Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 83

Thread: Indictments Coming for Trump and His Aides

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Actually, he doesn't interpret the law. He decides if the crime alleged fits the law.
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.
    ROFLMAO.. so the judge has to interpret the law every time a case comes before him? OMG. It would seem a simple understanding of the English language would mean you don't have to interpret something over and over and over and over and over.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  4. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2022
    Posts
    1,354
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 399 Times in 306 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 132 Times in 129 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Too bad that the law doesn't require the document be classified for it to be a crime. In fact the 3 crimes listed in the search warrant don't require a classified document for a crime to occur.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1519
    By failing to turn over the documents when subpoenaed, Trump attempted to conceal them. There is no requirement that the documents be classified.
    What "Federal investigations and bankruptcy" retard?


    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

    Trump took documents that were supposed to be given to the National Archives. That would mean he removed them and then by not turning them over under subpoena he concealed them. There is no requirement that the documents be classified.
    The GAO packed his boxes moron

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

    So Trump could legally have the document, (not likely since the Presidential records act says he can't) but if he showed it to anyone not authorized to see it he committed a felony.

    The FBI requested surveillance video from when Kash Patel was at Mar-a-Lago. Kash claims to have seem some of those documents.
    Trump also retained the documents and failed to turn them over to an employee of the United States, the National Archives, entitled to receive the documents. There is no requirement that the documents be classified for this to be a crime.
    A person "authorized to see it" is anyone the President deems authorized to see it moron. He is the Commander in Chief, who do you think makes that authorization above him?

  5. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.
    In reality, most judges leave it up to the jury to decide whether the facts of the alleged crime violate the law.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  6. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shoresy View Post
    A person "authorized to see it" is anyone the President deems authorized to see it moron. He is the Commander in Chief, who do you think makes that authorization above him?
    Trump is not President while living at Mar-a-Lago. He has no power to authorize anyone to view a classified document.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  8. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    ROFLMAO.. so the judge has to interpret the law every time a case comes before him? OMG. It would seem a simple understanding of the English language would mean you don't have to interpret something over and over and over and over and over.
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.

    I see why you have your appellation...Pobre.

    Poor in intellect, poor in debate.

  9. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Trump is not President while living at Mar-a-Lago. He has no power to authorize anyone to view a classified document.
    They were declassified, Pobre...concentrate...declassified.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (08-13-2022)

  11. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.

    I see why you have your appellation...Pobre.

    Poor in intellect, poor in debate.
    So your argument is that when he interprets the law he can add any word he wants?
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  13. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    So your argument is that when he interprets the law he can add any word he wants?
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.

    Lose the pathetic straw-men, Pobre.

  14. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Trump is not President while living at Mar-a-Lago. He has no power to authorize anyone to view a classified document.
    Wrong, Pobre, President Trump was president while at Mar-a-Largo or anywhere else in the world.

    You have no clue as to when the de-classification happened.

    No clue.

  15. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    They were declassified, Pobre...concentrate...declassified.
    Yeah.. and the law does not say the document has to be classified.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
    (d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with 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 on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
    Trump had possession of the document. If it pertained to national defense then it is covered by the law even if it isn't classified.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  17. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Wrong, Pobre, President Trump was president while at Mar-a-Largo or anywhere else in the world.

    You have no clue as to when the de-classification happened.

    No clue.
    ROFLMAO.. So Trump is President in May of 2022?
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  19. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    32,857
    Thanks
    19,749
    Thanked 9,460 Times in 7,746 Posts
    Groans
    836
    Groaned 510 Times in 503 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NiftyNiblick View Post
    Indictments are ok, but I'd rather it be armed drones.
    Your Nazi fantasies are duly recorded.

  20. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    10,950
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 5,069 Times in 3,419 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 643 Times in 611 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    Well, no, Pobre, he has to interpret the law to determine if it applies...in the case before him.

    Lose the pathetic straw-men, Pobre.
    The only interpretation of US 793 is it covers any document that relates to National Security that could reasonable be considered a threat to national security if revealed even if the document is not classified.
    "We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid."

    "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do."

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Poor Richard Saunders For This Post:

    Guno צְבִי (08-13-2022)

  22. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,507
    Thanks
    78,192
    Thanked 23,686 Times in 17,937 Posts
    Groans
    38,863
    Groaned 3,248 Times in 3,052 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poor Richard Saunders View Post
    Yeah.. and the law does not say the document has to be classified.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793


    Trump had possession of the document. If it pertained to national defense then it is covered by the law even if it isn't classified.
    “... 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 on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or...”


    This has not been proven, Pobre.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Grokmaster (08-13-2022)

Similar Threads

  1. John Dean: "More Indictments Coming"
    By katzgar in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 03-24-2019, 06:34 PM
  2. Or indictments coming, but who?
    By Jarod in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-30-2019, 11:51 AM
  3. ‘New indictments coming as soon as today’ in Mueller probe:
    By floridafan in forum General Politics Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-13-2018, 08:30 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-27-2018, 08:33 AM
  5. So when are the Hillary indictments coming?
    By archives in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-31-2017, 03:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •