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
18 Jun 2023 10:20 am
This is interesting.. if they already had access then what was the raid good for... yeah, I know.. lol.. I just like to hear a creative excuse from the snowflakes..
https://youtu.be/3paIyoUJHwM
https://youtu.be/3paIyoUJHwM
In memory of Pumpkins
18 Jun 2023 10:44 am
Here's a more succinct case:roadkill » 09 Jun 2023, 4:22 pm » wrote: ↑ Before you watch the video remember...Biden had classified docs EVERYWHERE...and likely still does.
Hillary was subpoenaed to turn over emails, etc. She wiped her illegal server and smashed cell phones to hide her crimes.
Remember when the left cried out about that? Me neither.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pipp4MvN_c0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cM2jsZbWdY
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?
18 Jun 2023 11:01 am
Cannonpointer » 18 Jun 2023, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ Here's a more succinct case:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cM2jsZbWdY
In a sane DOJ this would be a precedence.
18 Jun 2023 11:05 am
Jantje_Smit » 18 Jun 2023, 10:20 am » wrote: ↑ This is interesting.. if they already had access then what was the raid good for... yeah, I know.. lol.. I just like to hear a creative excuse from the snowflakes..
https://youtu.be/3paIyoUJHwM
show where they had full access.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/r ... -documents
18 Jun 2023 11:15 am
BY LAW there is ZERO RIGHT TO ANY ACCESS OF ANY DOCUMENTS DEEMED PERSONAL BY ANY PRESIDENT!!! He can tell the NARA to go pound sand and there IS NO LAWS BROKEN, ****!!jerrab » 18 Jun 2023, 11:05 am » wrote: ↑ show where they had full access.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/r ... -documents
Funny how you can't seem to UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE LEGAL CONCEPT THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PRA AND ALSO RULED AS MUCH BY AMY BERMAN JACKSON!!
Liberals are spoiled children, miserable, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic & useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats ~O'Rourke
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
The Democratic Party seems intransigent on their position of keeping the party ‘woke,’ detached, exclusionary, and totally insane.
18 Jun 2023 11:36 am
Beekeeper » 18 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ BY LAW there is ZERO RIGHT TO ANY ACCESS OF ANY DOCUMENTS DEEMED PERSONAL BY ANY PRESIDENT!!! He can tell the NARA to go pound sand and there IS NO LAWS BROKEN, ****!!
Funny how you can't seem to UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE LEGAL CONCEPT THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PRA AND ALSO RULED AS MUCH BY AMY BERMAN JACKSON!!
now you are making things up.
jackson's ruling did not change pra.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal records are defined as: “documentary materials or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely private or nonpublic character, which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President” and which include “diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business,” “private political associations” and “materials relating exclusively to the President’s own election to the office of the Presidency” [44 U.S.C. § 2201(3)]
18 Jun 2023 11:37 am
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Beekeeper » 18 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ BY LAW there is ZERO RIGHT TO ANY ACCESS OF ANY DOCUMENTS DEEMED PERSONAL BY ANY PRESIDENT!!! He can tell the NARA to go pound sand and there IS NO LAWS BROKEN, ****!!
Funny how you can't seem to UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE LEGAL CONCEPT THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PRA AND ALSO RULED AS MUCH BY AMY BERMAN JACKSON!!
. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and the law presumes that “a cause lies outside this limited jurisdiction
18 Jun 2023 11:41 am
Beekeeper » 18 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ BY LAW there is ZERO RIGHT TO ANY ACCESS OF ANY DOCUMENTS DEEMED PERSONAL BY ANY PRESIDENT!!! He can tell the NARA to go pound sand and there IS NO LAWS BROKEN, ****!!
Funny how you can't seem to UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE LEGAL CONCEPT THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PRA AND ALSO RULED AS MUCH BY AMY BERMAN JACKSON!!
Of course we all know this isn't about Trump breaking the law...it's about the dems trying to keep a cloud over Trump's head hoping he won't run in 2024.
Trump already has precedence on his side.
18 Jun 2023 11:41 am
assholeBeekeeper » 18 Jun 2023, 11:15 am » wrote: ↑ BY LAW there is ZERO RIGHT TO ANY ACCESS OF ANY DOCUMENTS DEEMED PERSONAL BY ANY PRESIDENT!!! He can tell the NARA to go pound sand and there IS NO LAWS BROKEN, ****!!
Funny how you can't seem to UNDERSTAND THAT SIMPLE LEGAL CONCEPT THAT WAS WRITTEN INTO THE PRA AND ALSO RULED AS MUCH BY AMY BERMAN JACKSON!!
-----------------------------------
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-re ... 3/nr23-016
The PRA also requires that all documentary materials “be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately.” 44 U.S.C. 2203(b). The President does not have discretion to categorize a Presidential record as a personal record.
18 Jun 2023 11:46 am
the descriptions of the documents make it pretty clear that they do NOT qualify as personal records and that the clown, therefore, had no reason to have them or to refuse to return them.
18 Jun 2023 11:51 am
in case some of you missed it the first timemaineman » 14 Jun 2023, 12:45 pm » wrote: ↑ the definition of "personal records" from the Presidential Records Act:
(3) The term "personal records" means all documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion therof,2 of a purely private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term includes—
(A) diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the course of, transacting Government business;
(B) materials relating to private political associations, and having no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President; and
(C) materials relating exclusively to the President's own election to the office of the Presidency; and materials directly relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.
