Whistle Pig said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

in your mind you think Trump committed obstruction because there is strong evidence

---

FIFY

Quote:

---

And my statement about Hunter was I thought he SHOULD be in jail.

---

Because of crimes you think he committed, without a trial. Which is fine. You don't see me policing your words as if we're in a courtroom. This is an internet message board.

---

That is because my words do not need policing. And now you added things you think I meant but did not say. Where did I say without a trial?

Sure it is a message board.

So I can respond to you and you can respond to me.

Words mean things.

You assume and project a lot.

Quote:

---

Where did I say without a trial?

---

You didn't. It's a fact he hasn't been charged yet. Yet you are free to make up your own mind, same as me. Words mean things.

Why with all this sophistic pedantry? This is a message board.

Whistle Pig said:

---

There are more known allegations that are very serious in the subpoena and the warrant affidavit. The false assertion and recovered documents are pretty damning facts supporting an obstruction charge.

---

Heh? I do not think so. You need evidence showing the lawyer knowingly made false statements. This has been reviewed with you a number of times. You keep posting the same innuendo and assumptions that exist in your mind and in the minds of whomever feeds you your talking points.

Typical process is to charge and indict a cooperating witness. The only thing I have seen regarding the lawyer is that she hired representation. If her lawyer has replied to an FBI request, then in effect she is "cooperating". But to date, no charges against her have been alleged.

You most certainly do not have facts or evidence supporting your supposition that Trump induced her to lie, forced her to lie, paid her to lie or lied to her to get her to lie in the statement. You have NOTHING to support such a "crime". That argument of obstruction is further weakened because you cannot point to any other alleged crimes being supported by facts or evidence.

As you mentioned, 2 months, almost 3 months, 8 pages here, 50+ pages on the purged thread, and you have zilch.

Presidential v Personal is a civil matter. You are left with proving Trump somehow violated the Espionage Act. That's lush and invites a strong comparison to Joe, Hunter and their CCP / Ukraine and globalist shenanigans.

Your team is about to get mudholed in the worst way. Your tears will be marvelous with a side of cooked bacon.

No run along and get us some more bad info to debunk. Go on lil piggy, go on.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

Where did I say without a trial?

---

You didn't. It's a fact he hasn't been charged yet. Yet you are free to make up your own mind, same as me. Words mean things.

Why with all this sophistic pedantry? This is a message board.

---

Dude, you mis spoke. Just admit it. You let your emotions and bias cloud your thought process.

And big words do not impress me. I know a few myself after being in medicine since 1977.

Sorry.

And as an "old" my advice would be to engage in critical thinking. If possible.

And this is why we ALL have to go vote. This is the mindset we're up against.

Rockdoc said:

---

And this is why we ALL have to go vote. This is the mindset we're up against.

---

The lack of common sense and critical thinking is alarming.

These are smart folks.

And fwiw, I like Whistle Pig rye.

I didn't misspeak, you misunderstood. You thinking he's guilty is independent of whether a trial has occurred yet.

You weren't implying there should be no trial, and I didn't read it that way.

Quick question. Am I allowed to think OJ was guilty even though he was acquitted? Just trying to understand the rules.

Amen. We also need to be reaching the impressionable youth more. I suspect some of the usual suspects on here are of the millennial mindset, whether or not they actually qualify as a millennial).

It is why TPUSA and similar orgs must be supported and local chapters setup in our high schools and colleges.

I am scheduled to meet with our district leadership to get TPUSA established in the high schools. I also committed to funding the establishment of these chapters as well.

Time to step it up.

Whistle Pig said:

---

I didn't misspeak, you misunderstood. You thinking he's guilty is independent of whether a trial has occurred yet.

You weren't implying there should be no trial, and I didn't read it that way.

Quick question. Am I allowed to think OJ was guilty even though he was acquitted? Just trying to understand the rules.

---

Where did I imply there should be no trial for Hunter?

Do you know what projection is?

You are allowed to think anything you want.

Just like me, say you think this. Do not state as fact when it is not.

Read your statements about Trump's lawyer and Trump.

Compare them with my statement about Hunter.

Think.

Can you not see the difference?

Whistle Pig said:

---

I didn't misspeak, you misunderstood. You thinking he's guilty is independent of whether a trial has occurred yet.

You weren't implying there should be no trial, and I didn't read it that way.

Quick question. Am I allowed to think OJ was guilty even though he was acquitted? Just trying to understand the rules.

---

Have to say, in a just world this would actually not be allowed based on the apparent "thinking" you have shown on this thread by reposting tired baseless talking points and allegations and utter refusal to consider other information that does not align with your "Got him!" agenda.

