Judge who signed off on Trump raid has anti-Trump posts and shared content from ‘Woke

[Monad Portal]

Of course there are laws regarding the handling of classified information. Those laws require proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the person charged knowingly and willingly mishandled the information. That means you have to first prove there was classified information, then prove the person knew it was classified, then prove that the person knowing it was classified violated how it is to be handled.

So...

Prove beyond a reasonable doubt that "(c)" means this sentence is classified.

no.

they do not involve intent.

 

[archives]

as are you.

Hardly, my points are supported by reason and common sense, your’s on the other hand, your devotion to Trump, as I’ve noted, only the MAGA militia constantly prove that they are the only ones who believe that regardless of the evidence that their Messiah is beyond even breaking any law, and effort to determine if he possibly has is regarded as bias and picking on Trump

 

[Noking]

This is rich coming from a Biden butt licker

 

[Monad Portal]

Hardly, my points are supported by reason and common sense, your’s on the other hand, your devotion to Trump, as I’ve noted, only the MAGA militia constantly prove that they are the only ones who believe that regardless of the evidence that their Messiah is beyond even breaking any law, and effort to determine if he possibly has is regarded as bias and picking on Trump

so you know what was put before the judge?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

no.

they do not involve intent.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully

knowingly and willfully are the words I used. They do imply intent.

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

(e) 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

Once again it requires an act that is done willfully.

(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent

But it clearly involves intent when the law says "intent."

 

[Monad Portal]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798



knowingly and willfully are the words I used. They do imply intent.

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


Once again it requires an act that is done willfully.


But it clearly involves intent when the law says "intent."

she knowingly set up an unsecured server with classified data on it.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

she knowingly set up an unsecured server with classified data on it.

ROFLMAO... So how did this server have classified information on it when it was set up? Did the server have email sent to it before it was set up to receive it?
Your argument is so ludicrous that no reasonable person would accept it, let alone a jury tasked with the requirement of guilt has to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

According to your argument, if someone sends you an email with classified information you would be guilty of intent because you have an email account that you intended to use.

 

[Bigdog]

And a Bush donor, does not mean he was wrong in signing the warrant. Silly non-sequitur argument.

Cracka pleez,

He only gave to Jeb because he hates DJT ... That much!

His support of Barack Hussein O. and hatred of DJT points to his political motive.

 

[Bigdog]

How is he a proven Trump hater? How is he politically motivated?

See the OP.

So you agree that 'preserving presidential records' is a perfect reason to launch a gestapo raid on a political opponent?

 

[Bigdog]

Prove it, prove what you claimed entered into his decision, and a tweet reproduced isn’t proof, document something you say

Yes, it is proof. The judge already scrubbed his tweets, like the Hillbag wiped her server ... and NOT with a cloth.

Prove this judge wasn't politically motivated when he authorized a massive raid on a Biden political opponent.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Yes, it is proof. The judge already scrubbed his tweets, like the Hillbag wiped her server ... and NOT with a cloth.

Prove this judge wasn't politically motivated when he authorized a massive raid on a Biden political opponent.

The bigger problem than this one judge is how profoundly our judges suck in quality now generally.

We used to be so much better!