Donald Trump Indicted Again.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

27 minutes ago, Gowebb11 said:

What shouldn’t get lost amongst all of the posting of complex court cases and legal diatribes is this. How stupid do you have to be to store classified documents in shoe boxes and cars and personal Computers and sock drawers and think that this is safe and good for the nation? 

That point requires intent and knowledge. There’s only one person we have clear evidence had that.

[CoffeeTiger 5,169]

9 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

It's interesting how you'all are discussing this like the facts matter. We know how every single person on this board would vote if they were on the jury. They would listen carefully, weigh all the evidence, and then 100% vote according to their predisposition about Trump.  40% of America sees this as a partisan witch hunt by an out of control DOJ, which has already completely destroyed it's own credibility with the Mueller investigation and 40% think any means is fair as long as the ends is "getting" Trump.  The trial won't be held until after the election, so the whole purpose is to cost him a few percentage points in an already tight race. It's interesting that the FBI and DOJ have so eroded their own credibility that a  37 count felony indictment hardly costs Trump any support.  Still, in a close election, that could be enough. Congratulations, DOJ we have now have further descended into a 3rd world political and judicial system.

 

Those same 40% who believe its a witch hunt also incorrectly believed/still believe there was wide spread voter fraud in the 2020 election. 

Those "witch hunters" also believed an egotistical reality tv star would make a great president in 2016. 

Trumps fans haven't shown themselves to be too reliable in the past, so maybe that should factor into how much weight we give their opinions on this issue. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by CoffeeTiger

[CoffeeTiger 5,169]

14 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

You can disagree all you'd like but the President does have the authority to declassify. Whether you think it's good or bad, The authority vested to the President by the Constitution is the source of the authority to declassify.

Well apparently the DOJ has a recording of Trump from 2021 acknowledging himself that he never properly declassified the documents and that he seemed to know then that he was in possession of documents he shouldn't have. 

Unless you're buying into the theory that the President can declassify any document at any time telepathically just thinking about it and taking no other action. 

That would be an interesting argument to try to make in court. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by CoffeeTiger

[homersapien 11,440]

16 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

The President has the ultimate authority to declassify and retain documents. Pretty wild that the President is given the Commander in Chief title and has the unilateral authority to launch nuclear weapons but suddenly now having classified documents and retaining them is grounds for Obstruction and Espionage that started from a non-criminal engagement over the Presidential Records Act.

Political Midwits that detest Trump: This isn't political. It's about protecting democracy because Trump is a 'national security threat' like we've been saying since 2016 by parroting the same politicized National Security State officials that spied on Trump's campaign and investigated him over proven lies of Russian collusion.

Also Midwits: Hillary wasn't charged because she cooperated herp derp.....

So by that argument had Trump just cooperated and returned all the documents as requested then he wouldn't have been charged. That would mean it wasn't illegal for him to possess the documents in the first place.

This isn't about Trump being 'above the law'. It's about creating new legal theories meant to criminalize Trump's conduct.

No, that's wrong.   Trump had no legal right to retain (refuse to return) the documents.

Had Trump returned those documents when requested, he would not have been indicted.  That's not a "new" legal theory.  It's the one that currently exists.

The criminality of Trump's actions resides in the fact he refused to return them plus his actions meant to evade there discovery and return, a.k.a. "obstruction".

[TexasTiger 13,006]

[aubiefifty 16,903]

On 6/10/2023 at 7:57 AM, aubaseball said:

Orange man bad.   Orange man bad.   Orange man bad.   Orange man bad.   The boogie man is coming.   The boogie man is coming.   Beatle juice, beatle juice.   
we need more articles on Trump.   We need more articles on Trump.   We need more articles on Trump.   

thank you for that vote of confidence! i will up my game just for you! i mean trump is in the news every single day. i know it hurts that you voted for him. you were one of the worst ones taking up for trump and getting crappy about. so let me go find some more tex.

[homersapien 11,440]

14 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

He didnt. You know it yet lie about it. So typical of you homey. 

Well, let's clear this up and go back and verify.  After all, this is a written forum with a written record.

First, to clarify, what was your question that you claim wasn't answered?  How about quoting that post?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Just now, homersapien said:

Well, let's clear this up and go back and verify.  After all, this is a written forum with a written record.

First, to clarify, what was your question that you claim wasn't answered?  How about quoting that post?

Well I appreciate the honest attempt homes. Good on you.

We were talking about mass mail in ballots and whether they were secure. I asked a simple hypothetical about someone receiving one of these ballots that arrived without request and how it would be verified since there was no signature on a request form to match against the subsequent ballot (the normal process.)

