fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

But you already haven't prosecuted one of them. Start with Hillary and then we can talk.

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

Philip J Fry said:

---

But you already haven't prosecuted one of them. Start with Hillary and then we can talk.

---

How about we start with whoever we can and then prosecute the rest?

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

eric76 said:

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

Given the expansive overuse of classification of information, I fully support this.

I enjoyed the movie Sneakers.... no more secrets.

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

So, I guess some on the left didn't mean it, the past 10+ years, when the right had been calling democrats out for corruption and it now appears they secretly agreed with the right; even though they labeled every one of them conspiracy theorists. And some on the left didn't decide to announce their true intentions until the guy they wanted prosecuted got indicted?

It's apparent why this all feels unbelievable.

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

As if other politicians, including former presidents, are always the safeguards and watchmen of nobility lol. Trump makes a mockery out of the whole political zoo, and that's why he was appealing to many.

And this broke people. It's terrifying to see how much contempt people hold for one person.

the_batman26 said:

---

As if other politicians, including former presidents, are always the safeguards and watchmen of nobility lol. Trump makes a mockery out of the whole political zoo, and that's why he was appealing to many.

And this broke people. It's terrifying to see how much contempt people hold for one person.

---

What is terrifying is how many people vote for people like Trump and Biden and Hillary.

eric76 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

---

No, Trump made himself the target by being elected in the first place.

This is the culmination of a long standing war against the man by those like you who believe that anything goes in the effort to bring him down.

Everyone else you posted is irrelevant noise.

eric76 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

I remain convinced that the “MY. BOXES.” theory of the case as articulated by @cjciaramella is the best one we have. pic.twitter.com/KDDpBe1j2W

— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) August 13, 2022

It's amazing people don't stop to consider the moment he came down an escalator in 2015, he was a marked "orange man."

All of his NYC contacts in real estate, business, NBC [which hosted his game show for some time (again, no one had issues with it then)] and those he made on both sides of the aisle immediately turned on him despite having no real issues with the man for decades; well except Rosie O'Donnell.

eric76 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

eric76 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

I see all the petty partisanship in this but it seems like no one has stopped to think about the big picture - for a lot of reasons.

---

If I was partisan, I'd be on Trump's side, but I have never considered Trump to be anything but an untrustworthy, unprincipled, opportunist twit is in this strictly for his own glorification. He is not, and never has been, the President that this country needs. Trump is not and has never been in it for the benefit of the country.

---

you and all the leftists here still missing the basic premise. It's the old Jeff Goldblum line from Jurassic Park:

You and so many others are so preoccupied with whether or not you could but you never stopped to think if you should.

---

Actually, the Republicans who voted for Trump in 2016 should have asked that. It was clear then that Trump was a real scumbag acting only for his own, personal glorification.

---

Income tax relief, border control, Inflation reduction, defeat of Russia in Syria,etc?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

eric76 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

I remain convinced that the “MY. BOXES.” theory of the case as articulated by @cjciaramella is the best one we have. pic.twitter.com/KDDpBe1j2W

— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) August 13, 2022

---

well, with the case of the conversation laid out in the indictment, it's reasonable to believe that Trump's motivation could have been to keep documents that illustrate the hypocrisy and weaponization of elements of the government against him.

It's no secret that many were pulling out the stops from Day 1 to undermine his presidency.

The epitome of TDS is how Alan Dershowitz has been treated by the media and by his friends and colleagues.

For the "crime" of merely providing his expert opinion on the US Constitution during the Trump impeachment hoax, everyone shunned him and excommunicated him from their professional and social lives.

Read that again. Dersh did NOT support Trump and took no sides. But he did provide his vast, deep knowledge of the US Constitution and our history of laws / judicial system to the Senate trial.

He said he and his wife were kicked out of social organizations, disinvited from social events, he nearly lost his Harvard teaching position.

For the crime of being loosely associated with the "wrong" side of the Trump impeachment.

That is how bad Trump broke many in the US, including a whole bunch of supposedly "conservative" posters on this board.

Trump had EVERY right to possess the docs in question under the PRA. Period, the end.

The rest is just noise and witch hunting.

They did quite literally since Day 1.

jrdaustin said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

eric76 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

I remain convinced that the “MY. BOXES.” theory of the case as articulated by @cjciaramella is the best one we have. pic.twitter.com/KDDpBe1j2W

— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) August 13, 2022

---

well, with the case of the conversation laid out in the indictment, it's reasonable to believe that Trump's motivation could have been to keep documents that illustrate the hypocrisy and weaponization of elements of the government against him.

It's no secret that many were pulling out the stops from Day 1 to undermine his presidency.

---

What do documents about military plans and nuclear capabilities have to do with the above?

Quote:

---

Trump is accused of keeping documents related to "nuclear weaponry in the United States" and the "nuclear capabilities of a foreign country," along with documents from White House intelligence briefings, including some that detail the military capabilities of the U.S. and other countries, according to the indictment. Prosecutors alleged Trump showed off the documents to people who did not have security clearances to review them and later tried to conceal documents from his own lawyers as they sought to comply with federal demands to find and return documents.

---

Seems more likely he (allegedly) just liked showing them off as party favors, right?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

eric76 said:

---

jrdaustin said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

eric76 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Since our legal system is based on common law, then it most certainly is a valid legal argument.

---

Have fun trying to make any kind of a rational argument for that. Start with providing court decisions that excuse people from mishandling classified documents.

---

The dude who stuffed docs in his sock and destroyed them - misdemeanor and no prison.

Next?

---

So Tweedledee's criminality means that Tweedledum should not be prosecuted for his criminality?

Prosecute them both.

---

The did "prosecute" Sandy Berger... with a misdemeanor charge. To refresh, he went to the National Archives under false pretenses to retrieve certain classified documents harmful to his political allies, stuff them into his sock, stole them from the building and forever destroyed them.

For that, he was given a parking ticket. So, by your standards, Trump gets something less than a parking ticket since he a) did not steal the documents and b) did not destroy the documents.

Fair?

---

While we are at it, should we release everyone from prison who is there for mishandling classified information?

If we do as you wish, we might as well do away with classifications and make it available to everyone on the Internet.

---

I'm realizing it is an impossible task to debate with you, as you are intent on refusing to distinguish between this particular political official and a member of the general public.

Therefore you refuse to acknowledge that targeting a specific political official is wrong and inherently dangerous - simply because you hate the official in question.

You are emotional, not logical, in your arguments.

---

Trump made himself the target by refusing to return classified documents. If he had, then none of this would be happening. Trump has only himself to blame for this.

Like any entitled whiner, though, all he can do is rail against everyone else for trying to hold him accountable. Don't forget that Trump never accepts responsibility for anything. He wants the glory, never the responsibility.

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

I remain convinced that the “MY. BOXES.” theory of the case as articulated by @cjciaramella is the best one we have. pic.twitter.com/KDDpBe1j2W

— Sonny Bunch (@SonnyBunch) August 13, 2022

---

well, with the case of the conversation laid out in the indictment, it's reasonable to believe that Trump's motivation could have been to keep documents that illustrate the hypocrisy and weaponization of elements of the government against him.

It's no secret that many were pulling out the stops from Day 1 to undermine his presidency.

---

What do documents about military plans and nuclear capabilities have to do with the above?

Quote:

---

Trump is accused of keeping documents related to "nuclear weaponry in the United States" and the "nuclear capabilities of a foreign country," along with documents from White House intelligence briefings, including some that detail the military capabilities of the U.S. and other countries, according to the indictment. Prosecutors alleged Trump showed off the documents to people who did not have security clearances to review them and later tried to conceal documents from his own lawyers as they sought to comply with federal demands to find and return documents.

---

Seems more likely he (allegedly) just liked showing them off as party favors, right?

---

With respect to the military plans, the indictment reveals that the plans in question were developed by Milley and DOD regarding plans against China.

The same Milley who pulled the "I'm in charge" stunt and who publicized his call to his Chinese counterpart to discuss how deranged he thought Trump was.

No comment as of yet on nuclear capability docs. But I'm not giving the benefit of the doubt to DOJ in this.

Quote:

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

---

All he had to do was tell the Jan 6 folks to peacefully protest and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was provide the transcript of the call he made with Zelensky and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was to tell reporters about Charlottesville that and I quote "you had people and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists" and nothing would happen to him and he wouldn't be misquoted two billion times as a racist calling skinheads and neo-Nazis fine people...oh wait.

So much this. It boggles my mind that so many supposedly educated and supposedly rational people still think that if Trump would just play nice than nothing bad would happen to him.

Trump could walk on water and heal the blind and he would be charged with polluting the ocean and putting his visual privilege on the sightless.

The Dems are acting like Chavistas….and they don't even know it.


Leopoldo Lopez

"Administrative sanctions were imposed on Lpez by Venezuela's Comptroller's Office in 2004,[3][4] disqualifying him from holding public office for six years (beginning in 2008, at the completion of his term as mayor, until 2014), following allegations of nepotism and misappropriation of funds. Opposition groups in Venezuela criticized these charges as fabricated.[5][6][7] Lpez supporters say he was never charged with a crime, tried, or allowed to rebut the allegations; he sued Venezuela and his case was reviewed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which issued a unanimous ruling in his favor. The ruling was ignored by Venezuelan officials.[8][9][10]

During the crisis in Venezuela, he called for protests in February 2014.[11] He was arrested on 18 February 2014 and charged with arson and conspiracy; murder and terrorism charges were dropped. Human rights groups expressed concern that the charges were politically motivated.[12][13] His imprisonment in Ramo Verde was controversial; the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights called for the release of those arrested in connection with the protests.[14][15] Opinion polls in late 2014 showed that Lpez had become one of the most popular politicians in Venezuela following his arrest.[16] In September 2015, he was found guilty of public incitement to violence through supposed subliminal messages, being involved with criminal association, and was sentenced to 13 years and 9 months in prison."

