- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge: Jury Sees Secret Files or Trump Wins
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:39 am to WPBTiger
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:39 am to WPBTiger
Trumpers going wild over a ruling that would effectively expose NatSec to over a dozen vulnerable people without security clearances is an insightful look into the depravity that comes along with being in a cult.
6
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:40 am to Meauxjeaux
quote:
The journalistic bias in those paragraphs is astounding.
It’s state run media. What do you expect?
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:42 am to reddy tiger
quote:
Trumpers going wild over a ruling that would effectively expose NatSec to over a dozen vulnerable people without security clearances is an insightful look into the depravity that comes along with being in a cult.
As opposed to the cult who has given the president a pass for far more insecure handling of documents while shrugging off him giving a ghostwriter of his book classified info for monitory gain?
Nice try! Next!This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 11:43 am
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:45 am to reddy tiger
Nice try
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:52 am to WPBTiger
There’s a huge difference between national security and embarrassing details and information. IMO the federal govt for too long has been trying to hide embarrassing details about its foreign and domestic activities under the umbrella of national security. It’s time it was reigned in and exposed to sunlight.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:55 am to reddy tiger
quote:
reddy tiger
Your butthurt is duly noted.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 11:59 am to Bard
quote:
A jury can't possibly be expected to make an informed decision if part of the "evidence" is locked away with only "trust us, it's there and it's bad" as the only thing for them to go on.
Especially when it’s this DOJ saying it. Zero credibility.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:05 pm to WPBTiger
Seems like a fair scenario.
If the "secrets" are that serious, then the US Government should just drop it. What's the real harm in a former President of the United States, having access to these documents? He has a Secret Service detail with him at all times, and you'd be silly if you didn't think his home is under constant surveillance.
The alternative is to expose these civilians to secret documentation for the express purpose of taking down a former, PotUS. Seems rather petty.
The truth is that the documentation is probably rather mundane and applicable to the President for his daily functions. Something that wouldn't exactly be reason to try a former PotUS for crimes.
It would just end up being an embarrassment by the Fed Government and demonstrate how wildly partisan the intelligence agencies have become since, Obama.
If the "secrets" are that serious, then the US Government should just drop it. What's the real harm in a former President of the United States, having access to these documents? He has a Secret Service detail with him at all times, and you'd be silly if you didn't think his home is under constant surveillance.
The alternative is to expose these civilians to secret documentation for the express purpose of taking down a former, PotUS. Seems rather petty.
The truth is that the documentation is probably rather mundane and applicable to the President for his daily functions. Something that wouldn't exactly be reason to try a former PotUS for crimes.
It would just end up being an embarrassment by the Fed Government and demonstrate how wildly partisan the intelligence agencies have become since, Obama.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:17 pm to reddy tiger
Easy to remedy that. Just get the FBI to do the work and give them official clearances. Not really that difficult. There are like a million folks in the US with some kind of clearance status, why not 12 more.
Better yet, I’m sure you could find 12 folks locally that held some kind of clearance in the military at one point. Put those folks on the jury.
It’s really not uncommon for folks in the military to have clearances.
Better yet, I’m sure you could find 12 folks locally that held some kind of clearance in the military at one point. Put those folks on the jury.
It’s really not uncommon for folks in the military to have clearances.
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 12:20 pm
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:25 pm to eitek1
quote:
Easy to remedy that. Just get the FBI to do the work and give them official clearances. Not really that difficult. There are like a million folks in the US with some kind of clearance status, why not 12 more. Better yet, I’m sure you could find 12 folks locally that held some kind of clearance in the military at one point. Put those folks on the jury.
So essentially stack the jury?
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:32 pm to reddy tiger
quote:
Trumpers going wild over a ruling that would effectively expose NatSec to over a dozen vulnerable people without security clearances
That's not the only option. Jack is painted into a corner, but he has a choice. Depends on how bad the orange man is.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:37 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
quote:
Easy to remedy that. Just get the FBI to do the work and give them official clearances. Not really that difficult. There are like a million folks in the US with some kind of clearance status, why not 12 more. Better yet, I’m sure you could find 12 folks locally that held some kind of clearance in the military at one point. Put those folks on the jury.
