Trump says he's been indicted in classified docs probe

[Bkk Brian]

10 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If the documents were declassified , wouldn't that make him not guilty of retaining classified document ?

He's not been indicted for whether they are classified or not, how can he be found not guilty if the indictment is not for this?

 

Charges include false statements and conspiracy to obstruct. All charges are related to retaining documents and obstructing justice, at least one charge related to the Espionage Act, "several obstruction-based type charges, and then false statement charges.

 

Did you read up on the presidential records act?

 

Did you read the first link in the OP?

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Trump first claimed that the FBI planted classified documents in his BR. 

Can you provide a link to support that claim ?

  (BTW , Trumps lawyer stating that  she was concerned about the FBI planting evidence is not an accusation by Trump that the FBI planted classified documents )

   So, can you back up your claim ?

(And BTW again, Trump saying that the FBI put the documents on the floor showing they were not properly kept in a safe environment , isn't showing that Trump claims that the FBI planed the documents .

   So, can you back up your claim ?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I did not say that I knew what offences he has been charged with, I said that others committing the same offences that he has been indicted for should be treated in the exact same way. 

How do you know, you don’t know what he’s been indicted for?

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Can you provide a link to support that claim ?

  (BTW , Trumps lawyer stating that  she was concerned about the FBI planting evidence is not an accusation by Trump that the FBI planted classified documents )

   So, can you back up your claim ?

(And BTW again, Trump saying that the FBI put the documents on the floor showing they were not properly kept in a safe environment , isn't showing that Trump claims that the FBI planed the documents .

   So, can you back up your claim ?

Did Trump’s lawyer back up her claim?

[bignok]

2 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Are you for real or just trolling the OP.  Do read the OP to understand the significance of the OP and what it entails as far as the posts being made.

8 years of hating on Trump. Who knows what happens next. 

[xylophone]

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I have only been viewing from afar and may not be fully informed .

   Could you tell me what other documents are in question ?

What were other other documents taken from the Mar le go ?

  Were they potentially personal documents or were they highly sensitive  documents which could have been used mischievously ?

You have to be joking or seriously deficient in the grey matter department to post this, especially after all of the pro trump nonsense you have been posting...........get real and try to understand what is going on, but then again maybe too difficult for you. Get a life.

[Liverpool Lou]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

1 hour ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I did not say that I knew what offences he has been charged with, I said that others committing the same offences that he has been indicted for should be treated in the exact same way. 

Expand  

How do you know, you don’t know what he’s been indicted for?

I don't need to know that specifically!   I'm saying that whatever he's being indicted for should apply to everyone else who could be in a similar position.

[bignok]

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

Do some research before asking stupid questions.

What is the answer then.

[Liverpool Lou]

55 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

5 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

.only if it applies to the others that committed the exact same offences.

Who are you implying it applies to?

And what "exact same offences."

"Who are you implying it applies to?"

I can't say...read the first few posts on this thread, I don't need a holiday right now.

 

"And what "exact same offences.""

Whatever Mr Trump has been indicted for, those offences, the same ones, the same rules should apply to everyone for the same offences, whatever they are.

[Mac Mickmanus]

6 minutes ago, xylophone said:

You have to be joking or seriously deficient in the grey matter department to post this, especially after all of the pro trump nonsense you have been posting...........get real and try to understand what is going on, but then again maybe too difficult for you. Get a life.

Can we stick to the subject and leave the personal abuse out of it ?

   Thanks 

 

[onthedarkside]

Troll & baiting posts removed:

 

Topic is Trump says he's been indicted in classified docs probe

 

Carry on derailing the topic and a warning will be issued

[xylophone]

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Can we stick to the subject and leave the personal abuse out of it ?

   Thanks 

 

You bring it on yourself with your one-eyed view of the situation.....then admitting you haven't been up to speed with the news on this. Unbelievable.

[Mac Mickmanus]

19 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

He's not been indicted for whether they are classified or not, how can he be found not guilty if the indictment is not for this?

 

Charges include false statements and conspiracy to obstruct. All charges are related to retaining documents and obstructing justice, at least one charge related to the Espionage Act, "several obstruction-based type charges, and then false statement charges.

 

Did you read up on the presidential records act?

 

Did you read the first link in the OP?

Am I missing something ?

