Donald Trump Indicted Again.

[homersapien 11,440]

16 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.

Yes, but

1) There's a declassification process - which includes notifying everyone who has that document that it's been declassified (for example).

2) Trump didn't declassify them when he had the power to do so.

[creed 1,649]

5 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

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.

 

At a minimum Biden should be relieved of his duties once the documents he acquired are verified. 

Edited June 12, 2023 by creed

[homersapien 11,440]

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.

What Trump did is criminal.  What Biden, Pence and Clinton did is not.

This is not a "selective prosecution" simply because you say it is.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, creed said:

At a minimum Biden should be relieved of his duties. 

I'm not sure I would go that far.  Why do you believe that?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

36 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

"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/

Here is an example: 

A few states require voters to have a witness or notary signature in order for their returned absentee ballots to be counted -- a requirement that could be an issue for voters who live alone and are trying to keep their distance from others during this time. Both Rhode Island and North Carolina -- a battleground state -- typically require either two witnesses or one notary to sign voters' absentee ballots. Rhode Island has completely eliminated this requirement for November, and in North Carolina, only one witness is required instead of two. Minnesota eliminated the witness signature requirement for its primary, and this has been extended for the general election, too.

The witness requirement was waived for the primary in South Carolina, and a federal judge ruled on Friday that it will not be required for the general election either, citing how severe the pandemic is as the reasoning.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What Trump did is criminal.  What Biden, Pence and Clinton did is not.

I agree, to a degree.  The  theoretical difference is only somewhat "technical".

But here is the reality and, what most need to understand.  The charges against Trump have nothing to do with documents he returned, cooperated with government, didn't disclose to others.  The charges against Trump are related ONLY to the documents his hid, moved, lied about, disclosed.  This is why we aren't even really comparing "apples to apples".

[AUFAN78 3,926]

30 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Would you not allow military overseas to vote?

What?

[homersapien 11,440]

8 minutes ago, creed said:

At a minimum Biden should be relieved of his duties once the documents he acquired are verified. 

He can always be impeached.

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

10 minutes ago, homersapien said:

This is not a "selective prosecution" simply because you say it is.

Correct.  The "selective prosecution" narrative is nothing but partisan politics.

[AuCivilEng1 11,026]

8 minutes ago, creed said:

At a minimum Biden should be relieved of his duties once the documents he acquired are verified. 

So no due process for 

 

1 minute ago, icanthearyou said:

I agree, to a degree.  The  theoretical difference is only somewhat "technical".

But here is the reality and, what most need to understand.  The charges against Trump have nothing to do with documents he returned, cooperated with government, didn't disclose to others.  The charges against Trump are related ONLY to the documents his hid, moved, lied about, disclosed.  This is why we aren't even really comparing "apples to apples".

Exactly. As many people as have taken documents, it is probably fairly common and not considered criminal. What is criminal is flexing nuts on the federal government and hiding the documents with an attempt to mislead. 

I am curious how what he did could play out with other countries who are affected. I am not well versed enough in that stuff to speculate, but if some of those documents, do in fact, contain information that could be harmful to our allies, I wonder what grounds said allies have to charge him?

[AUFAN78 3,926]

23 minutes ago, homersapien said:

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?

Questions my a**. Those are obvious deflections that have nothing to do with the point of contention. Basically the same thing 77 did. It's a sad and pathetic attempt to avoid admitting you were wrong.  

[homersapien 11,440]

24 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

I agree, to a degree.  The  theoretical difference is only somewhat "technical".

But here is the reality and, what most need to understand.  The charges against Trump have nothing to do with documents he returned, cooperated with government, didn't disclose to others.  The charges against Trump are related ONLY to the documents his hid, moved, lied about, disclosed.  This is why we aren't even really comparing "apples to apples".

No, the difference between notifying the appropriate agencies you have classified documents and volunteering to return them is vastly different from ignoring requests - much less subpoenas - to return them and even actively avoiding their return.

The difference is neither "theoretical" nor "technical".   It is apparently substantive.

Edited June 12, 2023 by homersapien

[homersapien 11,440]

32 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

What?

Would you not allow military overseas to vote? 

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by homersapien

[TexasTiger 13,006]

38 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. 

Somebody handled them wrongly and should have known better. Were properly trained personnel tasked with handling? If not, then that’s sloppy by the person tasking them. No VP is going to be that person unless they are trying to evade the law. There’s no evidence of that here and the types of documents while classified, weren’t of the highly sensitive nature Trump had.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

I disagree. 

The difference between notifying the appropriate agencies you have classified documents and volunteering to return them is vastly different from ignoring requests - much less subpoenas - to return them and even actively avoiding their return.

The difference is neither "theoretical" nor "technical".   It is apparently substantive.

I understand.  I agree.  Which is why, I think you clearly have to acknowledge the fact that NONE of the charges in the federal indictment have anything to do with the documents Trumps actually cooperated on.  I think the obvious defiance, the obvious obstruction, the obvious disregard for classification go well beyond the legal/technical argument of "intent".  This is in NO way about intent.  Trump pushed well beyond that boundary.  He even bragged about it.

[AUFAN78 3,926]

Just now, homersapien said:

Would you not allow military overseas to vote?  

Logic escapes you. I get it .

Obviously I can see and read goofball. The question was perplexing given it was to a military veteran who you know supports everything military, including their right to vote. So why the question? In other words WHAT?

