Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
Is Trump going to jail?
Is Trump going to jail?
By Prospero
1 Jun 2023 10:57 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
3 Jun 2023 10:09 am
Won’t be long, and I will be the only one here 🥷
[img]blob:2d7c5aec-4e61-40b1-8182-e7f088c26053[/img]
https://media.tenor.com/5D_XxFIPmoMAAAA ... t-gump.gif
3 Jun 2023 10:25 am
YESMrkelly » 03 Jun 2023, 10:09 am » wrote: ↑ Won’t be long, and I will be the only one here 🥷
[img]blob:2d7c5aec-4e61-40b1-8182-e7f088c26053[/img]
https://media.tenor.com/5D_XxFIPmoMAAAA ... t-gump.gif
THE ONLY REMAINING SOK ASSHOLE
3 Jun 2023 10:40 am
Sherlock Holmes you ain’t
3 Jun 2023 10:47 am
Please substantiate your claim.
3 Jun 2023 11:01 am
Ah yes, but isn't everyone, once or twice a day, eh?
3 Jun 2023 11:12 am
**** you, look it up
3 Jun 2023 11:15 am
If there was a request under the Freedom of Information Act for documents that Trump now claims he declassified, government officials would have no way of knowing whether it had been declassified. This is why this argument is a bit absurd. Without having the declassification recorded or put in writing, documents would continue to be treated as classified. Even if Mr. Trump had in fact declassified the records, he was still bound by federal law, including the Presidential Records Act, that required him to return all government documents, classified or unclassified, when he left office. Note that none of his lawyers claimed he declassified anything in court, and the reason is that the lawyer have no confirmation that he did it (given that Trump, having not followed protocols, has no way to prove it) and lawyers are not going to risk lying in a court of law. Trump Claims He Declassified Documents, but His Lawyers Don’t - The New York Times (nytimes.com)ConsRule » 03 Jun 2023, 7:16 am » wrote: ↑ An expert on CNNLOL just told Victor Blackwell said that the President has the authority to declassify anything at any time (and cited examples of Presidents doing just that) without following the protocols that others must follow. He also said he, and most others Constitutional experts, doubt any court would rule otherwise as it would be a restriction of the powers of the CIC. Like it or not, when it comes to the classification and declassification of documents, the rules that apply to everyone else in the government DO NOT APPLY to the Commander in Chief as he is the final authority on classification and security clearance matters.
That doesn't mean the President shouldn't follow protocol...it means he isn't required to follow protocol.
3 Jun 2023 11:27 am
Sorry, if you can't substantiate your claim, your comment is dismissed.
The onus is on those who make claims to substantiate them, not those whom they are trying to persuade.
That has been internet debate courtesy since the days of Usenet and BBSes in the early 90s.
But, I suspect you do not care.
Right?
3 Jun 2023 11:28 am
biden was VP and had classified docs.... THAT IS ILLEGALProspero » 03 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ If there was a request under the Freedom of Information Act for documents that Trump now claims he declassified, government officials would have no way of knowing whether it had been declassified. This is why this argument is a bit absurd. Without having the declassification recorded or put in writing, documents would continue to be treated as classified. Even if Mr. Trump had in fact declassified the records, he was still bound by federal law, including the Presidential Records Act, that required him to return all government documents, classified or unclassified, when he left office. Note that none of his lawyers claimed he declassified anything in court, and the reason is that the lawyer have no confirmation that he did it (given that Trump, having not followed protocols, has no way to prove it) and lawyers are not going to risk lying in a court of law. Trump Claims He Declassified Documents, but His Lawyers Don’t - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
3 Jun 2023 11:28 am
come on JackProspero » 03 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ If there was a request under the Freedom of Information Act for documents that Trump now claims he declassified, government officials would have no way of knowing whether it had been declassified. This is why this argument is a bit absurd. Without having the declassification recorded or put in writing, documents would continue to be treated as classified. Even if Mr. Trump had in fact declassified the records, he was still bound by federal law, including the Presidential Records Act, that required him to return all government documents, classified or unclassified, when he left office. Note that none of his lawyers claimed he declassified anything in court, and the reason is that the lawyer have no confirmation that he did it (given that Trump, having not followed protocols, has no way to prove it) and lawyers are not going to risk lying in a court of law. Trump Claims He Declassified Documents, but His Lawyers Don’t - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
tRump splained it to hannity
“the FBI may have been looking for hillarys missing emails “
https://youtu.be/jn9BWf50UdE
3 Jun 2023 11:31 am
I DON'T GIVE A FLYING **** WHAT SOME LIBTARD ASSWIPE LIKE YOU THINKS OR SAYSProspero » 03 Jun 2023, 11:27 am » wrote: ↑ Sorry, if you can't substantiate your claim, your comment is dismissed.
The onus is on those who make claims to substantiate them, not those whom they are trying to persuade.
That has been internet debate courtesy since the days of Usenet and BBSes in the early 90s.
But, I suspect you do not care.
Right?
3 Jun 2023 11:49 am
YOU CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE FECAL IMPACTION OF THE MOUTH, SLICK
3 Jun 2023 11:51 am
MR..SLICK YOU AIN'T
3 Jun 2023 11:57 am
Ponder this: As far as classified documents go, how would the prosecution handle the fact that, in order to view the evidence, (which would literally be the classified documents) address the clearances needed to view said classified documents? Jury, judge, lawyers, would all need clearances!! The possibility of a security breach would be significant!
