candide Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 8 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said: Who's lying... this is what the judge may think... I don't know, you presented it as a quote. A judge may not think "all the crimes". Biden did not lie about not having some documents when asked to give them back, did not obstruct justice etc... It's very simple. Had Trump just given back all the documents when he was asked to do so, there would have been no trial. That's his own fault. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipalongcassidy Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 14 hours ago, candide said: I don't know, you presented it as a quote. A judge may not think "all the crimes". Biden did not lie about not having some documents when asked to give them back, did not obstruct justice etc... It's very simple. Had Trump just given back all the documents when he was asked to do so, there would have been no trial. That's his own fault. You see... that is where the democrats differ... they think that giving back the documents means that there was no crime committed... however there was still a crime committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Carter icp Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 14 hours ago, candide said: I don't know, you presented it as a quote. A judge may not think "all the crimes". Biden did not lie about not having some documents when asked to give them back, did not obstruct justice etc... It's very simple. Had Trump just given back all the documents when he was asked to do so, there would have been no trial. That's his own fault. Although Trump claims that he did indeed give all the required documents back and we are waiting for the Court case to show who was right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 2 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said: You see... that is where the democrats differ... they think that giving back the documents means that there was no crime committed... however there was still a crime committed. A lame attempt at distorting what I wrote. 😅 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said: Although Trump claims that he did indeed give all the required documents back and we are waiting for the Court case to show who was right Lol! There are photos of the documents they found, videos of boxes being moved and testimonies of Trumps employees. I hope Trump's attempts to delay the trial won't make us wait too long.... Edited February 13 by candide 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipalongcassidy Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 6 minutes ago, candide said: A lame attempt at distorting what I wrote. 😅 Not really... that is exactly what you stated... that if trump had given back the stolen documents like joe did than there wouldn't be any crime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 2 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said: Not really... that is exactly what you stated... that if trump had given back the stolen documents like joe did than there wouldn't be any crime No. I wrote there would not have been any trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Carter icp Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 39 minutes ago, candide said: Lol! There are photos of the documents they found, videos of boxes being moved and testimonies of Trumps employees. I hope Trump's attempts to delay the trial won't make us wait too long.... Oh, I see, its Trumps fault that the trials have been delated ., what a coincidence that the trials are due to be held at the same time as the next election 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 6 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said: You see... that is where the democrats differ... they think that giving back the documents means that there was no crime committed... however there was still a crime committed. Gave them back only AFTER he decided to prosecute Trump. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Yellowtail Posted February 14 Popular Post Share Posted February 14 5 hours ago, candide said: No. I wrote there would not have been any trial. Unlike Biden, Trump possessed the documents legally. Has anyone accused Trump of having been recorded reading classified documents to his ghost writer yet? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 5 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said: Oh, I see, its Trumps fault that the trials have been delated ., what a coincidence that the trials are due to be held at the same time as the next election The coincidences is Trump’s bid to become President in order to avoid justice for his actions. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 13 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said: The coincidences is Trump’s bid to become President in order to avoid justice for his actions. So, but for the silly court cases he would not be running? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Troll posts contravening our Community Standards have been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Loh Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 31 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said: Splendid news from NY03 today. And Pennsylvania 140th District Special Election. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 7 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said: Oh, I see, its Trumps fault that the trials have been delated ., what a coincidence that the trials are due to be held at the same time as the next election Are you so uninformed? He's trying to get his trials delayed until after the elections, by asking for postponements and by appealing, while the accusation is trying to expedite them. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 21 minutes ago, candide said: Are you so uninformed? He's trying to get his trials delayed until after the elections, by asking for postponements and by appealing, while the accusation is trying to expedite them. The "accusation" is trying to expedite them now, after dragging their feet for two or three years. Why should he not appeal? Why should he not delay? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chomper Higgot Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 13 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: The "accusation" is trying to expedite them now, after dragging their feet for two or three years. Why should he not appeal? Why should he not delay? Trump is entitled to appeal and attempt delays. It’s all he got left. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: The "accusation" is trying to expedite them now, after dragging their feet for two or three years. Why should he not appeal? Why should he not delay? Not 2-3 years. The MAL search occurred in August 2022. 😁 Trump delay strategy is probably good for him...or not. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 2 minutes ago, candide said: Not 2-3 years. The MAL search occurred in August 2022. 😁 Trump delay strategy is probably good for him...or not. Well, it was good for Biden. He had classified documents illegally for over 15 years and he got a pass. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Well, it was good for Biden. He had classified documents illegally for over 15 years and he got a pass. 15 years? It seems you have problems with numbers! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottiejohn Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 11 minutes ago, candide said: 15 years? It seems you have problems with numbers! It seems you have problems with numbers facts! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said: It seems you have problems with numbers facts! Which fact? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 15 minutes ago, candide said: 15 years? It seems you have problems with numbers! Okay, it could have been much longer. He had classified documents illegally from when he was a Senator, which means at least 15 years and perhaps as long as 50 years, is that better? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Just now, candide said: Which fact? He has no idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Okay, it could have been much longer. He had classified documents illegally from when he was a Senator, which means at least 15 years and perhaps as long as 50 years, is that better? There's no PRA for Senators! The files of Congress members are considered their personal property and are not subject to the same restrictions as presidential records, which are considered government property And as VP, he was allowed to have classified documents, and even to classify them. Who has no idea? Edited February 14 by candide 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: Okay, it could have been much longer. He had classified documents illegally from when he was a Senator, which means at least 15 years and perhaps as long as 50 years, is that better? You pulled that out of your arse. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottiejohn Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 51 minutes ago, Jingthing said: You pulled that out of your arse. Like most of his other "contributions" to various forums. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottiejohn Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 1 hour ago, candide said: Which fact? All the so called "facts" that @Yellowtail quotes! Sorry if you thought I was referencing you! (I cannot find the "I am Sorry" emoji!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candide Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 2 minutes ago, scottiejohn said: All the so called "facts" that @Yellowtail quotes! Sorry if you thought I was referencing you! (I cannot find the "I am Sorry" emoji!) Ah OK! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heybruce Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 11 hours ago, Skipalongcassidy said: You see... that is where the democrats differ... they think that giving back the documents means that there was no crime committed... however there was still a crime committed. Oh Great Legal Wizard, did you read the Espionage Act? "Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now