  If Trump has been charged with making false statements saying he handed over all the requested classified documents and he's been charged with obstructing the FBI from doing their work .

   If its found that there were no classified documents , wouldn't that make Trump not guilty of all charges ?

[GroveHillWanderer]

5 minutes ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I don't need to know that specifically!   I'm saying that whatever he's being indicted for should apply to everyone else who could be in a similar position.

Except that no other former president or former vice president (which is what you're obviously referring to) has ever done what Trump has been charged with doing.

 

None of them ever wilfully retained national defence documents or refused to hand the documents back when requested to do so, or lied about having handed back all the documents in their possession.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Am I missing something ?

 

Yes

 

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

 If Trump has been charged with making false statements saying he handed over all the requested classified documents and he's been charged with obstructing the FBI from doing their work .

   If its found that there were no classified documents , wouldn't that make Trump not guilty of all charges ?

Did you read the below?

25 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Did you read up on the presidential records act?

 

Did you read the first link in the OP?

 

[GroveHillWanderer]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Am I missing something ?

  If Trump has been charged with making false statements saying he handed over all the requested classified documents and he's been charged with obstructing the FBI from doing their work .

   If its found that there were no classified documents , wouldn't that make Trump not guilty of all charges ?

You keep ignoring the fact (which has been pointed out to you multiple times already) that since none of the charges relate to the documents being classified, it makes not a single iota of difference, whether they were classified or not. 

[billd766]

2 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Sorry, can't name them, apparently that would be considered derailing, deflecting and off-topic, so you'll just have to use your imagination.

I did and came up with nobodies name.

[Mac Mickmanus]

5 minutes ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

You keep ignoring the fact (which has been pointed out to you multiple times already) that since none of the charges relate to the documents being classified, it makes not a single iota of difference, whether they were classified or not. 

I haven't ignored that and I have replied previously to that point 

It makes ALL the difference whether the documents were classified or not .

   If the documents were not classified, then Trump has no obligation to hand them over to anyone .

   If the letters between  him and NK Kim were his  own personal property , then its no business of the FBI's 

   

[billd766]

28 minutes ago, bignok said:

What is the answer then.

Do your own research and come up with the answer, then post it on the thread.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

I haven't ignored that and I have replied previously to that point 

It makes ALL the difference whether the documents were classified or not .

   If the documents were not classified, then Trump has no obligation to hand them over to anyone .

   If the letters between  him and NK Kim were his  own personal property , then its no business of the FBI's 

   

For the final time it makes zero difference.

 

Presidential Records Act:

 

The Presidential Records Act says that, the moment a president leaves office, NARA gets custody and control of all presidential records from his administration. Nothing in the law says there should be a negotiation between a former president and NARA over a former president’s return of presidential documents – much less that there should have been a monthslong battle after NARA first contacted Trump’s team in 2021 to try to get some of the records that had not been handed over at the end of his presidency.

 

“Upon the conclusion of a President’s term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms upon the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President.”

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/08/politics/fact-check-trump-claims-documents-investigation/index.html

[Tug]

33 minutes ago, xylophone said:

You have to be joking or seriously deficient in the grey matter department to post this, especially after all of the pro trump nonsense you have been posting...........get real and try to understand what is going on, but then again maybe too difficult for you. Get a life.

Don’t feed the troll comes to mind it’s been explained over and over again come Tuesday we should know what he’s charged with

[eisfeld]

8 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I haven't ignored that and I have replied previously to that point 

It makes ALL the difference whether the documents were classified or not .

   If the documents were not classified, then Trump has no obligation to hand them over to anyone .

   If the letters between  him and NK Kim were his  own personal property , then its no business of the FBI's 

   

Your first point is as previously explained simply not true. You can't take away documents from the governments possession nilly willy. Doesn't matter if classified or not.

Why are you claiming the documents were personal letters to the leader of North Korea? That's absurd.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, Tug said:

Don’t feed the troll comes to mind it’s been explained over and over again come Tuesday we should know what he’s charged with

Now you are calling me a troll ?

As its now becoming rather abusive , I will bail out the discussion 

[candide]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I haven't ignored that and I have replied previously to that point 

It makes ALL the difference whether the documents were classified or not .

   If the documents were not classified, then Trump has no obligation to hand them over to anyone .

