- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Tell me how the PRA doesnt apply to Trump
Posted on 6/10/23 at 5:50 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 5:50 am
quote:
“Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion,” Jackson wrote.
No crime = no obstruction, no false statements.
Thats all, Smith is weak as frick.
This will go to the Supreme Court, its over.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 5:51 am
17
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:02 am to Strannix
They've still got him under 18 U.S.C. 793(e). And whether the he lawfully or unlawfully possessed the defense secrets he showed to unauthorized people doesn't matter as 793(d) covers lawful possession.
It doesn't help that one of the people he showed the secret stuff was a writer who could plausibly be expected to share those secrets with the public.
It doesn't help that one of the people he showed the secret stuff was a writer who could plausibly be expected to share those secrets with the public.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 6:05 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:04 am to Diseasefreeforall
Except under the PRA he was showing them a personal record. I see logic isnt your strong suit.
Both scenarios cannot exist simultaneously. Either its a classified document owned by the government or Trump's personal property.
Both scenarios cannot exist simultaneously. Either its a classified document owned by the government or Trump's personal property.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 6:06 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:06 am to Strannix
quote:
No crime = no obstruction, no false statements.
Martha Stewart disagrees.
quote:
This will go to the Supreme Court, its over.
The trial will most likely happen prior to this. If he loses at trial, the appeals will be heard while he's in jail.
If you want a legal argument, there is a reason why they're bringing charges under the NSA. I don't imagine the Supreme Court is going to say the President can just secretly "declassify" documents that involve nuclear or national security secrets and claim they're his/her personal property.
That argument would defend, say, Joe Biden keeping documents relating to our nuclear weapons and the IT systems involved, declassifying them without anyone knowing, and then selling them to China. How does THAT make any sense?
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:08 am to Strannix
quote:
Except under the PRA he was showing them a personal record.
Just because it's declassified doesn't mean it's not a national security secret. 2 different classes of documents
Where is the word "classified" ues in this statute?
*ETA: there is even a subsection over lawfully possessing certain documents.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 6:11 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:08 am to Strannix
quote:
Except under the PRA he was showing them a personal record. I see logic isnt your strong suit.
If secret defense plans are personal records then sure.
Look, Trump was pissed that a "Senior Military Official" was quoted as being scared of Trump starting a war late in his presidency. I understand being angry at that but using defense secrets to try to get back at him is fricking stupid and likely criminal. We all know he has thin skin and he could pay dearly for it this time.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:09 am to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
They've still got him under 18 U.S.C. 793(e). And whether the he lawfully or unlawfully possessed the defense secrets he showed to unauthorized people doesn't matter as 793(d) covers lawful possession.
Yeah if he actually did this, it could be the one they get him on. They also could get him on the obstruction charge but the way all the way this was written they are trying to force other guy to flip and testify for the prosecution and point the finger at Trump to save his own arse.
This entire deal is bullshite, they have been targeting him since he came down the escalator.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:09 am to Strannix
I just watched a couple minutes of GMA because I had the NBA game on last night. Oh my, they are laying it on thick, making him look terrible.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:14 am to Strannix
Remember the Peter and Lisa text messages? Wasn't it said in the convo that Peter was meeting with a big shot DC FISA court Judge at a 'cocktail country club party'?
I believe it was: U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras who was a FISA court judge. He gave a green light to going after a former Trump Lawyer
Judge clears way for disciplinary proceedings against Trump ally Jeffrey Clark
They are ruthless. Yet the GOP sits and writes nastygram honorable letters. Garland & Monaco and as far down the totem pole as needed need impeached and excised. Or nothing will ever change.
Something needs to be done now. They blackballed Trump's lawyers for years and want him dehumanized. The only way it stops it attacking the cancer directly-Monaco and Garland is a good start.
They have Garland lying to Congress under Oath. But the DOJ already ignored all of Grassley, Nunes legal calls for charges.
So, what can stop them? They cannot arrest themselves.
On the Trump case: like Mueller, it is the DOJNSD killing two birds with one stone. Obtaining evidence that they are crooks and taking down Trump.
I watch this news show on NewsMax. They had a good show about Trump's case.
newsmaxtv.com/Shows/Rob-Schmitt-Tonight-Matt Taibbi interview
Just for one night... I peeked in on Fox last night. Megyn McCain's husband -who despises Trump- said the charges were purely political.
I believe it was: U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras who was a FISA court judge. He gave a green light to going after a former Trump Lawyer
Judge clears way for disciplinary proceedings against Trump ally Jeffrey Clark
They are ruthless. Yet the GOP sits and writes nastygram honorable letters. Garland & Monaco and as far down the totem pole as needed need impeached and excised. Or nothing will ever change.
