5 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

You're going to be disappointed.

Surely not disappointed by the latest news! ????

7 hours ago, candide said:

I love the current front page of Fox News website! ????

https://www.foxnews.com/

The latest front page attributes a quite different face expression to Trump! ????

He has lost his previous Mussolinien expression! ????

1 hour ago, riclag said:

“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.

 

Just too bad that the indictment seems to not even care if the docs were classified or not. He broke enough other laws that carry felony charges.

Here is the indictment: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23839625/trump-indictment.pdf

 

37 counts!

 

Quote

Trump mishandled classified documents that included information about the secretive U.S. nuclear program and potential domestic vulnerabilities in the event of an attack, the federal indictment said.

Trump also discussed with lawyers the possibility of lying to government officials seeking to recover the documents; stored some of the documents around a toilet, and moved boxes of them around his Mar-a-Lago Florida resort home to prevent them from being found, the charges said.

"Wouldn't it be better if we just told them we don't have anything here?" Trump said to one of his attorneys, according to the 49-page indictment.

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

 

This looks incredibly bad for Trump. He's going down hard, wow.

 

I always understood he's a BS talker with super inflated ego. But taking documents about a secretive US nuclear program and domestic vulnerabilities in the event of an attack? Sorry that doesn't even fit his normal bad character. I wouldn't be surprised if some foreign players have him by the balls and made him do this. Absolutely insane.

 

Now I'm not surprised anymore his lawyers quit right after reading this indictment.

 

33 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

Here is the indictment: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23839625/trump-indictment.pdf

 

37 counts!

 

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

 

This looks incredibly bad for Trump. He's going down hard, wow.

 

I always understood he's a BS talker with super inflated ego. But taking documents about a secretive US nuclear program and domestic vulnerabilities in the event of an attack? Sorry that doesn't even fit his normal bad character. I wouldn't be surprised if some foreign players have him by the balls and made him do this. Absolutely insane.

 

Now I'm not surprised anymore his lawyers quit right after reading this indictment.

 

It's always been obvious Trump is a traitor. Just imagine his conversations with Putin.

 

18 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It's always been obvious Trump is a traitor. Just imagine his conversations with Putin.

I see where you are coming from but at that time it seemed to me rather like high level corruption. But now it seems more like some hollywood movie villain kinda level. Or as one might say: sh*t just got serious!

2 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

I see where you are coming from but at that time it seemed to me rather like high level corruption. But now it seems more like some hollywood movie villain kinda level. Or as one might say: sh*t just got serious!

I say he is a traitor only because of his communications with Putin, defense of Putin and running interference in providing weapons to Ukraine.

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

It's so sad to see high level politicians not caring about the rule of law. So what now? Storm the court?

I can't count the number of posts here which argued that the documents were kept in secure storage at mar a logo and guarded by his secret service agents who allegedly didn't even know the documents were there..

"Deep scary: 1/50 k refers to military scale maps & publicly available US Geological Survey maps of areas mostly surrounding military installations,

 

Higgins has previously spoken at events held by mostly white militias, including the Oath Keepers, and sold T-shirts at political events featuring the logo of the anti-government III Percent militia, while threatening to shoot members of a Black militia that took part in Black Lives Matter marches in 2020.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/rep-clay-higgins/

 

 

Just to note that of the 32 counts involving Trump, the 5 counts involving Trump and Nauta, and the one count solely involving Nauta, none involve the Espionage Act (1917)

50 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I can't count the number of posts here which argued that the documents were kept in secure storage at mar a logo and guarded by his secret service agents who allegedly didn't even know the documents were there..

Some posters will have to eat their hat about it, and other claims too.