Always good to check in and see if Merrick Garland's Stasi has made any progress this morning.

Whistle Pig said:

---

What other information would you like me to consider?

You were apparently unaware until yesterday that the June subpoena demanded all documents "marked classified" after being told repeatedly. You were still claiming "declassification status" negated the false statement.

You make some good points above about investigative techniques to build an airtight case that will hold up at trial and the FBI is doing it. But this isn't a court. There is only one person who plausibly stood to benefit from that false representation. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what happened.

---

This is so laughable. It is not a crime to possess a piece of paper with a classified stamp on it. You want an FBI raid because Trump didn't take his Sharpie to the paper and mark through the stamp when he declassified. Pro Trip: He doesn't have to change the markings.

You have been told repeatedly and it has been explained to you over and over and over again that a documents marking has no bearing on its actual status. Its inconvenient for you, but its the truth.

What is this supposed "benefit" Trump was to receive by any purported misrepresentation?

You literally support armed FBI raids over a dispute of markings on documents that may or may not contain classified / declassified information. Got him!!

The intent of the raid was to intimidate people from supporting Trump or policies he would espouse/endorse vs. the swamp, not to produce bombshells. In the FBI/DoJ's warped thinking, I am sure they estimated that 'well, even if we can't take him out from '24, we can intimidate others who might consider him.'

"Get Trump" is an imperative to the left as much as killing babies, or for muslims waging jihad. To them, this moral imperative far outweighs any possible secondary effects (shame, illegality, unconstitutionality, absurd difference in how the FBI/nat'l archives treat him vs. Obama, etc).

Whistle Pig said:

---

I have never said the documents marked classified are definitely classified. I was simply pointing out you didn't understand the allegation, the subpoena, or why the lawyer statement was false. You didn't know the first thing about it and why it mattered.

Quote:

---

If the docs are not classified, then the lawyer did not lie.

---

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3330907/replies/63368505

You were wrong then, you still seem confused about it, and I wonder if you know anything about this case.

---

So now we are parsing "marked classified" with true classified?

So what is the penalty for allegedly lying about not knowing there were still documents with "Marked classified" on them?

And that is the supposed "bombshell" so far@?

Can you even fathom it might have been an honest mistake?

Of course not.

We have seen the FBI decline to indict a bad actor who had classified info on a private email server off the government's network and used bleachbit on the server and hammers on cell phones to get rid of the evidence.

No matter what you try to explain about a subpoena or what an attorney marked on some paperwork about the documents and possessions Trump had moved from the white house to mar a lago 18 months ago, I don't think there's anything you can say that will convince anyone that 30 FBI agents raiding Trump's home was not political. Unless there is an actual bombshell, like DJT stole nuclear secrets so he and Jared could sell them to the Saudi's, this entire thing will continue to be purely a political attack by Biden's DOJ against a political opponent.

They want his popularity to die. They don't want to have to cheat so badly again if they have to run against him again. Not letting the people decide who governs them is anti-democracy. Attacking and trying to imprison your political opponent for something you haven't found yet is Marxist.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

So now we are parsing "marked classified" with true classified?

---

It matters greatly in this case because it was subject to subpoena. Read the thread. FKA FTC was completely unaware.

If you have a theory for an "innocent explanation" I'd love to hear it.

---

Okay so say the attorney is guilty if not saying there were still files "marked classified".

If the stuff in there is not truly classified, what is the penalty?

You are a mountain out of a mole hill.

Assuming all these nefarious things with almost zero evidence

Quote:

---

It matters greatly in this case because it was subject to subpoena.

---

Would it have been okay if he had just destroyed them, then?

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

So now we are parsing "marked classified" with true classified?

---

It matters greatly in this case because it was subject to subpoena. Read the thread. FKA FTC was completely unaware.

If you have a theory for an "innocent explanation" I'd love to hear it.

---

No this is an utter and absolute LIE. You do NOT get to speak for me and do NOT get to make assumptions about this.

Marked classified is essentially meaning less. I know your side loves to parse language so lets go down this little piglet hole.

Hillary claimed she did nothing wrong with her bathroom email server because she says the emails were not "marked classified" even though they contained sensitive, top secret, classified information, etc. Some contained information within the email marked as classified with a "(c)" even though proper systems and headers were not used. Hillary thought these were just paragraph markings for a series of points (as in a), b), c), etc).

So Hillary can claim she had no classified information on the email server, even though she should have known the information was classified, and even had classified markings within the emails but she claims stupidity... as the Secretary of State... to not know what the markings meant.

As stated over and over again, markings do NOT make it classified. It gives an indication as to status. It is possible to have classified information that is not marked. This happens if someone tells you something classified, then you verbally share that with another person who is not authorized, you have broken the law regarding classified information and literally NO MARKINGS were involved.