BigJim49 AustinNowDallas said:

---

eric76 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

eric76 said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

I see all the petty partisanship in this but it seems like no one has stopped to think about the big picture - for a lot of reasons.

---

If I was partisan, I'd be on Trump's side, but I have never considered Trump to be anything but an untrustworthy, unprincipled, opportunist twit is in this strictly for his own glorification. He is not, and never has been, the President that this country needs. Trump is not and has never been in it for the benefit of the country.

---

you and all the leftists here still missing the basic premise. It's the old Jeff Goldblum line from Jurassic Park:

You and so many others are so preoccupied with whether or not you could but you never stopped to think if you should.

---

Actually, the Republicans who voted for Trump in 2016 should have asked that. It was clear then that Trump was a real scumbag acting only for his own, personal glorification.

---

Income tax relief, border control, Inflation reduction, defeat of Russia in Syria,etc?

---

Trump had adults in the room.

Leave it up to Trump and we would get things like this: "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Quote:

---

With respect to the military plans, the indictment reveals that the plans in question were developed by Milley and DOD regarding plans against China.

The same Milley who pulled the "I'm in charge" stunt and who publicized his call to his Chinese counterpart to discuss how deranged he thought Trump was.

No comment as of yet on nuclear capability docs. But I'm not giving the benefit of the doubt to DOJ in this.

---

DOD always has war plans. In fact, Rumsfeld was shocked to find out they did not have such a plan gathering dust on a shelf for invading Afghanistan after 9/11.

The fact they exst is not a national secret. And the fact that the Presidents themselves do not draw up those plans DOD does is not a national secret either.

Harry Stone said:

---

how are we going to stop this. the dems and their agencies are out of control.

---

At this point we need conservative statesmen elected at all levels of government.

Prosperdick said:

---

Quote:

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

---

All he had to do was tell the Jan 6 folks to peacefully protest and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was provide the transcript of the call he made with Zelensky and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was to tell reporters about Charlottesville that and I quote "you had people and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists" and nothing would happen to him and he wouldn't be misquoted two billion times as a racist calling skinheads and neo-Nazis fine people...oh wait.

---

I mean, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like it would be tough to charge him with mishandling classified documents if he…had already given them back?

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Prosperdick said:

---

Quote:

---

This is the absolute funniest part to me. All he had to do was just give them back and none of this would be happening. But he can't do that, because he's a 76 year old child.

---

All he had to do was tell the Jan 6 folks to peacefully protest and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was provide the transcript of the call he made with Zelensky and nothing would have happened to him...oh wait.

All he had to do was to tell reporters about Charlottesville that and I quote "you had people and I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists" and nothing would happen to him and he wouldn't be misquoted two billion times as a racist calling skinheads and neo-Nazis fine people...oh wait.

---

I mean, I'm no legal expert, but it seems like it would be tough to charge him with mishandling classified documents if he…had already given them back?

---

On what legal grounds was he required to give them back?

Hint: None. He had the right to possess under PRA. Its a civil dispute that the weaponized DOJ fabricated into a criminal case. Try and keep up.

Find me just one elected "stateman" that exists at ANY level of government these days.

eric76 said:

---

Philip J Fry said:

---

But you already haven't prosecuted one of them. Start with Hillary and then we can talk.

---

How about we start with whoever we can and then prosecute the rest?

---

How about we demand penalties for dereliction of duty and lying, which is what the FBI & DOJ have done.

We can play this tit for tat BS for a very long time.

The bureaucracies have been corrupted by the Democratic Party leadership which is ultimately the fundamental problem.

fka ftc said:

---

Find me just one elected "stateman" that exists at ANY level of government these days.

---

Unfortunately, I wish I could.

There is no reason to believe that it allows him to take documents marked classified with him.

Fido04 said:

---

There is no reason to believe that it allows him to take documents marked classified with him.

---

It most certainly does and is how so many classified docs continue to remain at the Bush '41 library right there in dear old College Station.

Try again.

And before there is the suggestion of "well that is a NARA administered site and subject to proper procedures"... that is true. However, before Trump team could set up an official place to house documents from the Trump admin that would then be sorted through and categorized, Team Biden shipped them all to M-A-L and then now try and act like Trump is careless when they ran out of room and had to store stuff in bathrooms, closets and on stages.

This thing has been cooked up from the very beginning. To believe otherwise is simply... foolish and ignorant of the law, precedent, facts and timeline.