Jump to content

Trump under investigation for potential violations of Espionage Act


Scott

Recommended Posts

Some of the documents seized were protected by attorney-client privilege according to Fox.

That leads to the question if that privilege still applies when a false declaration has been made:

 

whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation…shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BonMot said:

Lol, The poster is an imposter masking as an ex US attorney , not a genuine account and the post is from May 2020, this has been overtaken by events of August 2022 where Manafort admitted collusion so the wiretap was justified after all.

 

Edited by LosLobo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

What can be worse when even Bill Barr laughs at Dinesh D”Souza’s conspiracy theory film. No one take that film serious. Good for a chuckle though. 

Bill Barr?

 

You mean throughly disgraced Bill Barr? The person that we must add disgrace on to of disgrace? Oh, ok righto.

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-bill-barr-disgrace-steve-chapman-20210630-7pb7qtdkqzg27cg27ezvr3yhqu-story.html

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

9 minutes ago, BonMot said:

Bill Barr?

 

You mean throughly disgraced Bill Barr? The person that we must add disgrace on to of disgrace? Oh, ok righto.

 

https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-opinion-bill-barr-disgrace-steve-chapman-20210630-7pb7qtdkqzg27cg27ezvr3yhqu-story.html

from that article. 

"But he was bad enough. The latest evidence comes from his own mouth, in interviews with Jonathan Karl, whose account appears in The Atlantic. It reveals an official who is supposed to serve the public letting himself be used by a corrupt and autocratic president who violated every norm in the ruthless pursuit of his sordid interests."

When even a toady like Bill Barr laughs at that documentary, you know its ridiculous

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Some of the documents seized were protected by attorney-client privilege according to Fox.

That leads to the question if that privilege still applies when a false declaration has been made:

 

whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation…shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

You raise an interesting question, one I've never considered.

 

I've always heard of "Attorney-Client Privilege" in the context of things an Attorney cannot reveal about his or her Client.

 

But in this case, the records have been taken directly FROM THE CLIENT. Therefore, there's no need for sheltering by an attorney. The records came directly from the client, so no "middleman" [the attorney] was involved!

 

But if "Attorney-Client Privilege" is still an issue......... doesn't that suggest that the it's THE ATTORNEY that is seeking protection from the "Privilege," not the Client?

 

It has never occurred to me before that "Attorney-Client Privilege" may sometimes be called-upon to protect THE ATTORNEY........ rather than the Client! It has never occurred to me that the concept can be applied both ways!

 

Heck........I dont even know if it can!

 

At a minimum, anyway, it seems to me that "Attorney-Client Privilege" cannot be an issue........... when the information is coming directly from the Client. Direct collection from the Client makes the Attorney's role moot.

 

Unless.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

I certainly agree the 'system' is not perfect, but its the best we have.

You think his guilt "was never in doubt" , I believe his guilt, or innocence is up to a jury to decide, but we are getting way ahead of ourselves.

Very true. And as we know, juries are only as good as the legal team the defense can put together. Think OJ? Granted, the American judicial system sure beats China, Russia and Thailand. Flawed, yes. The best? Questionable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Allowing ourselves to possess a belief system, that insists in believing only that which we can touch, smell, taste, see, hear or feel is quite a limitation. There is so much to this universe and creation that we know absolutely nothing about. Does that mean it does not exist? Did gravity not exist before Newton? Did natural selection of the species not exist prior to Darwin? 

Spidermike: "Does that mean it does not exist?"

 

No, it means it is time to start asking questions and trying to confirm its existence.

 

It doesn't  mean it's time to automatically conclude therefore that it does.

 

Belief proves nothing. Sincere belief proves nothing. Being absolutely certain in your belief proves nothing.

 

Indeed, being absolutely certain in one's beliefs only means a person has become too tired, lazy or frustrated to keep asking questions. So they grab onto any answer they feel comfortable with....... probably something that people they like and admire agree with and speak favorably about......... and they stop caring whether it's true or not!

