Jump to content

Trump under investigation for potential violations of Espionage Act


Scott

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, NanLaew said:

Fundamentally because DT considers himself to STILL be the elected POTUS. As far as he's concerned, he's just on a four year furlough until this aberration of 'The Steal' is resolved in his favor.

That kind of aligns with my guess that it's his way of trolling the current administration and taking out his resentment on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Biden was and still is.  The FBI have been in possession of Hunter's laptop since Dec. 9, 2019.  Not a single action or word by the FBI to date.

If your diversions and whaddaboutisms get any lamer now we need to come up with a different metric to rate you.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

...with no details of what the documents are, or what they actually contain!

The fact that the lawyer signed a declaration to the justice department that there were no documents there is pretty incriminating.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

He didn't fully cooperate as he still had top secret documents in his possession, another lie.

He was in negotiations.  You want to fool people to turn that fact into "not fully cooperating?"  Careful when you throw the word "lie" around.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

He was in negotiations.  You want to fool people to turn that fact into "not fully cooperating?"  Careful when you throw the word "lie" around.

By itself, "being in negotiations doesn't signify much. Were the negotiations getting anywhere? Was progress being made? Was he just stalling?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

But, according to the article linked to this applies only to the cases where the President discloses something and says it's declassified. It has nothing to do with whether the President can just declare en masse that documents are classified. So, sure, if he cites the info verbally, he can declare it's declassified. Not the same thing as just declaring unspecified documents are declassified.

I've worked with clients and contractors where an important online document has a disclaimer in fine print in the footer that says, "This is a controlled document unless printed."

 

I guess DT's defence will be that these TS/SCI files had, "This is a classified document until the President takes it out of the office." in the footer.

 

...in invisible ink.

 

...that can only be read after scanning with his Captain America secret spy scanner ring that came with his son's Marvel comics subscription.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I can read and I've seen the title, thanks.  Some posters clearly don't know that he's not been charged.

Some presume others don't know he hasn't been charged. 

I think that presumption is incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

...with no details of what the documents are, or what they actually contain!

Top secret, they’ve not been declassified. I would not be surprised that if there is a trial some aspects of it will be a closed session purely because of the highly sensitive nature of the information.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, xylophone said:
1 hour ago, Tropposurfer said:

This handing over of the self to another in the case of MAGA and the Republican Party to Trump is predicated on a recognition by these folks in Trump of what is in them i.e. xenophobia, racism, anti-semitism, misogyny, fear of never-enough, greed, lust for power, and insatiable need for more and more, sadism, masochism, rage, neurotic needs around control, and a shopping-list of other neuroses, repressions and suppressions.

Well said and IMO so true.

And guns. If you're keen on getting their shopping list right, don't forget the semi-automatics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikeymike100 said:

What you say is fair enough. If that is in fact what happened? If the evidence is so damming then surely the DOJ can charge him? As yet as far as I know he hasn't been charged with anything.

Because they don't want to rush this case would be the answer. AG Garland will make absolutely 100% sure all tees are crossed and all ies are dotted before making whatever move he's gonna make, Surely you can understand that, right?

Edited by Phoenix Rising
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

He was in negotiations.  You want to fool people to turn that fact into "not fully cooperating?"  Careful when you throw the word "lie" around.

Trump's lawyer had already signed a statement that all documents had been returned. Presumably this was false. Another crime.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

"Of the 30,000 emails that the FBI examined..."

In addition to those emails, the other 31,830 that she deemed "personal" that she deleted so they could not be examined by the authorities should not be forgotten.

Oh, are we talking about Hillary again??:clap2:

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Because they don't want to rush this case would be the answer. AG Garland will make absolutely 1005 sure all tees are crossed and all ies are dotted before making whatever move he's gonna make, Surely you can understand that, right?

I do understand the FBI and DOJ will have to tread very carefully, yes!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

He committed a crime by taking them. What is there to negotiate? when he was notified and had any credibility he would have returned them long time ago. Never read so much nonsense from 1 person in 1 thread.

You make all sorts of assumptions, continue to do so, and refuse to acknowledge any your assumptions as such.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of nonsense.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

You make all sorts of assumptions, continue to do so, and refuse to acknowledge any your assumptions as such.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the definition of nonsense.

No assumptions, FACTS which you either refuse to read or to acknowledge. I am done with you either trolling or telling lies. Goodbye.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Okay, now let's pretend that there's never been a single negotiation with any FPOTUS before in the entirety of U.S. history.  And let's pretend, too, that the presumption that Trump was illegally in possession of what he had is not a presumption but fact.  And let's pretend that no further future information of any specificity about anything will have any bearing on the matter.  And let's pretend that Trump didn't have the ability to declassify what he had in his possession.  And let's pretend further to forget that no enforcement mechanism exists in this squabble with the National Archives.

And above all let's pretend that Trump negotiating with the National Archives is on par with bank robbers negotiating how much money the get to keep.

"Okay, now let's pretend that there's never been a single negotiation with any FPOTUS before in the entirety of U.S. history."

OK, maybe you can educate us on the history of this? When have the authorities been negotiating with former presidents regarding illegal removal of classified material?

 

"And let's pretend, too, that the presumption that Trump was illegally in possession of what he had is not a presumption but fact."

We should pretend to presume a non-presumption? I know they have 'kinda' legalized weed in Thailand but isn't it a bit early in the day?

 

"And let's pretend that Trump didn't have the ability to declassify what he had in his possession."

No need, we know the answer; There are limits to that (nuclear secrets exempt) and rules/procedures that have be followed. And we all know how well trump does with rules and limits.
Trump says "it was all declassified" — how declassification usually works

 

"And above all let's pretend that Trump negotiating with the National Archives is on par with bank robbers negotiating how much money the get to keep."

No need to pretend, it's a very apt comparison - except for the fact that what trump has done is potentially much, MUCH worse.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...