I think that Jack Smith is going to have a very easy time convincing a jury that documents concerning foreign country support of terrorist acts against the United States do NOT fit that definition.
I think that Jack Smith is going to have a very easy time convincing a jury that documents concerning the nuclear weapons capabilities of foreign countries do NOT fit that definition.
I think that Jack Smith is going to have a very easy time convincing a jury that documents concerning projected comparative regional military capabilities of foreign countries versus the United States do NOT fit that definition.
I think that Jack Smith is going to have a very easy time convincing a jury that documents concerning military attacks by a foreign country do NOT fit that definition.
ten years for each offense. and there are 27 more just like those four examples.
As a high school classmate of mine just posted on FaceBook: "Jack be nimble, Jack be quick, Jack indicted the fat orange prick"
hahahahahahahahahaahaha
18 Jun 2023 11:58 am
Great, you had directions on how to polish your missile head......that's some earth-shaking stuff right there.maineman » 18 Jun 2023, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑ And when I was an active duty Naval Officer, I had, in my stateroom safe, the TS (CNWDI) manuals on how to perform routine maintenance on the W44 nuclear warhead of the RUR-5 Anti-Submarine Rockets (ASROCS) that I had in my magazine. I was not permitted to take them home with me when I left the Navy.
You're not really playing with a full deck, are ya, Cletis?
18 Jun 2023 12:02 pm
maineman » 18 Jun 2023, 11:46 am » wrote: ↑ the descriptions of the documents make it pretty clear that they do NOT qualify as personal records and that the clown, therefore, had no reason to have them or to refuse to return them.
Wrong...Trump as president had the right BY LAW to keep those documents.
Yer IQ is falling fast.
18 Jun 2023 12:05 pm
Intent to harm the United States is only an element of the crimes described in Section 1(a) and 1(b)maineman » 13 Jun 2023, 9:37 pm » wrote: ↑ Like I said. learn to read.
Section 1(a): whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defence with intent or reason to believe that the information to be obtained is to be used to the injury of the United States...
Section 1(b): whoever for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent ...
Section 1(c): whoever, for the purpose aforesaid... (does not mention intent, only purpose)
Section 1(d): whoever, lawfully or unlawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defence, wilfully communicates or transmits... (does not mention purpose OR intent)
Section 1(e): whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, note, or information, relating to the national defence, through gross negligence permits...(does not mention purpose OR intent)
Only two of the five sub-articles require intent.
Again.... learn to read. each article talks about different types of actions and, for some of them those actions, the need to have intent and purpose, for another only purpose, and for the other two, neither purpose nor intent
People who quote Section 1(a) of Espionage and act like its verbiage covers all of the crimes in all of the other subsections of Section 1, or any of the crimes in all of the OTHER Sections of the Espionage Act are simply ignorant... willfully so, I would imagine.
18 Jun 2023 12:07 pm
The Navy certainly thought that the security of SWOPs was earth-shaking stuff.RebelGator » 18 Jun 2023, 11:58 am » wrote: ↑ Great, you had directions on how to polish your missile head......that's some earth-shaking stuff right there.
But you wouldn't know about that, would you mister armchair general?
18 Jun 2023 12:08 pm
He has a right to keep personal records. NOT Presidential ones.roadkill » 18 Jun 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑ Wrong...Trump as president had the right BY LAW to keep those documents.
Yer IQ is falling fast.
18 Jun 2023 12:11 pm
roadkill » 18 Jun 2023, 12:02 pm » wrote: ↑ Wrong...Trump as president had the right BY LAW to keep those documents.
Yer IQ is falling fast.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations. Below is additional information about how NARA carries out its responsibilities under the PRA. Please note that the PRA treats the records of the President and those of the Vice President in almost the same manner such that, in most cases below, President and Vice President can be used interchangeably.
18 Jun 2023 12:31 pm
And besides that...jerrab » 18 Jun 2023, 12:11 pm » wrote: ↑ -------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations. Below is additional information about how NARA carries out its responsibilities under the PRA. Please note that the PRA treats the records of the President and those of the Vice President in almost the same manner such that, in most cases below, President and Vice President can be used interchangeably.
There once was a man named Dave, who kept a dead whore in his cave
He said with a grin, I'm a bit of a ****
But think of the money I save.
Hope you've learned something jb.
18 Jun 2023 12:33 pm
roadkill » 18 Jun 2023, 12:31 pm » wrote: ↑ And besides that...
There once was a man named Dave, who kept a dead whore in his cave
He said with a grin, I'm a bit of a ****
But think of the money I save.
Hope you've learned something jb.
no, but maybe you did.
18 Jun 2023 12:37 pm
you can't even quote a limerick correctly.roadkill » 18 Jun 2023, 12:31 pm » wrote: ↑ And besides that...
There once was a man named Dave, who kept a dead whore in his cave
He said with a grin, I'm a bit of a ****
But think of the money I save.
Hope you've learned something jb.
grin and **** should rhyme
He said, "I'll ADMIT I'm a bit of a ****.
what a bumbling chucklehead YOU are!
The one that has "he said with a grin" is the one about the man from Pawtucket
Who is online
In total there are 945 users online :: 6 registered, 16 bots, and 923 guests
Bots: Applebot, Mediapartners-Google, Custo, proximic, ADmantX, app.hypefactors.com, Scrapy, DuckDuckGo, YandexBot, semantic-visions.com, GPTBot, linkfluence.com, Googlebot, curl/7, bingbot, BLEXBot