 

But stopping asking questions......... is not the same thing....... as finding actual answers!

 

Ultimately, asking "If you can't see it, touch it, feel it....... does that mean it doesn't exist?" is the wrong question. It's asking someone to prove a negative, which we all know can't be done.

 

The right approach is to require someone who claims something DOES exist....... to prove it. And if all they can present is their belief  that it exists......... well.........

 

Belief proves nothing----Never has, never will. 

 

Belief can be strong enough to make you stop asking questions. But belief will never be strong enough eliminate the need to ask more and better questions......... if what you really want is the truth!

 

 

 

Edited by KanchanaburiGuy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

I'll give you kudos for your passionate beliefs.

"45 had ZERO right to the docs he kept."

You have no way of knowing that with the certainty you express.  That much is obvious to anyone who is looking at this objectively.

"His counsel/he LIED in a signed affadavit in June claiming they had returned everything. That is intent to deceive and can form the basis for charging him with "conspiracy to commit espionage".

Again, you have zero personal knowledge of all of the details regarding whatever Trump transferred back or any of the disputes and talks between Trump and government agencies in the whole.

What you do have so far is a one-sided story put out by a media who has clearly shown they are propagandists.  And the narrative fits like a glove on your Trumpian bias.

The U.S. is not a democracy.  It's a Republic.  That you get this elemental fact wrong suggests you may be wrong about much else.

"What you do have so far is a one-sided story put out by a media who has clearly shown they are propagandists."

 

While the Hunter Biden laptop story you and others keep bringing up is, well, a perfect fit for your description.

 

"The U.S. is not a democracy.  It's a Republic."

 

Why do some people have so much trouble grasping the concept of a democratic republic?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BonMot said:

Investigation Espionage lol.

 

I smell another Jan 6 show trial .That is an absolute farce. Let the Dems wear it like a sword of Damocles

 

Mid term elections.... How convenient. Too lol.

 

A president charged with espionage. It's laughable on it's face.

Your "argument" certainly isn't based on evidence.

 

Is your assumption that Trump couldn't have done anything wrong based on him being Trump and infallible?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, heybruce said:

"justified frustration/anger within the American working class."

 

May be off-topic, but I am genuinely curious as to what this justified frustration/anger is and how anyone imagined Trump could or would make it better.

 

 

50+- years of the American working class in a documented economic squeeze which, I hasten to point out is the result of the actions?policies of both major political parties. The USA is not alone in this as it can be seen in Europe and certainly is reflected by many seeking to retire in lower cost countries.

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

Just saw an article in which folks believe that the inside Mole at MaraLago was none other than Jared Kushner, Trumps Son in Law as he appears to be making a deal to save his own hide....

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/jared-kushner-theories-saudi-money-donald-trump-mole-fbi-raid-1733474%3famp=1

 

Edited by ThailandRyan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Just saw an article in which folks believe that the inside Mole at MaraLago was none other than Jared Kushner, Trumps Son in Law as he appears to be making a deal to save his own hide....

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/jared-kushner-theories-saudi-money-donald-trump-mole-fbi-raid-1733474%3famp=1

 

I think it could be anyone on the inside. Hell, even a case could be made it was Trump himself.

Edited by stevenl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From none other than Fox News......lol

 

Sources told Fox News that some records could be covered by executive privilege, which gives the president of the United States and other officials within the executive branch the authority to withhold certain sensitive forms of advice and consultation between the president and senior advisers. 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-seizes-privileged-trump-records-during-raid-doj-opposes-request-independent-review-sources

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

13 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The finger prints on the documents and the survelliance tapes will reveal and incriminate the traitors. 

Recently forensics gained the ability to date-stamp fingerprints. So the ones after Trump became FPOTUS will be interesting. When he was president I think he may have had the ability to share them with anyone of his choosing.

Edited by LosLobo
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...