Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
"DOJ has one big problem with its Trump criminal case, legal expert says"
"DOJ has one big problem with its Trump criminal case, legal expert says"
By roadkill
9 Jun 2023 4:22 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
25 Jun 2023 7:43 pm
do you honestly believe that any court in the land would agree that the president has the right to determine that nuclear launch codes produced by the DoD or the latest fleet ballistic missile patrol zones were his personal records to do with as he chose, including sharing them with his golfing foursome?user1687614437 » 25 Jun 2023, 7:37 pm » wrote: ↑ And she added b
(b)
Documentary materials produced or received by the President, the President’s staff, or units or individuals in the Executive Office of the President the function of which is to advise or assist the President, shall, to the extent practicable, be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately
The president determines what is personal or Presidential...
25 Jun 2023 7:46 pm
so.. you don't know the long list of parameters used to decide FBM patrol zones?golfboy » 25 Jun 2023, 7:16 pm » wrote: ↑ Of course, everyone does.
You move them to within reach of any current, or potential threat.
You know, like Tehran, and now because of Joe Biden, Taiwan, Moscow and NKorea.
and why would a fry cook from Boise have a clue anyway?
25 Jun 2023 7:47 pm
so he can share any national secret with anyone he wants to?
25 Jun 2023 7:51 pm
the charges don't list ANY subsections. He has been charged with 31 violations of THIS SECTION. You said that intent was required in the entire section. IT IS NOT. Not intent not purpose not even belief. You were wrong.golfboy » 25 Jun 2023, 6:46 pm » wrote: ↑ lol. Need help moving those goalposts mainbitch?
First it was section d, then e, now f?
Can you quote from the charges that this is the paragraph he has been charged with violating?
25 Jun 2023 7:52 pm
What could be worse than Sleepy Joe Biden having the Nuclear Launch Codes......he is quite insane or are you?maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 7:43 pm » wrote: ↑ do you honestly believe that any court in the land would agree that the president has the right to determine that nuclear launch codes produced by the DoD or the latest fleet ballistic missile patrol zones were his personal records to do with as he chose, including sharing them with his golfing foursome?
25 Jun 2023 7:54 pm
and if everyone knew how we determined our ballistic missile patrol zones, why wouldn't the DoD just publish them in the Washington Post so that the families of nuclear submariners would know where they're fathers and husbands were at all times?
25 Jun 2023 7:54 pm
user1687614437 » 25 Jun 2023, 7:37 pm » wrote: ↑ And she added b
(b)
Documentary materials produced or received by the President, the President’s staff, or units or individuals in the Executive Office of the President the function of which is to advise or assist the President, shall, to the extent practicable, be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately
The president determines what is personal or Presidential...
she omitted a.
25 Jun 2023 7:55 pm
I spent many a sleepless night knowing that the clown could start WW3 on a whim.RebelGator » 25 Jun 2023, 7:52 pm » wrote: ↑ What could be worse than Sleepy Joe Biden having the Nuclear Launch Codes......he is quite insane or are you?
25 Jun 2023 8:01 pm
So having them locked up, under the protection of the Secret Service was grossly negligent?maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 7:41 pm » wrote: ↑ by his gross negligence.
or, he could give them to someone who he did not know, at the time, would use them to injure America, but then did.
That's weird. I guess it's better to keep them in the open garage, next to your corvette, or in an unlocked office space in Chinatown.
25 Jun 2023 8:04 pm
Doesn't matter. The precent was set in 2012, that the President owns whatever records he wants, and no one can do anything about it.jerrab » 25 Jun 2023, 7:41 pm » wrote: ↑ https://www.archives.gov/presidential-l ... esidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978, 44 U.S.C. ß2201-2209, governs the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents that were created or received after January 20, 1981 (i.e., beginning with the Reagan Administration). The PRA changed the legal ownership of the official records of the President from private to public, and established a new statutory structure under which Presidents, and subsequently NARA, must manage the records of their Administrations. The PRA was amended in 2014, which established several new provisions.Specifically, the PRA:
25 Jun 2023 8:04 pm
you asked how the clown could be charged under the statute without intent.golfboy » 25 Jun 2023, 8:01 pm » wrote: ↑ So having them locked up, under the protection of the Secret Service was grossly negligent?
