Trump indicted over classified documents

209,034 Views | 3433 Replies | Last: 3 days ago by will25u
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ag with kids • 9:06p, 6/26/23
AG
Quote:
They have that document to prove it was classified, right?
Last I saw, they did not.
Reply Quote
5
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 9:18p, 6/26/23
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
They have that document to prove it was classified, right?
Last I saw, they did not.


That is my current understanding and I imagine will be key to any defense that "well no, it wasn't that one".

Of course, he can also play the "It was a signed DVD from Stormy I kept in a classified marked folder so Melania".

Even so, if he just waved the document and did not let the guy read it, have it, or make a copy then all that is moot.

As previously noted, he is also not charged with providing national defense information. Only having it after it had been asked for back. So all 37 counts are about the docs they found. The tape may or may not be related to one of those documents.

Think they are using that in the indictment to manipulate the narrative. Just like the photos of all the boxes. It's mean for noise and effect. And it's utterly despicable of Smith and Garland to conspire to mislead the American people.
Reply Quote
3
captkirk
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 9:32p, 6/26/23
AG
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
They have that document to prove it was classified, right?
Last I saw, they did not.
Oooooh. That's unfortunate
Reply Quote
3
TXAggie2011
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:41p, 6/26/23
AG
They charged him over 31 documents. Their theory of the proving each retention charge clearly doesn't hinge on that audiotape about one particular document.

The audiotape is most clearly relevant to show Trump's general mindset and general knowledge. It also is a response ahead of time to any defense that "I declassified everything" and will require a lot of explaining away.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Rapier108
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:46p, 6/26/23
Since CNN got the tape, that means it came from the FBI.

CNN is their go to media outlet when they want to "leak" something.
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." - Sir Winston Churchill
Reply Quote
7
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TXAggie2011 • 9:46p, 6/26/23
I was told to go through my records and sort personal vs presidential, as I have the right to under the Presidential Records Act.

Boom. Clear, easy defense. If there were intelligent, honest people in Washington, DC.

But know, its always about "getting Trump".

Including the bull**** "show his mindset" which is a funny claim since the charges show they began the second he was no longer POTUS.

I guess maybe Smith didn't think it all through as much as he claims.

Banana republic, clown show, Trump broke no laws.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:17p, 6/26/23
Reply Quote
4
Dan Scott
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:35p, 6/26/23
AG
Is it possible CNN can F up the government case on Trump by leaking evidence against him?
Reply Quote
3
Ag with kids
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Dan Scott • 10:53p, 6/26/23
AG
Dan Scott said:
Is it possible CNN can F up the government case on Trump by leaking evidence against him?
That...

Would be ****ing HILARIOUS...

They're all tripping over their dicks to see how fast they can have him in shackles that if this screwed it up I'd literally LMAO (I'm fat, I could use the weight loss).
Reply Quote
4
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:18p, 6/26/23
Still think Trump should file something at the supreme court.

File something on all these constitutional issues and let them say no.

Put the onus on the supreme court to do what they are supposed to do.

If they refuse to take up the case then at least we'll know where we are at.
Reply Quote
1
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:35p, 6/26/23
Trump stays the case in the district court pending the outcome of concurrent appeals to the 11th circuit and the supreme court of the united states.

Give both higher court an opportunity to deal with the case right off the bat.

Both courts get an opportunity to take a preliminary look at these issues.

If both courts deny trump on this then at least he knows where he's at.

If either one of the courts take the case then it's a massive win for trump.

If both courts reject Trump then its probably a bigger win for Trump.

If both courts deny Trump here it's a bad look.

It lets him know that he's on for the long haul. Wrapped up in federal criminal trial for the next 3-years.
Reply Quote
1
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:51p, 6/26/23
Trump trial is the new covid.
Reply Quote
3
BMX Bandit
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 5:18a, 6/27/23
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
I'm also confused at you claiming Fed don't want to tell Trump who is on the list. The motion says they already provided it, and if that was false you know Trump lawyers would be all over that telling Cannon it was a lie.
She issued a paperless order. No hearing, no response required.


"No response required" because Trump's lawyers did not oppose the relief sought. That does not mean they were not allowed to file a response.

It's an absolute certainty Trump's lawyers would have let the Court know if the filing by government falsely states they had provided the list.
Reply Quote
7
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:49a, 6/27/23
If the DOJ is going to leal evidence to CNN, then why is Trump burdened with any sort of restrictions.

I hope Cannon tells DOJ she is throwing the case out for them leaking evidence and limiting Trump's right to an impartial jury.
Reply Quote
3
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:53a, 6/27/23
Can anyone explain how the tape exonerates Trump? I'm not seeing tht angle. I'd be focusing on crooked DOJ if I were his team, but can understand why Trump has to say something. Does he even believe this?



Trump told Brett Baier the documents were just magazines, anyone buying that?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
3
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:57a, 6/27/23
AG
So was the "interview" only two minutes? Isn't that the length of what CNN released? That is the complete tape?
Reply Quote
2
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 11:58a, 6/27/23
It's not the complete interview, but I don't know how long the whole thing is.


I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:00p, 6/27/23
How will the judge try and reign in Trump for violating the gag order?

Will Trump be threatened with jail time or substantial fines for talking about his ongoing criminal prosecution ... during the middle of a presidential campaign?

Seems to be shaping up that way.

This case is too much for a single district court judge to deal with.

It's a miscarriage of justice for a single judge to be put in a position of administering this kind of case.
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:01p, 6/27/23
AG
Im Gipper said:
It's not the complete interview, but I don't know how long the whole thing is.

