tbop77
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 8:24:37 GMT -5
Posts: 2,700
|
Post by tbop77 on Sept 5, 2022 7:54:36 GMT -5
See, you can't have a honest conversation with the party of Trump. |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496 
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 7:57:32 GMT -5
He is guilty of a felony then, one that he enshrined into law. And you want yo give him a pass and call it politically motivated. In addition, his lawyers certified that he posses no other confidential documents, yet they found 1100 more, and you are still unsure he did anything illegal. I want the drugs you are taking I'll leave the drug dept to you. He is guilty of mis-handling classified papers. Whatever he gets for that he get slap on the wrist or jail time, but I highly doubt a former US president is going to see jail time for that. That alone would set this country into a civil war I think it would result in violence but more a bloody insurrection than a war. And if some people want to sacrifice their lives for Donald Trump, who are we to stop them. I will feel sorry for any other lives lost. |
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,374
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 5, 2022 8:05:46 GMT -5
the only fact there is that he mis-handled information. Show me any fact that supports anything else. If not I will take speculation for 200 alex Its a fact with several pieces including he created a law to make the consequences more significant for mishandling classifed info. One, he took classified information from the White House when he was no longer President Two, he and his minions did not return all of the info even though it was requested multiple times Three, he endangered national security by storing it insecure in a location where significant amounts of people pass through. Four, and very important IMO, he has documents that should only be viewed and handled in secure facilities. While there is speculation on what he is doing with the materials and may have done with it, the above is fact. Much like the below. Trump signed the bill, which made changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, into law in January 2018.
It upgraded the seriousness of wrongly moving classified material, turning it from a misdemeanor into a felony — and increasing the maximum sentence to five years, up from one.
Moss noted that it was passed after Trump's relentless attacks during the 2016 presidential campaign on Hillary Clinton, who was being investigated over whether she mishandled classified information.
www.businessinsider.com/law-trump-signed-2018-may-punish-him-classified-info-2022-8 |
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,845
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 5, 2022 9:24:41 GMT -5
Do you have a link that proves your third ‘fact?’ The only person I’ve heard claim the envelopes were empty were Paul Manafort. He is not exactly a credible expert. Nope just replying to what is said here Ok I googled it and found that in the detailed inventory the FBI released showing what documents were collected in August, they did pick up 48 empty envelopes used to hold classified documents. ‘Among other documents’ - which means not ALL the empty classified envelopes were empty. Believe me, if they were all empty, Trump would be shouting that from the rooftops. www.businessinsider.com/48-empty-folders-classified-trump-mar-a-lago-inventory-unsealed-2022-9 |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 9:37:13 GMT -5
Nope just replying to what is said here Ok I googled it and found that in the detailed inventory the FBI released showing what documents were collected in August, they did pick up 48 empty envelopes used to hold classified documents. ‘Among other documents’ - which means not ALL the empty classified envelopes were empty. Believe me, if they were all empty, Trump would be shouting that from the rooftops. www.businessinsider.com/48-empty-folders-classified-trump-mar-a-lago-inventory-unsealed-2022-9 If the word "among" was used, it might mean that. The linked article uses the word "alongside". |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 9:59:11 GMT -5
He is guilty of a felony then, one that he enshrined into law. And you want yo give him a pass and call it politically motivated. In addition, his lawyers certified that he posses no other confidential documents, yet they found 1100 more, and you are still unsure he did anything illegal. I want the drugs you are taking I'll leave the drug dept to you. He is guilty of mis-handling classified papers. Whatever he gets for that he get slap on the wrist or jail time, but I highly doubt a former US president is going to see jail time for that. That alone would set this country into a civil war i agree with your latter point. the obstruction charge could possibly carry jail time. violation of the Espionage Act would definitely carry that kind of penalty, as well as barring him from office. whether they have enough to convict on that remains to be seen. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 10:03:50 GMT -5