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

I can't count the number of posts here which argued that the documents were kept in secure storage at mar a logo and guarded by his secret service agents who allegedly didn't even know the documents were there..

from NY Times -- secure haung nam:

 

54 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Just to note that of the 31 counts involving Trump, the 6 counts involving Trump and Nauta, and the one count solely involving Nauta, none involve the Espionage Act (1917)

Counts 1 to 31 are brought under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 37 which deals with Espionage and Censorship. Specifically paragraph 793(e) "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information". These paragraphs originate from the Espionage Act.

His valet got arrested for obstruction too.

 

Asked for comment, Diana Ross said, "aint no valet low enough".

UPDATE: What's in the Trump indictment: US nuclear secrets and files kept in shower

 

The charge sheet notes that Mar-a-Lago hosted events for tens of thousands of members and guests, including in a ballroom where documents were found.

 

Prosecutors say Mr Trump tried to obstruct the FBI inquiry into the missing documents by suggesting that his lawyer "hide or destroy" them, or tell investigators he did not have them.

 

"Wouldn't it be better if we just told them we don't have anything here?" Mr Trump said to one of his attorneys, according to the indictment.

 

READ MORE

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65852286

 

UPDATE: ‘This is a terrible thing': National security insiders alarmed over military secrets found at Mar-a-Lago

 

Trump is facing 31 counts of violating the Espionage Act through “willful retention” of classified records and six counts related to his alleged effort to obstruct the investigation, according to the 49-page document released Friday.

 

The indictment also alleges that Walt Nauta, a Trump aide during his presidency and now in private life, moved boxes with classified records to obscure them from investigators.

 

The indictment includes information about the kinds of documents in the former president’s possession, some of them “regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.”

 

READ MORE

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/09/devastating-former-trump-officials-alarmed-over-military-secrets-found-at-mar-a-lago-00101366

 

19 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

Counts 1 to 31 are brought under 18 U.S.C. Chapter 37 which deals with Espionage and Censorship. Specifically paragraph 793(e) "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information". These paragraphs originate from the Espionage Act.

OK but the Espionage Act is not specifically referenced in the indictment.

6 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

OK but the Espionage Act is not specifically referenced in the indictment.

Because that's from 1917, more than a hundred years old and laws have been updated, amended  and re-organized since then. They are found in the mentioned paragraphs of Chapter 37 of the 18 U.S.C Code these days.

1 minute ago, eisfeld said:

Because that's from 1917, more than a hundred years old and laws have been updated, amended  and re-organized since then. They are found in the mentioned paragraphs of Chapter 37 of the 18 U.S.C Code these days.

From a link above:

 

For example, the Espionage Act of 1917 — one of the three laws cited in the search warrant of Mar-a-Lago in Florida ...

 

As there has been much talk about the Espionage Act on here and elsewhere and it was even noted in a federal search warrant, all I was saying is that it was not specifically referenced in the indictment.

 

I know what the US Code is.

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I can't count the number of posts here which argued that the documents were kept in secure storage at mar a logo and guarded by his secret service agents who allegedly didn't even know the documents were there..

Are you referring to posters trying to keep a sense of perspective surrounding the classified documents - a President's authority to possess them vs a career politician and senator, whether under lock and key and security at MAL vs dumped in a garage rented by a degenerate junkie, length of time in possession etc etc? Doing so will allow a reasoned understanding of the situation.

 

Looks to me like even the extreme left realize this incredibly timed witch-hunt is political to stop Mr world peace and prosperity from running again in 2024. Would that be election interference or insurrection? Certainly fascistic in nature.

 

"MSNBC host Rachel Maddow suggested Thursday there could be a plea deal where former President Trump gets less punishment for agreeing to bow out of the 2024 race after he announced he was being indicted by the Department of Justice.

Maddow advocated for the idea as a potential "political solution to this criminal problem" while on MSNBC’s "The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell."

O’Donnell argued Trump’s legal defense team would have to be the side that pushes the quid pro quo, so the prosecution can avoid the accusation that the whole indictment is just a way to get Trump to stay out of the 2024 race. "

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rachel-maddow-suggests-doj-quid-pro-quo-with-trump-drop-charges-leaves-2024-race

 

Funny they are not even pretending we have democracy and a free and fair vote any more!

