Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (1 Viewer)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads?
*
This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
*

Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Snarky Sack]

You are so off base here, it’s actually kinda funny.

I will respectfully decline your offer to return to that topic.

 

[MT15]

I agree about Pence that once he was caught, he became cooperative. There was some shady business with Biden, but the FBI gave him time for it, so I guess you could say he "cooperated."

The better comparison is Clinton, who negotiated, stalled, and sorted documents herself, rather than give the FBI full access. At the end, I guess you could say that she cooperated. The FBI, for whatever reasons, settled on allowing her to pick and choose what to return, and then to choose the method of destroying the remaining material.

Do tell . . .

Clinton didn’t go through the emails and pick and choose. Her lawyers (officers of the court did). It was said to be routine procedure and the FBI said there was no evidence that they did anything out of bounds with their selection. She didn’t choose the method of destroying anything, any equipment that was decommissioned was destroyed in ways that are customary.

You can repeat these lies all you want, but that will not make them true.

 

[Snarky Sack]

It's most people's experience. Things properly packed in boxes that are properly stored tend to be just fine.

Then my experience has been unique, likely accounting for my differing opinions from so many on here. Thanks for the clarification!

If you take "you stopped lying, cool" as a compliment...

Heavens, no! I would never take that as a compliment.

I never said that they were 100% guaranteed to be classified. I said it was the safest assumption.

Agreed!

No, it was a giant leap. You went from "maybe those redacted documents aren't classified" to "maybe we should lock up everyone accused of a violent crime in a full display of shirtting on our Constitution and criminal justice system." It was an absolute crap comparison and anyone with the barest hint of intellect and honesty can see that.

Then I must apologize for my deficits.

It is my belief that the way you carry yourself here will either lead you to leave because everyone eventually gets sick of your crap and blocks you or you violate so many rules that you get banned, much like most far right posters before you.

Ah. Then I will redouble my efforts to follow the rules and to avoid having people tire of my posts. Thank you for the heads up!

 

[Taurus]

You are so off base here, it’s actually kinda funny.

Remember, everyone, you're talking to the political equivalent of a Young Earth Creationist.

Forget the YEC. You'll never get them to engage in a serious manner. Your real audience is lurkers who might be fooled into thinking they have a point.

 

[MT15]

Very good point.

I wonder if any would attribute a pro-Trump bias in the judge doing something that will cause a delay.

I wouldn’t think so because I believe I read that she only gave them about a week to get that done.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Clinton didn’t go through the emails and pick and choose. Her lawyers (officers of the court did). It was said to be routine procedure and the FBI said there was no evidence that they did anything out of bounds with their selection. She didn’t choose the method of destroying anything, any equipment that was decommissioned was destroyed in ways that are customary.

You can repeat these lies all you want, but that will not make them true.

I don't remember it that way, but I'm not always right, that's for sure!

 

[MT15]

Holy gish gallop Batman! Lol.

I especially enjoyed two parts - one where he thinks Monte “rage quit” a topic. That one made me laugh out loud because in all the years he’s been here I cannot ever remember him being angry. Second one was where he seems to think we all have alts. Lol. Yeah, we’re playing the long game here that’s for sure.

 

[Snarky Sack]

I wouldn’t think so because I believe I read that she only gave them about a week to get that done.

Oh, good! Then the right thing will be done, and no nefarious intent be inferred. I thank you for responding.

 

[FullMonte]

I especially enjoyed two parts - one where he thinks Monte “rage quit” a topic. That one made me laugh out loud because in all the years he’s been here I cannot ever remember him being angry.

I have a wierd personality thing where I very rarely get angry. I’ve just grown up and found getting angry about things to be a waste of energy.

I either look for a way to fix the issue, or just move on with my life and barely give whatever it is a second thought.

 

[MT15]

I don't remember it that way, but I'm not always right, that's for sure!

The procedure was outlined by Comey in detail. I quoted it for you.

 

[Snarky Sack]

The procedure was outlined by Comey in detail. I quoted it for you.

No doubt I discounted it on the grounds of lack of credibility if Comey was the source.

 

[Lapaz]

The better comparison is Clinton, who negotiated, stalled, and sorted documents herself, rather than give the FBI full access. At the end, I guess you could say that she cooperated. The FBI, for whatever reasons, settled on allowing her to pick and choose what to return, and then to choose the method of destroying the remaining material.

Where is your link that Clinton sorted "documents"? I believe it was all about her emails. Unlike Trump, which actually withheld and obstructed the return of agency documents, which are not presidential documents.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Where is your link that Clinton sorted "documents"? I believe it was all about her emails. Unlike Trump, which factually withheld and obstructed the return of agency documents, which are not presidential documents.

I consider emails to be "documents."

 

[LA - L.A.]

Remember, everyone, you're talking to the political equivalent of a Young Earth Creationist.

Forget the YEC. You'll never get them to engage in a serious manner. Your real audience is lurkers who might be fooled into thinking they have a point.

Spot on. It's not about "owning" them or "winning." It's about making sure everyone else understands how wrong and dishonest they are being.

We don't need Trump or his supporters to stop doing what they do. We just need to make sure everyone else sees what they're doing.

When responding to things these people say, don't talk to them, talk to everyone else reading the thread. Like Trump, these people get perverse delight from feeling like they are making everyone dance to their tune. The more that people give them their fix, the more they're going to chase that fix.

 

[Lapaz]

It's been mentioned that this case is likely to end via jury nullification. That will be spun into that Trump is innocent. It will be just like the other charges against Trump that were valid, yet since they failed due to his acolytes, Republicans spun it into being bogus. Fortunately, Trump's influence outside the Republican party has been weakening, as evidenced by the losses of the people he has supported, and his own loss in 2020, so that spin doesn't seem to carry weight outside of the Republican party. However, despite Trump not being able to win over a majority, how do the failures to make the charges stick impact justice in the future? Do y'all think that future cases against politicians will end in nullification more often? People complain about corruption, but I think nullification would lead to much more political corruption.

 

[Lapaz]

I consider emails to be "documents."

Emails are not documents. Furthermore, do you realize that emails ARE presidential records, because they are generated by the President? Do you realize that documents generated by other agencies ARE NOT Presidential records?

 

[Snarky Sack]

Emails are not documents.

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that emails are not documents.

I wonder if any other posters also believe that emails are not documents? To pick a poster at random, @J-DONK , may I ask your opinion?

Furthermore, do you realize that emails ARE presidential records, because they are generated by the President?

Yes, if you mean emails written by the president.

Do you realize that documents generated by other agencies ARE NOT Presidential records?

I'm not sure about that. What if an agency sends an email to the president? Is that a presidential record? Thank you for sharing your expertise.

Other than that, it makes sense that inter-agency emails would not be presidential records.

 

[Snarky Sack]

It's been mentioned that this case is likely to end via jury nullification. That will be spun into that Trump is innocent. It will be just like the other charges against Trump that were valid, yet since they failed due to his acolytes, Republicans spun it into being bogus. Fortunately, Trump's influence outside the Republican party has been weakening, as evidenced by the losses of the people he has supported, and his own loss in 2020, so that spin doesn't seem to carry weight outside of the Republican party. However, despite Trump not being able to win over a majority, how do the failures to make the charges stick impact justice in the future? Do y'all think that future cases against politicians will end in nullification more often? People complain about corruption, but I think nullification would lead to much more political corruption.

If the case ever goes to trial, I believe you are right about jury nullification.