That's weird. I guess it's better to keep them in the open garage, next to your corvette, or in an unlocked office space in Chinatown.
I answered you. He was charged with 31 counts of violating the espionage act. Many sections of the act do NOT require intent or purpose or even belief.
You lose. crawl away.
25 Jun 2023 8:06 pm
so... you really are saying that the president could declare the nuclear launch codes and the locations of our nuclear stockpiles and the range and capabilities of our ICBM's to be personal records and share them with whomever he wants?golfboy » 25 Jun 2023, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑ Doesn't matter. The precent was set in 2012, that the President owns whatever records he wants, and no one can do anything about it.
25 Jun 2023 8:06 pm
So you keep claiming.maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 8:04 pm » wrote: ↑ you asked how the clown could be charged under the statute without intent.
I answered you. He was charged with 31 counts of violating the espionage act. Many sections of the act do NOT require intent or purpose or even belief.
You lose. crawl away.
But of course you're wrong. You always are.
It's amusing that now you think Trump was going to give, or sold information to someone that wanted to hurt the U.S.
And you don't even understand how stupid and absurd these irrational claims are.
Because you have a room temp IQ.
25 Jun 2023 8:07 pm
Please quote me saying that.maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑ so... you really are saying that the president could declare the nuclear launch codes and the locations of our nuclear stockpiles and the range and capabilities of our ICBM's to be personal records and share them with whomever he wants?
Oh wait, you can't because you're making **** up, because you can't deal with facts.
25 Jun 2023 8:08 pm
Trump is not being charged under the Espionage Act....maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 7:36 pm » wrote: ↑ The very last sentence of Page 33
The Espionage Act of 1917 is a United States federal law enacted on June 15, 1917, shortly after the United States entered World War I. It has been amended numerous times over the years. It was originally found in Title 50 of the U.S. Code (War & National Defense) but is now found under Title 18 (Crime & Criminal Procedure). Specifically, it is 18 U.S.C. ch. 37(18 U.S.C. § 792 et seq.)
25 Jun 2023 8:09 pm
Biden can do that. And for the right price, he would.maineman » 25 Jun 2023, 8:06 pm » wrote: ↑ so... you really are saying that the president could declare the nuclear launch codes and the locations of our nuclear stockpiles and the range and capabilities of our ICBM's to be personal records and share them with whomever he wants?
25 Jun 2023 8:10 pm
Yes he is. The Espionage Act of 1917 is a United States federal law enacted on June 15, 1917, shortly after the United States entered World War I. It has been amended numerous times over the years. It was originally found in Title 50 of the U.S. Code (War & National Defense) but is now found under Title 18 (Crime & Criminal Procedure). Specifically, it is 18 U.S.C. ch. 37(18 U.S.C. § 792 et seq.)user1687614437 » 25 Jun 2023, 8:08 pm » wrote: ↑ Trump is not being charged under the Espionage Act....
Trump is charged with 31 counts in violation of 18 U.S.C. ch. 37(18 U.S.C. § 792 et seq.)
25 Jun 2023 8:10 pm
user1687614437 » 25 Jun 2023, 8:08 pm » wrote: ↑ Trump is not being charged under the Espionage Act....
Show us these documents he is being charged with.... military activity of a foreign country
25 Jun 2023 8:11 pm
nice dodge.
you lose. crawl away now.
25 Jun 2023 8:11 pm
Yes he is, but he's not been charged with espionage.user1687614437 » 25 Jun 2023, 8:08 pm » wrote: ↑ Trump is not being charged under the Espionage Act....
They are just using the title of the law because it's prejudicial.
Who is online
In total there are 2995 users online :: 22 registered, 17 bots, and 2956 guests
Registered users: *Huey, Skans, Deezer Shoove, murdock, FJB, Buck Naked, Zeets2, Mrkelly, roadkill, Johnny You, ConservativeWave, MR-7, EDC4ALL!, Punch, *Beekeeper, Buffalo, Vegas, 31st Arrival, Fuelman, ROG62, *GHETTO BLASTER, Blackvegetable
Bots: CriteoBot, MicroMessenger, Bolt, proximic, facebookexternalhit, app.hypefactors.com, okhttp, curl/7, ADmantX, Mediapartners-Google, linkfluence.com, YandexBot, DuckDuckGo, semantic-visions.com, Googlebot, GPTBot, bingbot