Furthermore, we know now that several states suspended signature verification entirely during the 2020 election. So quite clearly there was no verification for all ballots. This isn't some earth shattering news. There are literally hundreds of articles on the topic.

So when I asked the hypothetical his response was, you guessed it, signature verification.   Of course when challenged he never responded. Is it a wonder why?

 

[homersapien 11,440]

15 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Well I appreciate the honest attempt homes. Good on you.

We were talking about mass mail in ballots and whether they were secure. I asked a simple hypothetical about someone receiving one of these ballots that arrived without request and how it would be verified since there was no signature on a request form to match against the subsequent ballot (the normal process.)

Furthermore, we know now that several states suspended signature verification entirely during the 2020 election. So quite clearly there was no verification for all ballots. This isn't some earth shattering news. There are literally hundreds of articles on the topic.

So when I asked the hypothetical his response was, you guessed it, signature verification.   Of course when challenged he never responded. Is it a wonder why?

 

How many such ballots are we talking about exactly?  Are you arguing that Trump would have won the election but for these "fraudulent" votes?

If so, was this one of the 62(?) cases that were brought before the courts by Trump supporters?

Bottom line - are you claiming Trump actually won in 2020?

[I_M4_AU 7,987]

1 hour ago, CoffeeTiger said:

 

Those same 40% who believe its a witch hunt also incorrectly believed/still believe there was wide spread voter fraud in the 2020 election. 

Those "witch hunters" also believed an egotistical reality tv star would make a great president in 2016. 

Trumps fans haven't shown themselves to be too reliable in the past, so maybe that should factor into how much weight we give their opinions on this issue. 

You must be in the 40% in the end justifies the means category.

What is interesting is that 63% of the independents feel the charges are serious and we all know the independents are going to elect the next president.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

Have you all started complaining about the judge yet; the one this case is assigned to? 

[AU9377 5,035]

11 hours ago, Cardin Drake said:

It's interesting how you'all are discussing this like the facts matter. We know how every single person on this board would vote if they were on the jury. They would listen carefully, weigh all the evidence, and then 100% vote according to their predisposition about Trump.  40% of America sees this as a partisan witch hunt by an out of control DOJ, which has already completely destroyed it's own credibility with the Mueller investigation and 40% think any means is fair as long as the ends is "getting" Trump.  The trial won't be held until after the election, so the whole purpose is to cost him a few percentage points in an already tight race. It's interesting that the FBI and DOJ have so eroded their own credibility that a  37 count felony indictment hardly costs Trump any support.  Still, in a close election, that could be enough. Congratulations, DOJ we have now have further descended into a 3rd world political and judicial system.

Facts absolutely matter, which is why it is so important for you to understand that the facts that are at the core of Trump's indictment are nothing remotely similar to the facts underlying Hillary's emails or Biden's classified documents discovery.  Did you listen to the interview with Bill Barr on Fox Sunday?  If not, you should.  As he stated, this is not a witch hunt.  For the better part of two years, they pleaded with Trump to simply comply with what the law requires.  Instead of doing that, he chose to lie and direct others to lie.\

The only group making this country look like a 3rd world collection of malcontents is that group that is incapable of or unwilling to hold their cult figure to the same standards as every other citizen.

[TexasTiger 13,006]

32 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Well I appreciate the honest attempt homes. Good on you.

We were talking about mass mail in ballots and whether they were secure. I asked a simple hypothetical about someone receiving one of these ballots that arrived without request and how it would be verified since there was no signature on a request form to match against the subsequent ballot (the normal process.)

Furthermore, we know now that several states suspended signature verification entirely during the 2020 election. So quite clearly there was no verification for all ballots. This isn't some earth shattering news. There are literally hundreds of articles on the topic.

So when I asked the hypothetical his response was, you guessed it, signature verification.   Of course when challenged he never responded. Is it a wonder why?

 

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/04/13/desantis-wants-voters-signatures-to-match-would-his-pass-the-test/?outputType=amp

[AU9377 5,035]

28 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Well I appreciate the honest attempt homes. Good on you.

We were talking about mass mail in ballots and whether they were secure. I asked a simple hypothetical about someone receiving one of these ballots that arrived without request and how it would be verified since there was no signature on a request form to match against the subsequent ballot (the normal process.)

Furthermore, we know now that several states suspended signature verification entirely during the 2020 election. So quite clearly there was no verification for all ballots. This isn't some earth shattering news. There are literally hundreds of articles on the topic.

So when I asked the hypothetical his response was, you guessed it, signature verification.   Of course when challenged he never responded. Is it a wonder why?

 

"Furthermore, we know now that several states suspended signature verification entirely during the 2020 election."   When you claim this, are you speaking of yourself and "Judge Jeanine" or who?  WHo "knows" this?   Go ahead and source me something that backs up this claim that this collection of states suspended all ballot verification methods......