I'll leave the drug dept to you. He is guilty of mis-handling classified papers. Whatever he gets for that he get slap on the wrist or jail time, but I highly doubt a former US president is going to see jail time for that. That alone would set this country into a civil war I think it would result in violence but more a bloody insurrection than a war. And if some people want to sacrifice their lives for Donald Trump, who are we to stop them. I will feel sorry for any other lives lost. i am not quite at the "bring it on" point, but i am getting there. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 10:05:31 GMT -5
Nope just replying to what is said here Ok I googled it and found that in the detailed inventory the FBI released showing what documents were collected in August, they did pick up 48 empty envelopes used to hold classified documents. ‘Among other documents’ - which means not ALL the empty classified envelopes were empty. Believe me, if they were all empty, Trump would be shouting that from the rooftops. www.businessinsider.com/48-empty-folders-classified-trump-mar-a-lago-inventory-unsealed-2022-9they actually picked up 90 empty folders. only 48 were marked classified, however. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,947
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 5, 2022 10:15:15 GMT -5
No what you're doing is jumping to conclusions without knowing the facts. Fact Trump had document the archive wanted Fact Trump has documents marked classified (possibly classified possibly declassified) we shall see Fact There is empty folders. Were they empty when he loaded them, did he shred them, did he sell them? Hopefully a good investigation will find out. So out of all the facts there right now the only thing he is guilty of is having documents that he shouldn't have had. That is what he is guilty of and that alone one could argue he knows more classified information given 4 years in office than what was there probably dems will push something but he will receive no jail time. without considering why he had the documents and how he obtained them, i agree with you. but just having SCIF documents at MAL is a problem. so, how did they get there? that question might answer the why, as well. but it might not. and the potential answers to those questions are quite troubling. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 10:17:58 GMT -5
he just loves making shit up, doesn't he?
|
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,762
|
Post by scgal on Sept 5, 2022 12:06:22 GMT -5
the only fact there is that he mis-handled information. Show me any fact that supports anything else. If not I will take speculation for 200 alex Which is a felony you continue to downplay Wrong I don't downplay it. It is a far cry from treason you guys like to jump from 1 to 100 without the investigation being final. He should be held accountable for it. Which I think will be alot less of a sentence than you guys will like |
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,762
|
Post by scgal on Sept 5, 2022 12:09:50 GMT -5
the only fact there is that he mis-handled information. Show me any fact that supports anything else. If not I will take speculation for 200 alex Its a fact with several pieces including he created a law to make the consequences more significant for mishandling classifed info. One, he took classified information from the White House when he was no longer President Two, he and his minions did not return all of the info even though it was requested multiple times Three, he endangered national security by storing it insecure in a location where significant amounts of people pass through. Four, and very important IMO, he has documents that should only be viewed and handled in secure facilities. While there is speculation on what he is doing with the materials and may have done with it, the above is fact. Much like the below. Trump signed the bill, which made changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, into law in January 2018.
It upgraded the seriousness of wrongly moving classified material, turning it from a misdemeanor into a felony — and increasing the maximum sentence to five years, up from one.
Moss noted that it was passed after Trump's relentless attacks during the 2016 presidential campaign on Hillary Clinton, who was being investigated over whether she mishandled classified information.
www.businessinsider.com/law-trump-signed-2018-may-punish-him-classified-info-2022-8agreed. Still not treasonous unless its proven he gave/sold the documents away |
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,374
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 5, 2022 12:15:49 GMT -5
Its a fact with several pieces including he created a law to make the consequences more significant for mishandling classifed info. One, he took classified information from the White House when he was no longer President Two, he and his minions did not return all of the info even though it was requested multiple times Three, he endangered national security by storing it insecure in a location where significant amounts of people pass through. Four, and very important IMO, he has documents that should only be viewed and handled in secure facilities. While there is speculation on what he is doing with the materials and may have done with it, the above is fact. Much like the below. Trump signed the bill, which made changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, into law in January 2018.
It upgraded the seriousness of wrongly moving classified material, turning it from a misdemeanor into a felony — and increasing the maximum sentence to five years, up from one.
