And LOSING like the little whiny *** LWNJ she is.
haha speaking of losers..................
in yo face
jerrab » 24 Jun 2023, 6:45 pm » wrote: ↑ i asked stupid b to find where trump can keep all documents government and personal and I am still waiting,
in the court's view- ie an opiinion and she did not nullify the law which was signed by a US president.user1687614437 » 24 Jun 2023, 10:52 pm » wrote: ↑ Judge Jackson in 2012 defines Trump gets to determine what is personal and what he keeps...
The reason they doesn't prosecute presidents for mere possession of documents is....
This was decided already in 2012 ... so anything they think they have on him is only a political hack job..
the judge ruled Clinton could keep any records he wants... so can Trump... Biden was only a VP
Judge Amy Jackson ruled in 2012 that a president's discretion to declare records "personal" is far-reaching and mostly unchallengeable.
https://justthenews.com/politics-po...-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-co.../JW-v-NARA-Clinton-Tapes-transcript-01834.pdf
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/stat ... 4292813827
https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/judicial- ... -890793772
https://www.docketbird.com/court-do...-on-3-1-2012-lcabj2/dcd-1:2010-cv-01834-00013
![]()
/// from US law§2203. Management and custody of Presidential records(a) Through the implementation of records management controls and other necessary actions, the President shall take all such steps as may be necessary to assure that the activities, deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect the performance of the President's constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties are adequately documented and that such records are preserved and maintained as Presidential records pursuant to the requirements of this section and other provisions of law.user1687614437 » 24 Jun 2023, 10:52 pm » wrote: ↑ Judge Jackson in 2012 defines Trump gets to determine what is personal and what he keeps...
The reason they doesn't prosecute presidents for mere possession of documents is....
This was decided already in 2012 ... so anything they think they have on him is only a political hack job..
the judge ruled Clinton could keep any records he wants... so can Trump... Biden was only a VP
Judge Amy Jackson ruled in 2012 that a president's discretion to declare records "personal" is far-reaching and mostly unchallengeable.
https://justthenews.com/politics-po...-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-co.../JW-v-NARA-Clinton-Tapes-transcript-01834.pdf
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/stat ... 4292813827
https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/judicial- ... -890793772
https://www.docketbird.com/court-do...-on-3-1-2012-lcabj2/dcd-1:2010-cv-01834-00013
![]()
user1687614437 » 24 Jun 2023, 10:52 pm » wrote: ↑ Judge Jackson in 2012 defines Trump gets to determine what is personal and what he keeps...
The reason they doesn't prosecute presidents for mere possession of documents is....
This was decided already in 2012 ... so anything they think they have on him is only a political hack job..
the judge ruled Clinton could keep any records he wants... so can Trump... Biden was only a VP
Judge Amy Jackson ruled in 2012 that a president's discretion to declare records "personal" is far-reaching and mostly unchallengeable.
https://justthenews.com/politics-po...-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-co.../JW-v-NARA-Clinton-Tapes-transcript-01834.pdf
https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/stat ... 4292813827
https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/judicial- ... -890793772
https://www.docketbird.com/court-do...-on-3-1-2012-lcabj2/dcd-1:2010-cv-01834-00013
And your "source"......jerrab » 24 Jun 2023, 9:14 pm » wrote: ↑ haha speaking of losers..................
https://www.justsecurity.org/83034/trac ... documents/
- Trump was warned in late 2021 by his former White House lawyer that it was unlawful to retain the documents, especially classified information;
- Trump personally sorted through the documents in late 2021;
- Trump’s personal knowledge and possession, access, and control of the documents is indicated by the quantity, content, and location of documents with classified markings (including intermingled with personal belongings) and by his admissions on Truth Social;
- Trump repeatedly stated privately that the documents were his to possess and he was not willing to deliver them to the government;
- Trump aides repeatedly tried to get him to return the documents to the government;
- Trump was repeatedly put on notice by Archives and Justice Department that his retention of the documents was unlawful and a potential threat to national security;
- Trump was apparently involved in obstructive acts of trying to conceal documents from the government after receiving a subpoena.