So out of context and people were laughing, because it sounded like he was joking? Without the full context, hard to determine very much.
Reply Quote
4
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Stat Monitor Repairman • 12:04p, 6/27/23
How has he violated a "gag order"?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:04p, 6/27/23
The way things are going so far, we might well see Trump jailed for violating the judicial process. We might not even sniff at a conviction before Trump is put behind bars.
Reply Quote
2
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:04p, 6/27/23
You cannot enforce a gag order on a POTUS candidate. Clear 1st amendment violation.

It may be the case SCOTUS has to take. You are going to jail your rival political candidate to keep him from talking about the corrupt abuse of power by current POTUS directing his DOJ to prosecute his opponents and not prosecute his son?

That's not the America any of us want to live in.

Trump broke no laws. This was known before MAL was ever raided. You are colossally dumb or corrupt yourself to buy the case Smith is trying to sell.
Reply Quote
6
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 12:05p, 6/27/23
He definitely could be joking. Does not sound like it, but as you said we don't have the full tape. That's a better way to play it than "exonerated".

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:05p, 6/27/23
Im Gipper said:
How has he violated a "gag order"?
You seem to still believe that laws and rules are applied to Trump without prejudice.
Reply Quote
3
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:06p, 6/27/23
Im Gipper said:
He definitely could be joking. Does not sound like it, but as you said we don't have the full tape. That's a better way to play it than "exonerated".
What charges listed in the indictment does the tape relate to?
Reply Quote
2
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 12:06p, 6/27/23
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
How has he violated a "gag order"?
You seem to still believe that laws and rules are applied to Trump without prejudice.


So can you answer the question? How has he (allegedly) violated any "gag order"?

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:10p, 6/27/23
Im Gipper said:
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
How has he violated a "gag order"?
You seem to still believe that laws and rules are applied to Trump without prejudice.


So can you answer the question? How has he (allegedly) violated any "gag order"?
Gag order on Trump is unconstitutional on its face, so impossible for him to violate. HTH.
Reply Quote
2
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 12:11p, 6/27/23
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
He definitely could be joking. Does not sound like it, but as you said we don't have the full tape. That's a better way to play it than "exonerated".
What charges listed in the indictment does the tape relate to?
One of the documents in 1-31 is the assumption. They are using this tape to inflame passions (not technically permitted, but happens in every case) and to show he knew it was not declassified.

As I explained to you previously, and you now have explained to others, Trump isn't even charged with improperly disclosing anything. That worth pointing out again for anyone new that may show up and not dig back through pages and pages!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 12:11p, 6/27/23
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
He definitely could be joking. Does not sound like it, but as you said we don't have the full tape. That's a better way to play it than "exonerated".
What charges listed in the indictment does the tape relate to?
Ship goes into this.

Reply Quote
1
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:12p, 6/27/23
Add the gag order to the list of constitutional issues in this case.

Anybody keeping track?

What are we up to now, or does it even matter?
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:12p, 6/27/23
AG
Im Gipper said:
He definitely could be joking. Does not sound like it, but as you said we don't have the full tape. That's a better way to play it than "exonerated".
And in court, there is the concept of completeness. The state cannot just play one cherry picked excerpt and exclude the rest of the context.

There is also the question of "on background" or off of the record. Haven't read Meadows' book. Is this conversation referenced with quotes attributed to Trump?
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to fka ftc • 12:12p, 6/27/23
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
How has he violated a "gag order"?
You seem to still believe that laws and rules are applied to Trump without prejudice.


So can you answer the question? How has he (allegedly) violated any "gag order"?
Gag order on Trump is unconstitutional on its face, so impossible for him to violate. HTH.
It helps to show me you aren't really up to speed on what the Order says.

Trump has done nothing that comes anywhere close to violating any "gag order."

You should call Trump to be his lawyer. You know more than his team does about the constitution! HTH! LOL!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
4
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 12:13p, 6/27/23
Correct. Just like all the boxes in bathrooms and storage closets has nothing to do with the case.

Sort of like how classification status of the documents has nothing to do with the case.

This has all be known since before August 2022. Of course, I'm Gipper is now somehow saying he explained this to me which is sort of funny.
Reply Quote
2
fka ftc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Im Gipper • 12:15p, 6/27/23
Im Gipper said:
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
fka ftc said:
Im Gipper said:
How has he violated a "gag order"?
You seem to still believe that laws and rules are applied to Trump without prejudice.


So can you answer the question? How has he (allegedly) violated any "gag order"?
Gag order on Trump is unconstitutional on its face, so impossible for him to violate. HTH.
It helps to show me you aren't really up to speed on what the Order says.

Trump has done nothing that comes anywhere close to violating any "gag order."

You should call Trump to be his lawyer. You know more than his team does about the constitution! HTH! LOL!
I don't need to waste my time reading a "gag order" when enforcement of it explicitly violates Trump's first amendment rights. Again, happy to educate you on these things.
Reply Quote
2
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 12:15p, 6/27/23

Quote:
An in court, there is the concept of completeness. The state cannot just play one cherry picked excerpt and exclude the rest of the context.


Yep. No way this clip is played for jury unless Team Trump gets to play the part it wants also!


Quote:
There is also the question of "on background" or off of the record. Haven't read Meadows' book. Is this conversation referenced with quotes attributed to Trump?
Has anyone read that book? loll.

I don't know what the book says, just know what it says on the tape. Can you explain what difference that makes here? Are you saying that if "off the record" it leans towards Trump kidding around? I could see that.

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.