Moss noted that it was passed after Trump's relentless attacks during the 2016 presidential campaign on Hillary Clinton, who was being investigated over whether she mishandled classified information.
www.businessinsider.com/law-trump-signed-2018-may-punish-him-classified-info-2022-8agreed. Still not treasonous unless its proven he gave/sold the documents away And yet on this thread only you mention treason and another poster quoting someone else's words. ymam.proboards.com/post/3332468/thread |
|
scgal
Well-Known Member
Joined: Sept 18, 2020 16:56:48 GMT -5
Posts: 1,762
|
Post by scgal on Sept 5, 2022 12:33:19 GMT -5
funny I couldn't find anything where Trump told Zelensky he would hold money back. Maybe i'm not searching hard enough. He does have the right to have anyone investigated. What the people thought and what is said is not the same thing that was such a bogus overreach of congress. I just hope when the gop takes congress back they don't play by the same petty pules that the dems do or this country will never move forward. [ Start? How many Benghazi investigations were there.? How many hearings about bill Clinton were there? I didn’t realize he wasn’t impeached. All for lying about sex? The allegations against trump are far more serious. Did you agree with impeAching Clinton? Republicans were talking publicly about the investigations the would do starting day 1 of the Hilary administration. There are republicans talking about impeaching Biden. You act. Like republicans didn’t participate in this. They could have helped fix it by convicting trump for the gross detection of duty after the riot broke out. No need to even worry about incitement. There is plenty of sworn testimony about his refusal to act once the Capitol was breeched. Unless they are all liars too No I don't agree with the clinton impeachment. Impeaching Biden for what I do not know, I don't think being a babbling idiot is an impeachable offense. Refusal to act what was he supposed to do isn't that what the capitol police is for? |
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 8,064
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Sept 5, 2022 12:55:10 GMT -5
[ Start? How many Benghazi investigations were there.? How many hearings about bill Clinton were there? I didn’t realize he wasn’t impeached. All for lying about sex? The allegations against trump are far more serious. Did you agree with impeAching Clinton? Republicans were talking publicly about the investigations the would do starting day 1 of the Hilary administration. There are republicans talking about impeaching Biden. You act. Like republicans didn’t participate in this. They could have helped fix it by convicting trump for the gross detection of duty after the riot broke out. No need to even worry about incitement. There is plenty of sworn testimony about his refusal to act once the Capitol was breeched. Unless they are all liars too No I don't agree with the clinton impeachment. Impeaching Biden for what I do not know, I don't think being a babbling idiot is an impeachable offense. Refusal to act what was he supposed to do isn't that what the capitol police is for? The Capitol police were overwhelmed. The national guard should have been called up. The president controls the DC national guard. Conservatives could not talk enough about using force against the BLM protesters, trump included. Yet, at a time when the Capitol was under attack, and the peaceful transfer of power was supposed to take place, protesters, who were trying to prevent that were allowed to run wild. Trump stood by and did nothing. Yet you give him a pass. I am sure you have the Antifa and BLM protesters a pass too. You didn’t think that additional resources were needed, did you? |
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 8,064
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Sept 5, 2022 12:58:46 GMT -5
[ Start? How many Benghazi investigations were there.? How many hearings about bill Clinton were there? I didn’t realize he wasn’t impeached. All for lying about sex? The allegations against trump are far more serious. Did you agree with impeAching Clinton? Republicans were talking publicly about the investigations the would do starting day 1 of the Hilary administration. There are republicans talking about impeaching Biden. You act. Like republicans didn’t participate in this. They could have helped fix it by convicting trump for the gross detection of duty after the riot broke out. No need to even worry about incitement. There is plenty of sworn testimony about his refusal to act once the Capitol was breeched. Unless they are all liars too No I don't agree with the clinton impeachment. Impeaching Biden for what I do not know, I don't think being a babbling idiot is an impeachable offense. Refusal to act what was he supposed to do isn't that what the capitol police is for? Funny how you have nothing to say about trumps mental state. Articulate he is not. He couldn’t talk enough about “padding” a simple screening test on a physical exam, which someone with an Ivy League education should have no problem passing. Biden exercises and rides a bicycle. Trump needed to ride a golf cart up a hill at the G8 in Sicily when the rest of the conference walked up the hill. And it is Biden’s health you question I bet your daughter is an expert in mental hess as others and told you about these issues |
|
pulmonarymd
Junior Associate
Joined: Feb 12, 2020 17:40:54 GMT -5
Posts: 8,064
Member is Online
|
Post by pulmonarymd on Sept 5, 2022 13:01:34 GMT -5