   If the letters between  him and NK Kim were his  own personal property , then its no business of the FBI's 

   

These documents are Presidential records. Whether classified or not, Trump has no right to keep Presidential records, as per the Presidential Record Act. As I replied to you before, It's not the FBI, It's the NARA which wanted them back.

From a link kindly indicated by your pal Riclag:

 

"The classification system is separate from criminal penalties that Congress has imposed to protect security secrets. For example, the Espionage Act of 1917 — one of the three laws cited in the search warrant of Mar-a-Lago in Florida — is designed to protect secrets related to defense information that could harm the U.S. or aid a foreign adversary. It makes no reference to materials’ classification status, and prosecutors in an Espionage Act case do not need to prove that materials were classified but rather that they were “closely held,” and their release could damage national security.

The search warrant executed in August at Mar-a-Lago cited as “probable cause” violations of relevant parts of the Presidential Records Act, which does not carry criminal penalties, as well as three provisions of criminal law: a part of the Espionage Act that deals with the mishandling of “national defense information” (18 U.S.C. § 793); a records-related obstruction statute (18 U.S.C. § 1519); and a third that deals with the mishandling of public records (18 U.S.C. § 2071). None of the three criminal statutes deal with classified material per se. Penalties differ. The obstruction-related statute carries the strongest sentence of a fine and a maximum 20 years in jail for each offense."

https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html

 

Capice?

 

[onthedarkside]

UPDATE: Trump aide Walt Nauta indicted in classified documents case

 

An aide to former President Donald Trump has been indicted in special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into the mishandling of classified documents from the Trump White House, two sources familiar with the indictment tell CNN.

 

Walt Nauta’s indictment is the second in the special counsel’s investigation after Trump was indicted on seven counts on Thursday.

 

An attorney for Nauta declined to comment. Nauta was with Trump at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club this week.

 

READ MORE

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/walt-nauta-trump-indicted/index.html

 

 

 

Trump aide Nauta indicted, former president says

WASHINGTON, June 9 (Reuters) - Walt Nauta, a personal aide to Donald Trump, was indicted alongside the former Republican president on Thursday, Trump said on his social media network on Friday.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-aide-nauta-indicted-former-president-says-2023-06-09/

[eisfeld]

Seems like the disaster for Trump continues to grow.

 

  

Quote

Trump lawyers quit in documents case; Trump aide indicted

 

Two lawyers defending Donald Trump quit the case on Friday, one day after the former U.S. president was indicted on federal charges of illegally retaining classified documents, obstruction and other crimes.

The Wall Street Journal at the same time reported that Trump's former military valet, Walt Nauta, had been charged alongside Trump. Nauta went to work at Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort after working in the Trump White House.

Article: https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-faces-federal-charges-classified-documents-case-adding-legal-woes-2023-06-09/

Non-paywall: https://archive.is/jQgXr

[ozimoron]

CNN is reporting that the indictment has been unsealed.

[scorecard]

 

"...a good day for the rule of law!"

...only if it applies to the others that committed the exact same offences.

I don't buy that.

 

If in previous cases offenders weren't caught or caught and not prosecuted that doesn't mean that a current offender should not be charged.

 

A question to all: Imagine If your wife, child, mother was murdered;

- Would you accept the cops saying 'we have the murderer but we can't charge him/her because other murderers have been identified but never charged?'

 

The real bottom line is that cases where proven offenders went free of any charges then the cases should be reopened and appropriate faie action taken and the cops who didn't carryout their duties severely punished.

 

In the meantime someone caught just recently with very strong evidence of guilt should

be prosecuted and the case properly continued. 

 

[Tug]

Wow!!he’s in deep deep trouble this is very serious and violated the espionage act yeiks with proof good god!!but but Hillary’s emails ain’t gonna cut it anymore!

[riclag]

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Trump personally made the claim that he de classified all the documents .

   Has the tape been verified as it being genuine and does it actually exist ?

   Is it a genuine tape ar yet another "someone told me about it" report ?

“I determined that the materials in that binder should be declassified to the maximum extent possible”.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/memorandum-declassification-certain-materials-related-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

 

https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/DCPD-202100044

Its in the courts hands now .

There is no denying while POTUS,that he declassified docs.

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by riclag