10 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

From a link above:

 

For example, the Espionage Act of 1917 — one of the three laws cited in the search warrant of Mar-a-Lago in Florida ...

 

As there has been much talk about the Espionage Act on here and elsewhere and it was even noted in a federal search warrant, all I was saying is that it was not specifically referenced in the indictment.

 

I know what the US Code is.

You are correct that it was not specifically referenced in the indictment, at least I didn't spot it anywhere but I'm also not surprised because the referenced paragraph is the current version of it. If someone says Title 18 U.S.C. Chapter 37 Paragraph 793(e) then that's totally meaningless to a regular person. But saying Espionage Act makes it pretty clear what it's about. So they are giving up a little bit of precision in order to gain a lot more understanding. Fair tradeoff imho.

8 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

You are correct that it was not specifically referenced in the indictment, at least I didn't spot it anywhere but I'm also not surprised because the referenced paragraph is the current version of it. If someone says Title 18 U.S.C. Chapter 37 Paragraph 793(e) then that's totally meaningless to a regular person. But saying Espionage Act makes it pretty clear what it's about. So they are giving up a little bit of precision in order to gain a lot more understanding. Fair tradeoff imho.

Yes. You are right Chapter 37 codifies the Espionage Act.

 

I was just noting, as there is a reference to the Act on most pages this topic, it is not specifically referenced in the indictment.

5 hours ago, riclag said:

“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.

 

Who's denying that Trump declassified docs? One question isn't whether he declassified but rather whether he classified the docs that he had in his possession at Mar-A-Lago. If anything, the evidence you offer here proves that Trump knew how to declassify docs. Yet he chose not to  declassify those docs at Mar-A-Lago according to standard procedure. In fact, after his term was over, he's on video acknowledging that he had docs in his possession that weren't declassified.

30 minutes ago, placeholder said:

In fact, after his term was over, he's on video acknowledging that he had docs in his possession that weren't declassified.

Audio only.

 

DOJ has audio recording of Trump discussing classified document he took: CNN

 

https://news.yahoo.com/doj-audio-recording-trump-discussing-214445369.html

 

Maybe like  Alexander Butterfield and the Nixon Tapes? And maybe not.

31 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Are you referring to posters trying to keep a sense of perspective surrounding the classified documents - a President's authority to possess them vs a career politician and senator, whether under lock and key and security at MAL vs dumped in a garage rented by a degenerate junkie, length of time in possession etc etc? Doing so will allow a reasoned understanding of the situation.

 

Looks to me like even the extreme left realize this incredibly timed witch-hunt is political to stop Mr world peace and prosperity from running again in 2024. Would that be election interference or insurrection? Certainly fascistic in nature.

 

"MSNBC host Rachel Maddow suggested Thursday there could be a plea deal where former President Trump gets less punishment for agreeing to bow out of the 2024 race after he announced he was being indicted by the Department of Justice.

Maddow advocated for the idea as a potential "political solution to this criminal problem" while on MSNBC’s "The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell."

O’Donnell argued Trump’s legal defense team would have to be the side that pushes the quid pro quo, so the prosecution can avoid the accusation that the whole indictment is just a way to get Trump to stay out of the 2024 race. "

https://www.foxnews.com/media/rachel-maddow-suggests-doj-quid-pro-quo-with-trump-drop-charges-leaves-2024-race

 

Funny they are not even pretending we have democracy and a free and fair vote any more!

Since when are TV hosts part of the legal process? If that were the case then I dread to see what would happen with some of the rants being spewed out by the right wing hosts.

8 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

I can't say.

Then why say it!

9 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

 Sounds like a decent legal defence to me 

Thank god your not my lawyer!

An off topic post discussing Russia has been removed.

 

Once again try to hijack the OP and you will receive a posting suspension.