Liberal Forum

golfboy » 28 Jun 2023, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Jun 2023, 12:41 pm

Why would I once again explain to you the literal word "intent" doesn't have to be used in the English language, for the meaning of the law requiring intent?
And I only brought up Clinton, because you once again, lied.

-------------------------------------------

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/13/politics ... index.html


Here’s what the law saysThe specific language in 18 US Code 793 (e), which is cited in the indictment against Trump, goes like this, and I’ve put the key portion in bold:(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 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; or …That’s the whole point here. The National Archives and the FBI tried repeatedly over time to get the material back. But the government has accused Trump of hiding from the government and his own lawyers.