So essentially stack the jury?
That wouldn't be stacking the jury. The detail to which these jurors have had their entire lives examined probably far exceeds the requirements for getting the clearance to see these documents. The prosecution team is so dirty, they probably know when these jurors will take thir next shite, long before they even know it themselves.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 12:48 pm to Steadyhands
There are no charges about these secret documents being classified and therefore needing a security clearance, only that they are tied to national security.
How can something not classified, be put under a national security seal? If it is in fact vital that this information is not shared to protect the national security of the country, then why is it not classified?
Could it be that Trump did, as he stated on several occasions, used his power as president to declassify documents, but the intelligence community finds them embarrassing or at least counter to their own goals and therefore are making them a matter of national security?
Does someone want to venture into what types of information would ever be considered tied to national security but not itself classified?
Either charge Trump with the issues of holding classified documents or explain how it is possible to be non-classified but essential to national security. That is where the judge seems to be going on this.
How can something not classified, be put under a national security seal? If it is in fact vital that this information is not shared to protect the national security of the country, then why is it not classified?
Could it be that Trump did, as he stated on several occasions, used his power as president to declassify documents, but the intelligence community finds them embarrassing or at least counter to their own goals and therefore are making them a matter of national security?
Does someone want to venture into what types of information would ever be considered tied to national security but not itself classified?
Either charge Trump with the issues of holding classified documents or explain how it is possible to be non-classified but essential to national security. That is where the judge seems to be going on this.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:37 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:is the same pompous, pretentious, condescending, arrogant, better-than-thou, know-it-all, smug a-hole that "he-she"/"shim" has always been.
It's refreshing to see that SlowFlowPro
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 1:39 pm
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:44 pm to moneyg
quote:
The documents are the sausage.
Unless the jury has a veteran bureaucrat, none of them will be able to ascertain if a document is classified on their own.
Just as they wouldn't be able to watch a video of a surgery and tell if the surgery was performed correctly.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 1:46 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
please go on - tell us what "Crossfire Hurricane" really is - be as specific as you can be.
The reference was that these documents were CF documents and that's why "they" took them from Trump.
That's a MAGA echo chamber meme
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Gotta call Bravo Sierra on this. If it is a classified document, the document will be marked Secret/Top-Secret (normally top and bottom). Now if the document is a compilation of information from various sources, then the creator of the document would have been responsible for the "derivative" classification based on the information contained. Sometimes the derivative document will be classified and sometimes it will not.
Unless the jury has a veteran bureaucrat, none of them will be able to ascertain if a document is classified on their own.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Unless the jury has a veteran bureaucrat, none of them will be able to ascertain if a document is classified on their own.
Isn't that sort of the point here?
quote:
Just as they wouldn't be able to watch a video of a surgery and tell if the surgery was performed correctly.
There's a determinable explainable generally established standard of care in this instance.
With this documents bullshite they are trying to make it up as the go along.
Not really an apt analogy at all.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:05 pm to RollTide71
quote:
If it is a classified document, the document will be marked Secret/Top-Secret (normally top and bottom).
Again, this can be shown to the jury without getting into the contents.
People have been convicted for violating these laws before. These procedures have precedent in how to handle these types of cases.
Some of these arguments effectively make the law impossible to prosecute, which is clearly an absurd interpretation.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:07 pm to reddy tiger
quote:
Trumpers going wild over a ruling that would effectively expose NatSec to over a dozen vulnerable people without security clearances is an insightful look into the depravity that comes along with being in a cult.
"National security" and protecting muh "sources and methods" is the biggest load of shite ever used to cover up info embarrassing to the national security apparatus. That NYT article on CIA meddling in Ukraine was a massive, organized leak. The deep state was always leaking on Trump. When is it OK and when is it not?
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News