[homersapien 11,440]

21 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Questions my a**. Those are obvious deflections that have nothing to do with the point of contention. Basically the same thing 77 did. It's a sad and pathetic attempt to avoid admitting you were wrong.  

No, they were honest questions designed to reveal the point of your argument,  instead of wallowing about in the weeds by delving into various state requirements and the effectiveness of various procedures to validate ballots.

You are the one who is evading the bottom line: either these mail ballot processes affected the election or they did not.  If they didn't, what's your point?

If you want to talk about how our various election ballot process can be fine-tuned from state to state, fine.  Start a new thread.

But you and I both know that's not your point.  You're trying to insinuate - if not outright claim  - Trump won the 2020 election.  Right?

What's "sad and pathetic" is you aren't willing to "man up" and own your own argument.   But you can always clear that up by answering my questions.

So why won't you do so?

Edited June 12, 2023 by homersapien

[AU9377 5,035]

4 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Man, where is the link? They found well over a 100 clearly marked classified docs on her server. According to you, there were none there. There were. Possesion os all you need in a classified document mishandling. Nothing more. You are wrong on the number and the law. They chose not to go after HRC, Powell, et al when they were CLEARLY breaking the classified doc law. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/heres-why-james-comey-didnt-recommend-prosecution-for-hillary-clinton/

The point you are missing is that prosecutions under the relevant laws prior to that investigation all included some degree of willfulness.  In the article above, they point out the difference between that case and the Patraeus case.  I'm not always right, nobody is, but when it comes to the applicable law concerning this, I am not wrong.

You do have a point in part of the determination being that the DOJ had no desire to pursue Rice, Powell and a hundred other people around D.C. that had done similar things and still do regularly.

Edited June 12, 2023 by AU9377

[homersapien 11,440]

22 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

The question was perplexing given it was to a military veteran who you know supports everything military, including their right to vote.

Well, then you should be particularly upset with Trump now that we know he kept highly classified military secrets and was sharing them inappropriately, thus endangering our nation's security as well as putting our military in direct jeopardy. 

Right?

Edited June 12, 2023 by homersapien

[AU9377 5,035]

39 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Here is an example: 

A few states require voters to have a witness or notary signature in order for their returned absentee ballots to be counted -- a requirement that could be an issue for voters who live alone and are trying to keep their distance from others during this time. Both Rhode Island and North Carolina -- a battleground state -- typically require either two witnesses or one notary to sign voters' absentee ballots. Rhode Island has completely eliminated this requirement for November, and in North Carolina, only one witness is required instead of two. Minnesota eliminated the witness signature requirement for its primary, and this has been extended for the general election, too.

The witness requirement was waived for the primary in South Carolina, and a federal judge ruled on Friday that it will not be required for the general election either, citing how severe the pandemic is as the reasoning.

.....and yet they all still verified signatures and investigations out the port hole failed to find more than a couple of voters who claimed to have not returned their valid ballots.  Trump even won the Carolinas.

[AuCivilEng1 11,026]

6 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, then you should be particularly upset with Trump now that we know he kept highly classified military secrets and was sharing them inappropriately, thus endangering our nation's security as well as putting our military in direct jeopardy. 

Right?

[Cardin Drake 1,853]

"There is absolutely no selective prosecution."

You can gaslight us all you want, but literally nobody who is fairminded believes that. There is no way anyone other than Trump is prosecuted over these circumstances.  We have just watched the DOJ prosecute Trump for years over Russian collusion when it was instigated by his political opponent and the DOJ knew the case was bs. Yet we are expected to believe this time it's different and this prosecution isn't political. That's nonsense and everyone knows it.

[homersapien 11,440]

3 minutes ago, Cardin Drake said:

"There is absolutely no selective prosecution."

You can gaslight us all you want, but literally nobody who is fairminded believes that. There is no way anyone other than Trump is prosecuted over these circumstances.  We have just watched the DOJ prosecute Trump for years over Russian collusion when it was instigated by his political opponent and the DOJ knew the case was bs. Yet we are expected to believe this time it's different and this prosecution isn't political. That's nonsense and everyone knows it.

How's the weather in MAGA world? 

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

35 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

.....and yet they all still verified signatures and investigations out the port hole failed to find more than a couple of voters who claimed to have not returned their valid ballots.  Trump even won the Carolinas.

But, but,,, Trump won.  Deep state, liberals, gays, intellectuals, ANTIFA, BLM, they are going to destroy the United States of American.  I don't know how or, why.  They just are.  I watch Fox News.  I know.

 

[Leftfield 2,654]

1 minute ago, Cardin Drake said:

"There is absolutely no selective prosecution."

You can gaslight us all you want, but literally nobody who is fairminded believes that. There is no way anyone other than Trump is prosecuted over these circumstances.  We have just watched the DOJ prosecute Trump for years over Russian collusion when it was instigated by his political opponent and the DOJ knew the case was bs. Yet we are expected to believe this time it's different and this prosecution isn't political. That's nonsense and everyone knows it.

I'm fair minded. I believe it. Just because plenty of people want it to happen doesn't mean it isn't warranted.

Unfortunately we can't prove or disprove your assertion, because nobody near that level of government has been crazy/stupid/narcissistic enough to try this.

Is your solution to let him off the hook? Hypothetically, if he is, what happens the next time someone does this? Surely we have to let that slide, too, because precedent has been set? Then someone will push it a little further, and so on. Where do we draw the line?