3 Jun 2023 11:57 am
The DOJ policy is to afford exec branch the benefit of the doubt on classified docs. Many of the Biden docs were acquired when he was Senator. Senators often take stacks of classified docs home (except TS/SCI, of course). The DOJ is more concerned with their retrieval, and whether or they will cooperate in their return, so they do not prosecute for possession, alone, unless:
1. There is willful, deliberate attempt to take the documents without intending on their return and that can be proven. PLUS the fact that....
2. They obstruct the government's efforts to retrieve them.
That is NOT the case with Biden and Pence, but is, indeed, the case with Trump.
3 Jun 2023 11:58 am
Ponder this: As far as classified documents go, how would the prosecution handle the fact that, in order to view the evidence, (which would literally be the classified documents) address the clearances needed to view said classified documents? Jury, judge, lawyers, would all need clearances!! The possibility of a security breach would be significant!
3 Jun 2023 11:59 am
Prospero » 03 Jun 2023, 11:57 am » wrote: ↑ The DOJ policy is to afford exec branch the benefit of the doubt on classified docs. Many of the Biden docs were acquired when he was Senator. Senators often take stacks of classified docs home (except TS/SCI, of course). The DOJ is more concerned with their retrieval, and whether or they will cooperate in their return, so they do not prosecute for possession, alone, unless:
1. There is willful, deliberate attempt to take the documents without intending on their return and that can be proven. PLUS the fact that....
2. They obstruct the government's efforts to retrieve them.
That is NOT the case with Biden and Pence, but is, indeed, the case with Trump.
so you are **** saying, there is one set of rules for **** crooked democrats and another set for Republicans
3 Jun 2023 12:05 pm
YOUR BABBLE IS INCORRECT.Prospero » 03 Jun 2023, 11:57 am » wrote: ↑ The DOJ policy is to afford exec branch the benefit of the doubt on classified docs. Many of the Biden docs were acquired when he was Senator. Senators often take stacks of classified docs home (except TS/SCI, of course). The DOJ is more concerned with their retrieval, and whether or they will cooperate in their return, so they do not prosecute for possession, alone, unless:
1. There is willful, deliberate attempt to take the documents without intending on their return and that can be proven. PLUS the fact that....
2. They obstruct the government's efforts to retrieve them.
That is NOT the case with Biden and Pence, but is, indeed, the case with Trump.
IN REFERENCE TO BIDEN AS SENATOR, REMOVING CLASIFIED DOCUMENTS FROM THE PLACE THEY WERE STORED, A SCIF, IS A CRIMINAL ACT. ACCORDING TO LEFTIST SENATOR BLUMENTHAL, “When we view documents, we have to leave them in the room where we see them without taking notes without making copies, without any kind of transcription.
Referring to Biden’s handling of materials with classified markings, Fitzpatrick cited his experience as an FBI special agent and a federal prosecutor, and said: “Classified documents can never be taken out of a SCIF, ever.”
Biden documents included “sensitive compartmented information.”That would mean those documents require a SCIF.
3 Jun 2023 12:16 pm
I'm a seasoned writer, essayistProspero » 02 Jun 2023, 11:30 pm » wrote: ↑ When I do, I ALWAYS put them in quotes or italics, and either link to, or name the source.
IF I don't, then the reply is based on my research. FYI, I'm a seasoned writer, essayist ( and I must remain anonymous) and my writing tends to look like copy and pasted text.
I also use AI as a research tool, but it's output is public domain and not quotable. If I copy and paste any AI text, more often than not, I rewrite it to my own words. If the data is wrong, prove me wrong, that's the point of debate. My whole point of being on this forum is to research the efficacy of AI in a debate forum setting. Is that acceptable to the rules? If not. I will leave this forum.
HAHAHAHAHA
NOW THATS FUNNY
3 Jun 2023 3:05 pm
All that you have said about tRump is fake news. You cannot prove a word of it.Prospero » 03 Jun 2023, 5:08 am » wrote: ↑ Oh, I pretend not.
IN the meantime, you've made a claim, that Biden has a scandal.
The only kind I know of are those that the right have manufactured in their fertile imaginations..
IF you have an actual scandal, you'll need to provide evidence for it.
Take care,
Prospero
Take a xanax,
Your father, Luke.
When you complain, ur friends roll their eyes and ur enemies rejoice
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
"Because I SAY I am" is a todler's tantrum, not "science"
You cannot betray me - only yourself, to me.
Who cuts off your dick is not a friend
An opinion you won't defend is not your own
Humanity's Law of the Jungle: Survival NOT of the fittest, but of the tribe
When peeing in the pool, stand on the edge
If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with?
Who is online
In total there are 5729 users online :: 8 registered, 16 bots, and 5705 guests
Bots: NING, Adsbot, okhttp, proximic, ADmantX, MicroMessenger, Pinterest, facebookexternalhit, YandexBot, Applebot, Googlebot, Baiduspider, Mediapartners-Google, CriteoBot, bingbot, curl/7