Something needs to be done now. They blackballed Trump's lawyers for years and want him dehumanized. The only way it stops it attacking the cancer directly-Monaco and Garland is a good start.
They have Garland lying to Congress under Oath. But the DOJ already ignored all of Grassley, Nunes legal calls for charges.
So, what can stop them? They cannot arrest themselves.
On the Trump case: like Mueller, it is the DOJNSD killing two birds with one stone. Obtaining evidence that they are crooks and taking down Trump.
I watch this news show on NewsMax. They had a good show about Trump's case.
newsmaxtv.com/Shows/Rob-Schmitt-Tonight-Matt Taibbi interview
Just for one night... I peeked in on Fox last night. Megyn McCain's husband -who despises Trump- said the charges were purely political.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:14 am to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
This entire deal is bullshite, they have been targeting him since he came down the escalator.
Read the book, Three Felonies A Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent.
The average person commits 3 felonies a day and doesn't even know it.
If they want you they will get you. It's an indictment against our entire system of justice.
As bad as they wanted Trump I'm surprised that it took them this long.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:16 am to cajunangelle
Why did you post a picture about Crossfire Hurricane documents? Those have nothing to do with this prosecution.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:17 am to Bunk Moreland
quote:
making him look terrible.
In the eyes of their typical viewer? Or to you personally? Think carefully.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:24 am to Strannix
I hope Trump has hired more competent representation than who he has in the past because if this is the extent of his defense he is in big trouble.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:27 am to TigerOnTheMountain
quote:
I hope Trump has hired more competent representation than who he has in the past because if this is the extent of his defense he is in big trouble.
Patriots will just say the good lawyers wouldn't work for him.
Just like they said these indictments were myths, until they weren't.
Or how the NY indictments were myths, until they weren't.
Patriots love consuming echo chamber content and then screaming about some sort of conspiracy when the bad information they relied on from grifters is exposed as bad information. A meme has developed over 12 hours or sow here some people are just linking a thread with 1 tweet from a clearly non-objective source as some sort of gotcha, like his tweet is a Supreme Court case
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Just because it's declassified doesn't mean it's not a national security secret. 2 different classes of documents
Just because it's national security information doesn't mean it can't be retained under PRA. It's common enough that there is an exception in the PRA regarding FOIA specifically for national security information. The president can deny public requests for up to 12 years after records become available.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:32 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Just like they said these indictments were myths, until they weren't.
Or how the NY indictments were myths, until they weren't.
I’ll come clean. I was sorta in that group. Pretty embarrassing to have thought in any fashion that they’d exercise better sense.
Anyhow, a reminder to all: his pursuers are, what, still like 0 - 10 against him in this category of attempted legal takedowns? I’m not really seeing them snapping the losing streak here. Would be nonsense to do so.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:33 am to TigerOnTheMountain
We know there is no way that Trump did espionage against his country. The man bleeds red, white and blue.
But that doesn't mean he didn't expose himself to a technical reading of a complex law that wasn't even meant for a situation like this.
When you have a system of laws and rules this voluminous and complex it's exercise becomes more dependent on the opinions of individuals.
What looks like the rule of law is actually the rule of man. It's an illusion.
Justice is not being done here.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:41 am to Diseasefreeforall
Paul Sperry posted to twitter last night that Jack Smith does not have the document Trump supposedly showed the reporter so he can’t prove it was classified.
LINK
LINK
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:41 am to Ponchy Tiger
quote:
This entire deal is bullshite
The End.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 6:41 am to SlowFlowPro
You have confidence in the DOJ that they would list:
"Crossfire Hurricane" Documents: we took so Trump or no one could write a book about SpyGate & how crooked we are?
Prove the CH docs weren't in the huge amount of documents normally accumulated by a President of 4 years.
They most likely were. Trump's people have long said they were taken. Go ask them if they are lying.
Does it not make perfect sense they would take what Trump so clearly declassified that was evidence that they were crooked AF?
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino
"Crossfire Hurricane" Documents: we took so Trump or no one could write a book about SpyGate & how crooked we are?
Prove the CH docs weren't in the huge amount of documents normally accumulated by a President of 4 years.
They most likely were. Trump's people have long said they were taken. Go ask them if they are lying.
Does it not make perfect sense they would take what Trump so clearly declassified that was evidence that they were crooked AF?
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino
Page 1 of 9
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News