesh]

There is no way to show intent...the docs were all declassified by President Trump.

The markings don't matter.

She signed off that all MARKED docs had been returned stupid.

They were clearly marked

 

[struth]

She signed off that all MARKED docs had been returned stupid.

They were clearly marked

Now you are just making things up. She said all classified documents were turned over. You got to show that she knowingly and intentionally lied...and since Trump declassfied everything already, she reasonably believed they were all turned over

The obstruction of justice claim is even weaker...since there has to be a crime that's being obstucted...a violation of the Presidential Records Act isn't a crime