Jump to content

Trump under investigation for potential violations of Espionage Act


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, KanchanaburiGuy said:

Don't try to blame me for your own bad behavior. How I responded is not the point. Your bad behavior is the point. In a world of Cause and Effect, it's Cause  that earns the blame, not Effect!

 

Ultimately, you didn't get an answer your question.......... because your decision to be snarky proved you didn't deserve  an answer. 

 

Pffft!

...or maybe you just don't have a good answer, so you try to deflect. School playground.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, riclag said:

from politifact of all places.

Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, said that such authority gives the president the authority to "classify and declassify at will."

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/
 

Is this a machine? It's clear to EVERYONE that this notion of retroactive declassification is just a tactic employed after the fact. And AS SUCH - would you be comfortable with the outcome if this tactic succeeded? Even though you have NO IDEA what the documents that would then be declassified contain? That is the question.

Posted
1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Actually, I said "a large number of people on this thread would do well to bear this in mind". 

 

As you will no doubt note, the people who made those comments on the other thread are also present on this thread. So your point, while extremely pedantic, is also moot.

 

Not a bad effort though... ???? 

Effort, hahahaha you made none to prove that those posters have stated the same here in this OP that he is guilty and should be arrested already... You are persistent I will give you that.  Once your hero is shown to be a true zero, how will you feel then....hold that thought for a few months and then get back to me.

Posted
1 hour ago, Bruno123 said:

Is it possible for you to have a discussion without demonstrating your very obvious bias?

Most people using this forum are not American, so are only interested in facts, not ridiculous political conspiracy theories; so all of your blather with regard to your hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with your politics is more than tedious.

What I want to know is why he kept the documents. Don't you want to know that?

Stop trying to deflect by playing partisan politics all of the time. It's already tedious.

 

 

Quite the rant.

 

Back to reality, as a neutral, I would like to know what evidence they had to make the raid.

 

Unfortunately they won't release it.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62558319

 

I'd have thought if they had sufficient evidence they would release it to shut up the people who are saying it was politically motivated. But no, they want to keep it a secret. No doubt all the Democrats on the forum will conclude that is because there is so much damning evidence there is no need to release it, it's clearly a slam dunk so what's the point of telling everyone. Some kind of weird logic like that. 

 

It's Trump anyway, no need for due process. Him very very bad man ????.

  • Like 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Shock!

 

The FBI seek warrants from Judges when the FBI have reasonable cause to believe a crime has been committed or is in progress.

 

Judges authorize warrants when the FBI have demonstrated to the Judge that they have good cause to believe a crime has been committed or is in progress.

 

Who knew?!

Who knew that the FBI having 'good cause' to believe a crime has been committed, was the equivalent of a criminal conviction.

 

Shame they won't release what evidence they had to believe they had 'good cause'. Weird huh? Who could have predicted that? "Yeah we've got loads of evidence, but we're not telling anyone what it is". Sounds legit...

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62558319

 

No need for due process. String him up.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Quite the rant.

 

Back to reality, as a neutral, I would like to know what evidence they had to make the raid.

 

Unfortunately they won't release it.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62558319

 

I'd have thought if they had sufficient evidence they would release it to shut up the people who are saying it was politically motivated. But no, they want to keep it a secret. No doubt all the Democrats on the forum will conclude that is because there is so much damning evidence there is no need to release it, it's clearly a slam dunk so what's the point of telling everyone. Some kind of weird logic like that. 

 

It's Trump anyway, no need for due process. Him very very bad man ????.

You can wait like the rest of the world until an indictment is made and then the whole world will know what the charges are based upon the evidence, at which time the defense will be able to ask for discovery to see the evidence, but I think they already have an idea of where it's going and the Donald is trying to cast dispersions on this with his own narcissistic spin.

Edited by ThailandRyan
  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Quite the rant.

 

Back to reality, as a neutral, I would like to know what evidence they had to make the raid.

 

Unfortunately they won't release it.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62558319

 

I'd have thought if they had sufficient evidence they would release it to shut up the people who are saying it was politically motivated. But no, they want to keep it a secret. No doubt all the Democrats on the forum will conclude that is because there is so much damning evidence there is no need to release it, it's clearly a slam dunk so what's the point of telling everyone. Some kind of weird logic like that. 

 

It's Trump anyway, no need for due process. Him very very bad man ????.

There are numerous reasons why the FBI might very legitimately withhold the arguments they made to get the warrant, tipping off the target(s) of their investigations is the most obvious.

 

For example:

The scope and breadth of the investigation. 

The cooperation of witnesses within the target(s)’ immediate sphere.

The ongoing use of wire taps or other means of surveillance.

The inclusion within the investigation of coconspirators.


 

Just a few very reasonable reasons, but I’m sure there are many more,

 

But don’t fret. If the FBI proceeds to an indictment, it is then that they shall provide the target(s)’ defense teams with all evidence gathered - Not before.
 

  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, ThailandRyan said:

You can wait like the rest of the world until an indictment is made and then the whole world will know what the charges are based upon the evidence, at which time the defense will be able to ask for discovery to see the evidence.

Or maybe there will be no indictment, and the whole thing will be a 'big misunderstanding', like another third world country so close to our hearts.

 

I mean you've done the raid, refused to give the reason for having 'good cause'. Why not go the whole hog? 

  • Haha 2
Posted
Just now, Bkk Brian said:

You completely lost my attention at this point "as a neutral"...............????

That's great, better you stop replying to my posts in that case.

Posted
4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who knew that the FBI having 'good cause' to believe a crime has been committed, was the equivalent of a criminal conviction.

 

Shame they won't release what evidence they had to believe they had 'good cause'. Weird huh? Who could have predicted that? "Yeah we've got loads of evidence, but we're not telling anyone what it is". Sounds legit...

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62558319

 

No need for due process. String him up.

I’ve never once suggested that evidence of crime is equivalent to a conviction.

 

Please quell your histrionics.

Posted
Just now, ThailandRyan said:

Oh you want them to disclose the whole case and try it in the court of public opinion....is that called the New Due Process......

Given the amount of criticism they have taken, if they had solid reasons for such unprecedented action they may have wished to disclose it to quash the rumours and restore some credibility to the Bureau. This is not some low level dope dealing investigation, it is core to the credibility of the country.

 

That's if they had anything of course.

 

If they had very spurious reasons for raid and found nothing, the current policy of saying nothing might be prudent. Let things die down, then try to let it fade away until there's some new drama stealing the headlines. Kind of like the policy countries like Thailand take.

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1

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...