You seem hell bent on trying to catch me in some sort of lie or misrepresentation. Go for it. I am as honest as it comes. I do not lie, cheat or steal and I do NOT tolerate those who do.

No run along and go wallow around in the swamp of slop and **** you live in lil piggy. Go on.

dermdoc said:

---

Whistle Pig said:

---

Quote:

---

Where did I say without a trial?

---

You didn't. It's a fact he hasn't been charged yet. Yet you are free to make up your own mind, same as me. Words mean things.

Why with all this sophistic pedantry? This is a message board.

---

Dude, you mis spoke. Just admit it. You let your emotions and bias cloud your thought process.

And big words do not impress me. I know a few myself after being in medicine since 1977.

Sorry.

And as an "old" my advice would be to engage in critical thinking. If possible.

---

Derm, are you saying your being "critical" of other peoples "thinking"?

I must not know what this critical thinking thing is!

I'll have to look up the proper way to use critical thinking this weekend when the Ags play Ole Miss, in case I don't think our coaching staff is thinking critically.

The obstruction charge is fairly serious in itself in that it implies a conspiracy and planning. The lawyer takes a risk so that Trump can keep the documents. It had to be at his behest.

The next question is why would they go to such lengths to keep and hide these documents over 18 months?Even risking a felony obstruction charge.

Sophistic pedantry and gish gallop.

Evidently warbling swine watches way too much Dawson's Creek.

Whistle Pig said:

---

The obstruction charge is fairly serious in itself in that it implies a conspiracy and planning. The lawyer takes a risk so that Trump can keep the documents. It had to be at his behest.

The next question is why would they go to such lengths to keep and hide these documents over 18 months?Even risking a felony obstruction charge.

---

And if you were an honest person you would also be asking why Biden and the Corrupt DOJ/FBI and the feckless NARA director are trying SOOOO HARD to get them back that they conducted an armed raid of a compound under constant video surveillance and heavily guarded by an elite force from the Department of Homeland Security.

Strange isn't it?

This thread.....

Poor piggy

Squadron7 said:

---

This thread.....

---

Let's try and stay on topic now...

Found this gem in looking at the history in more detail of Mar-a-Lago.

Remember the most racist President ever resides at 1600 Pennsylvania and in some place called Delaware.

Trump lives between two huge and beautiful luxury properties and did more for Blacks, gays and Jewish folks than Abe Lincoln and Binyamin Netanyahu combined.

"When he opened Mar-a-Lago, Trump welcomed Jewish members, African-Americans, and gay couples, who had been prohibited from joining other Palm Beach clubs. Club members reportedly used to pay a $100,000 initiation fee and annual dues of $14,000 (along with taxes and an annual food minimum of $2,000) for the privilege of using the facilities. Following Trump's victory, the inauguration fee went up to $200,000."

fka ftc said:

---

Found this gem in looking at the history in more detail of Mar-a-Lago.

Remember the most racist President ever resides at 1600 Pennsylvania and in some place called Delaware.

Trump lives between two huge and beautiful luxury properties and did more for Blacks, gays and Jewish folks than Abe Lincoln and Binyamin Netanyahu combined.

"When he opened Mar-a-Lago, Trump welcomed Jewish members, African-Americans, and gay couples, who had been prohibited from joining other Palm Beach clubs. Club members reportedly used to pay a $100,000 initiation fee and annual dues of $14,000 (along with taxes and an annual food minimum of $2,000) for the privilege of using the facilities. Following Trump's victory, the inauguration fee went up to $200,000."

---

Are you telling me that Trump turned Mar-a-Lago into a jungle? A racial jungle????

Whistle Pig said:

---

I have never said the documents marked classified are definitely classified. I was simply pointing out you didn't understand the allegation, the subpoena, or why the lawyer statement was false.

---

Does "not telling the truth" about documents that are legally possessed rise to the level that a former President's home should be raided? Is that where we are now?

Whistle Pig said:

---

The obstruction charge is fairly serious in itself in that it implies a conspiracy and planning.

---

Utter bull***** It's effectively entrapment when the "Justice" Department is as corrupt as this one is.

Rockdoc said:

---

Poor piggy

---

Don't get too excited yet. Staff just deleted the posts where FKA hyperventilated because I called Mar a Lago a hotel. He flags everything he deems a "lie".

Whistle Pig said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

Poor piggy

---

Don't get too excited yet. Staff just deleted the posts where FKA hyperventilated because I called Mar a Lago a hotel. He flags everything he deems a "lie".

---

Staff injecting their own biases into the forums?