That is a fairy tale notion.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jul/30/facebook-posts/most-states-require-signature-verification-mail-ba/

[TexasTiger 13,006]

12 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Have you all started complaining about the judge yet; the one this case is assigned to? 

Any reasonable person would after she was repeatedly deemed incompetent or hopelessly biased by the 11th Circuit.

[AuCivilEng1 11,026]

I really wish that everyone would just read the indictment or at least some cliff notes of it. So many people are downplaying the seriousness of what Trump did who haven't even bothered to educate themselves on what this is all about. There are some pretty gnarly charges. If he is found guilty of this stuff, we should all hope that he faces the consequences, so to deter anyone from pulling this kind of sh*t in the future. If he gets off, due to some technicality with the secret service, etc, our justice system has completely failed, yet again. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by AuCivilEng1

[AU9377 5,035]

15 hours ago, Auburnfan91 said:

I want fairness whether I like somebody or not. I don't want selective prosecution. If it's not criminal when somebody they like does it, it shouldn't be criminal when somebody they don't like does it.

There is absolutely no selective prosecution.  That is only an argument made by either people that have no idea what the two cases are about or by those intentionally conflating the two sets of facts in order to generate smoke and take the conversation away from what has actually taken place.

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by AU9377

[AUFAN78 3,926]

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

How many such ballots are we talking about exactly?  Are you arguing that Trump would have won the election but for these "fraudulent" votes?

If so, was this one of the 62(?) cases that were brought before the courts by Trump supporters?

Bottom line - are you claiming Trump actually won in 2020?

Good grief man. So you weren't interested in honesty at all. Go figure .

The voices in the heads of some of you cats is amazing. Look homes, follow the thread with logic, not some brand of cryptic BS.  

[AUFAN78 3,926]

22 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/04/13/desantis-wants-voters-signatures-to-match-would-his-pass-the-test/?outputType=amp

A great example of why signature verification isn't secure. I won't even get into some of the people they have trying to match them.

Look, there is a very good reason over 75% of Americans want voter id for elections. 

[TexasTiger 13,006]

Just now, AUFAN78 said:

A great example of why signature verification isn't secure. I won't even get into some of the people they have trying to match them.

Look, there is a very good reason over 75% of Americans want voter id for elections. 

Would you not allow military overseas to vote?

[creed 1,649]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

That point requires intent and knowledge. There’s only one person we have clear evidence had that.

Federal employees, including the executive staff, receive annual training in the handling of documents especially classified documents. Now intent maybe lacking in Biden’s case, but not having knowledge on how to identify and handle documents is a hard sale. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by creed

[homersapien 11,440]

30 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Good grief man. So you weren't interested in honesty at all. Go figure .

The voices in the heads of some of you cats is amazing. Look homes, follow the thread with logic, not some brand of cryptic BS.  

Not going to respond to my questions huh (below)?

Isn't that what you were just railing on AU9377 for?  

Hypocrite.

1) How many such ballots are we talking about exactly? 

2) Are you arguing that Trump would have won the election but for these "fraudulent" votes?

3) If so, was this one of the 62(?) cases that were brought before the courts by Trump supporters?

4) Bottom line - are you claiming Trump actually won in 2020?

Edited June 12, 2023 by homersapien

[icanthearyou 4,463]

29 minutes ago, AuCivilEng1 said:

So many people are downplaying the seriousness of what Trump did who haven't even bothered to educate themselves on what this is all about.

I doubt that would matter at all to those people.  They are in the Q world.  The enemies are, the "deep state", the liberals who, as we all know, are Marxist, and most importantly, that these people are determined to destroy the U.S.A.

So, logically (in their minds), they must attack the U.S. Capitol and, hang Mike Pence.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

10 minutes ago, creed said:

Federal employees, including the executive staff, receive annual training in the handling of documents especially classified documents. Now intent maybe lacking in Biden’s case, but not having knowledge on how to identify and handle documents is a hard sale. 

I agree.  There should be penalties for these "lapses" even when they are unintentional and, without consequence.  I am not saying that all of them need to go to jail but,,, there has to be some deterrent that reinforces the need for confidentiality. 

The only exception I would see is the disclosure of the government violating the law.

 

[AuCivilEng1 11,026]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I doubt that would matter at all to those people.  They are in the Q world.  The enemies are, the "deep state", the liberals who, as we all know, are Marxist, and most importantly, that these people are determined to destroy the U.S.A.

So, logically (in their minds), they must attack the U.S. Capitol and, hang Mike Pence.

I wish there was a way for these people to live in the Gilead that they so want a deserve, without everyone else being forced to live like that too.