Which is a felony you continue to downplay Wrong I don't downplay it. It is a far cry from treason you guys like to jump from 1 to 100 without the investigation being final. He should be held accountable for it. Which I think will be alot less of a sentence than you guys will like Show me one post where I said he committed treason. Carelessness with classified material is potentially dangerous. Being concerned about that is unreasonable? The fact that classified folders are empty does not concern you? Conservatives were the party of national security. Guess that fell by the wayside now that a republican is the one who may have damaged national security by being careless |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 13:51:45 GMT -5
[ Start? How many Benghazi investigations were there.? How many hearings about bill Clinton were there? I didn’t realize he wasn’t impeached. All for lying about sex? The allegations against trump are far more serious. Did you agree with impeAching Clinton? Republicans were talking publicly about the investigations the would do starting day 1 of the Hilary administration. There are republicans talking about impeaching Biden. You act. Like republicans didn’t participate in this. They could have helped fix it by convicting trump for the gross detection of duty after the riot broke out. No need to even worry about incitement. There is plenty of sworn testimony about his refusal to act once the Capitol was breeched. Unless they are all liars too No I don't agree with the clinton impeachment. Impeaching Biden for what I do not know, I don't think being a babbling idiot is an impeachable offense. Refusal to act what was he supposed to do isn't that what the capitol police is for? Say something: Jan. 6 panel sheds light on the 187 minutes Trump went dark during Capitol siege |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 13:55:23 GMT -5
i think this is particularly criminal. he had a responsibility for protecting the capital, and he failed to do it. and the reasons why are abundantly clear. it is not because he thought he lacked the authority. it is because he didn't want that to happen. Mark Meadows said so. i presume he was speaking for the president when he said it. AS SOON AS Trump said go home, people disbursed. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 14:20:16 GMT -5
i previously suggested that malicious negligence would be a good statute for covering this. in fact, i think what Trump did should be used in law school as a classic example.
Gross Negligence is another (and possibly more familiar) term for it.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 14:21:33 GMT -5
i think this is particularly criminal. he had a responsibility for protecting the capital, and he failed to do it. and the reasons why are abundantly clear. it is not because he thought he lacked the authority. it is because he didn't want that to happen. Mark Meadows said so. i presume he was speaking for the president when he said it. AS SOON AS Trump said go home, people disbursed. EDIT: crossed with dj's post above. A quibble perhaps with the word "criminal". I am not sure it is court of law criminal. Having said that, I do think it should have been a major basis for the Senate to have convicted him and banned him from office. With them failing to do so, it should be a major basis for him not to be nominated or, if he is, elected. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 14:26:08 GMT -5
i think this is particularly criminal. he had a responsibility for protecting the capital, and he failed to do it. and the reasons why are abundantly clear. it is not because he thought he lacked the authority. it is because he didn't want that to happen. Mark Meadows said so. i presume he was speaking for the president when he said it. AS SOON AS Trump said go home, people disbursed. EDIT: crossed with dj's post above. A quibble perhaps with the word "criminal". I am not sure it is court of law criminal. Having said that, I do think it should have been a major basis for the Senate to have convicted him and banned him from office. With them failing to do so, it should be a major basis for him not to be nominated or, if he is, elected. i am fairly concerned about the normalization of extreme negligence, bills. how about you? any worries about that? |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 14:26:43 GMT -5
i previously suggested that malicious negligence would be a good statute for covering this. in fact, i think what Trump did should be used in law school as a classic example. Gross Negligence is another (and possibly more familiar) term for it. That would be an interesting case. Would love to read the "opening arguments" before I was decided one way or the other. |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 14:28:57 GMT -5
EDIT: crossed with dj's post above. A quibble perhaps with the word "criminal". I am not sure it is court of law criminal. Having said that, I do think it should have been a major basis for the Senate to have convicted him and banned him from office. With them failing to do so, it should be a major basis for him not to be nominated or, if he is, elected. i am fairly concerned about the normalization of extreme negligence, bills. how about you? any worries about that? I don't see it becoming a norm based on this situation. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,716
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 5, 2022 14:29:21 GMT -5
one could argue it is criminal in the (sole?) case of Mike Pence.