Just ANOTHER LWNJ source that uses TOTAL **** "news stories" and INNUENDO to draw OPINIONATED "conclusions" to "get Trump".We are grateful for support from Craig Newmark Philanthropies, Open Society Foundations, Global Institute for Advanced Study at New York University, Atlantic Philanthropies, New York University School of Law, and individual donors.
https://www.justsecurity.org/about-us/
Beekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑ And your "source"......
Just ANOTHER LWNJ source that uses TOTAL **** "news stories" and INNUENDO to draw OPINIONATED "conclusions" to "get Trump".
BTW, Open Society is a SOROS funding mechanism, as long as you have the complete prerequisite HATE for anyone NOT LWNJ!!
Beekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑ And your "source"......
Just ANOTHER LWNJ source that uses TOTAL **** "news stories" and INNUENDO to draw OPINIONATED "conclusions" to "get Trump".
BTW, Open Society is a SOROS funding mechanism, as long as you have the complete prerequisite HATE for anyone NOT LWNJ!!
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/44/2203Beekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑ And your "source"......
Just ANOTHER LWNJ source that uses TOTAL **** "news stories" and INNUENDO to draw OPINIONATED "conclusions" to "get Trump".
BTW, Open Society is a SOROS funding mechanism, as long as you have the complete prerequisite HATE for anyone NOT LWNJ!!
WHY read anything that is relying on LWNJ "news" sources that use "unnamed sources", "someone close to the investigation", and just SPECULATION about what is or isn't there.
Beekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑ WHY read anything that is relying on LWNJ "news" sources that use "unnamed sources", "someone close to the investigation", and just SPECULATION about what is or isn't there.
WE SMART PEOPLE call that kind of CRAP, PROPAGANDA and you should learn about it as well. It's FILLED YOUR HEAD with **** that has been proven OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER to be lies and innuendo that are YOUR sources!! "Russia Russia Russia" comes to mind and THAT one, along with NUMEROUS other "articles" that actually won "Pulitzer prizes" were FABRICATED ****!!
So you keep trying to come up with DOCUMENTED and PROVEN SOURCES, rather than some **** from "news" sources that are in the back pocket of your precious LWNJ Party and THEN you might have something.
SOROS funded "we hate Trump" sites isn't one.
And YOU are relying on "unnamed sources" as something"factual"!!!
dumb asses like you are incapable of reading US lawsBeekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 6:53 am » wrote: ↑ WHY read anything that is relying on LWNJ "news" sources that use "unnamed sources", "someone close to the investigation", and just SPECULATION about what is or isn't there.
WE SMART PEOPLE call that kind of CRAP, PROPAGANDA and you should learn about it as well. It's FILLED YOUR HEAD with **** that has been proven OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER to be lies and innuendo that are YOUR sources!! "Russia Russia Russia" comes to mind and THAT one, along with NUMEROUS other "articles" that actually won "Pulitzer prizes" were FABRICATED ****!!
So you keep trying to come up with DOCUMENTED and PROVEN SOURCES, rather than some **** from "news" sources that are in the back pocket of your precious LWNJ Party and THEN you might have something.
SOROS funded "we hate Trump" sites isn't one.
No provision for it, there is no provision against it. balance achieved. This is a intentional argument created to divide ideologies like siblings seeking favorite child notoriety from those in command of people demanding human rights to ignore how living happens in plain sight, so there has tobe rules of engagement denying the self evident time evolving here in plain sight.jerra b » 24 Jun 2023, 9:20 am » wrote: ↑ https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics ... index.html
In its statement Friday, the National Archives flatly disputed that claim, stating, “There is no history, practice, or provision in law for presidents to take official records with them when they leave office to sort through, such as for a two-year period as described in some reports.”
Asked about Parlatore’s comments that presidents have two years to go through their records after leaving office, Jason R. Baron, former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, told CNN, “The statement is false.”
“Only during his time in office does a President have the right to go through his records to separate what may be ‘personal records’ of his, from official records within the scope of the Presidential Records Act,” Baron added.Trump continued to make false claims about the Presidential Records Act on his Truth Social account, posting after the indictment was unsealed Friday, “This is crazy! … Under the Presidential Records Act, I’m allowed to do all this.
Beekeeper » 25 Jun 2023, 7:01 am » wrote: ↑ And YOU are relying on "unnamed sources" as something"factual"!!!
SO SHUT THE **** UP UNTIL YOU HAVE VERIFIED FACTS, of which your **** SOURCE has NONE!!