- 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 2:09 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:09 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
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.
But this discussion is about the nature of these documents, and pretending that it's impossible to prosecute a person for illegally possessing them without violating the law.
quote:
Not really an apt analogy at all.
I mean we can do drugs if you want.
The jury doesn't get to smell/smoke weed. They have to rely on experts testifying what the substance is. The defense can have their own experts testify that this incriminating testing was done improperly
1
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:09 pm to laxtonto
quote:
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.
/\ THIS /\ is a good description of my mindset.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
This is not an "experts" case, as much as the prosecution may wish it was.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:10 pm to TBoy
quote:
Show them to the jurors under controlled circumstances. That isn’t terribly difficult.
No shite man. The stuff would be shown at court. They aren't taking documents home.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:15 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
This is not an "experts" case, as much as the prosecution may wish it was.
We're just talking about the nature of the identification of the documents.
If these arguments prevail, then these laws are not able to be prosecuted. The Defendant could then always claim "no they're not" and the prosecution goes "damn. nothing we can do I guess"
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
I wholly reject your notion of any "precedence" here, though.
Or, at least, not the way you are articulating it.
Or, at least, not the way you are articulating it.
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 2:18 pm
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
The President is THE Classification Authority. He has the power to determine what is/is not classified. Senators do not. Biden took the documents as senator (which he was not authorized to take. those documents should never have left the classified area) and stored them in his garage for years. biden isn't being charged. selective prosecution.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:21 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
People have been convicted for violating these laws before. These procedures have precedent in how to handle these types of cases.
And again.. those people never had the authority to declassify in their roles did they?
This case and a case where a peon with a shiny new clearance and wants to impress his friends are two different cases.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:26 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
I wholly reject your notion of any "precedence" here, though.
Or, at least, not the way you are articulating it
This discussion is just about the ability to identify these documents as having a special status at trial.
This isn't about the motivations of the prosecution or esoteric defenses (like declaring declassification or some sort of privilege or whataboutism-based precedent).
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:27 pm to CleverUserName
quote:Or a case where a senator illegally takes classified documents out of the CLASSIFIED AREA and stores them in his garage next to his classic green corvette.
a case where a peon with a shiny new clearance and wants to impress his friends are two different cases.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:28 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This isn't about the motivations of the prosecution or esoteric defenses (like declaring declassification or some sort of privilege or whataboutism-based precedent).
What amazing timing for this comment
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:29 pm to laxtonto
quote:
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.
Accurate.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
I can only imagine how your life must suck.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:34 pm to chili pup
quote:Amen Brother!
I can only imagine how your life must suck.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:37 pm to RollTide71
quote:
Or a case where a senator illegally takes classified documents out of the CLASSIFIED AREA and stores them in his garage next to his classic green corvette.
And shared with his writer for a book he stood to profit on.
I would love to see the leftists seethe when the Biden docs are thrown back in their face. They have zero defense.
Well they do have one.. “our president is too dumb and old to stand trial!”
This post was edited on 3/19/24 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:39 pm to CleverUserName
quote:Agreed. But that won't stop them from screaming but but but BUT TRUMP!
They have zero defense.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
oooh, maybe its the PeePee tapes! I hope its the PeePee tapes.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This discussion is just about the ability to identify these documents as having a special status at trial.
Right. There's no precedence in that vis a vis this scenario, as you seem to be trying to assert. It's not an "esoteric" discussion.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:55 pm to WPBTiger
Democrats don't give a rat's arse about the security of the country. All they care about is power. Therefore, he will let the jurors see the docs. This should surprise no one.
Posted on 3/19/24 at 2:57 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
There's no precedence in that vis a vis this scenario
What is so difficult this time?
They're either classified (or "national security") or they're not. It's a pretty easy, binary decision for each document.
If Trump is trying to argue a " wedding feast in Cana" scenario where he turned the water into wine, then that should be done via pretrial motion (similar to his immunity arguments in the DC case), no?
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News