Trump not only did nothing to protect Pence (arguably his duty), but he actually incited a mob to hang him, and then advocated for it (albeit privately).
indeed it would be an interesting case. there might not be enough evidence to convict.
but there might be.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 5, 2022 14:39:22 GMT -5
The cult of Trump is an apt name. Watching said cult fall all over themselves trying to rationalize his unhinged behavior is amazing. I don’t see how anyone can think this is ok and be an American. i was watching some thing on youtube about a Mormon dude who was found guilty of sexual abuse of underaged girls. the members of his "sect" stand by him, and say that it is all religious persecution and lies. cult is precisely right. there is the presumption of innocence. that is noble. one should always presume that. and then there is overwhelming evidence that should at the very least cause suspicion. i think that scgal exhibits some of the latter, for the record.I was saying this and not saying it. |
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 5, 2022 14:44:18 GMT -5
it means that even if Trump is off the hook for mishandling classified documents, he is on the hook for failing to return all documents (classified and otherwise) over to the archives. agreed...This group already has him tarred and feathered for treason on speculation If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck….. What we DO know is the Trump family has received a buttload of money from places that would dearly love access to US top secret files. Why else would Kushner have received $2 billion from the Saudis? |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,496
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 5, 2022 15:12:37 GMT -5
one could argue it is criminal in the (sole?) case of Mike Pence. Trump not only did nothing to protect Pence (arguably his duty), but he actually incited a mob to hang him, and then advocated for it (albeit privately). indeed it would be an interesting case. there might not be enough evidence to convict. but there might be. This illustrates the concern I always have with Trump and his cult. There is no "not enough evidence to covict". There is only "innocent" (or corruption if found guilty). |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,947
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 5, 2022 16:28:40 GMT -5
He is guilty of a felony then, one that he enshrined into law. And you want yo give him a pass and call it politically motivated. In addition, his lawyers certified that he posses no other confidential documents, yet they found 1100 more, and you are still unsure he did anything illegal. I want the drugs you are taking I'll leave the drug dept to you. He is guilty of mis-handling classified papers. Whatever he gets for that he get slap on the wrist or jail time, but I highly doubt a former US president is going to see jail time for that. That alone would set this country into a civil war Shouldn't we all then get the same type of treatment for similar criminal offenses then? After all, no one is above the law. No one. |
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,845
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 5, 2022 20:24:05 GMT -5
I'll leave the drug dept to you. He is guilty of mis-handling classified papers. Whatever he gets for that he get slap on the wrist or jail time, but I highly doubt a former US president is going to see jail time for that. That alone would set this country into a civil war Shouldn't we all then get the same type of treatment for similar criminal offenses then? After all, no one is above the law. No one. Yeah I don’t know why everyone hesitates to charge or convict a previous president. I understand an ex-president has never gone to jail before, but if he commits a crime, why wouldn’t he? Justice is supposed to be blind. We’ve sent plenty of governors and congresspeople to jail. I’m sure judges as well. Trump has broken so many other norms, why not let him break this particular one as well. I know he couldn’t go in the general population, and he would require SS protection, but really, if we locked Trump in a plain, non gilded room with no access to social media or hamburgers, he’d be miserable. That would be good enough. |
|
