- 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
re: Tell me how the PRA doesnt apply to Trump
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:28 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:28 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If he loses at trial, the appeals will be heard while he's in jail.
Life ban bet if Trump loses and appeals it will not be from jail?
1
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:28 am to Paddyshack
quote:
There is one fundamental difference you seem to be missing regarding Biden and his documents.
Which is what, exactly?
I'm not talking about the documents he was already found with, so that dog won't hunt.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:29 am to CountryVolFan
quote:
Every time you say something like this it makes me think you are a pretend attorney like AggieHank
I don't do criminal stuff in federal court but explain what's wrong with my statements.
Do federal criminal proceedings have interlocutory appeals?
We have that here in LA, but I thought that wasn't an option with the feds. All the appeals had to be taken post-trial.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:30 am to ItNeverRains
quote:
Life ban bet if Trump loses and appeals it will not be from jail?
The feds let you out on an appeal bond if you appeal a conviction?
That's a serious question.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:31 am to Diseasefreeforall
quote:
think these charges were specifically chosen to not have to deal with the PRA.
That’s what they are hoping by ignoring it all together. But it overlaps and cannot be ignored.
Problem for them Is the PRA says the president determines what is a personal record, and there is no ambiguity there.
They can’t say he illegally retained something when the PRA gives him the authority to take what he wants.
The TDS people at the archives had no business trying to decide for him what he can have. PRA says it’s his decision. Not theirs.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:35 am to BobBoucher
quote:
They can’t say he illegally retained something when the PRA gives him the authority to take what he wants.
The question is if the PRA can do that with these documents. It's not something that's been specifically litigated.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:35 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm not talking about the documents he was already found with, so that dog won't hunt.
It's certainly better to just move past that for the purposes of justifying this indictment considering the discovery and handling of those records correctly fell under the PRA
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:38 am to GRTiger
quote:
It's certainly better to just move past that for the purposes of justifying this indictment
They are 2 completely unrelated and separate incidents, but his attempt at a gotcha is utterly irrelevant to the post he quoted.
My hypothetical was about Joe Biden the President. Not about what illegal stuff Biden may have done previously.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 8:39 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:39 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The feds let you out on an appeal bond if you appeal a conviction? That's a serious question.
Will the SS be his cell/block mates? That also a serious question.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:43 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The question is if the PRA can do that with these documents. It's not something that's been specifically litigated.
PRA - to my knowledge - doesn’t say it only applies to certain documents. It was written to apply to all records.
Second - disputes over the PRA are not criminal. But that’s exactly what Smith tried to do. Apply some statutes from the Espionage Act to make it criminal.
When this gets slapped down - it will be
embarrassing. If they had any shame.
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 8:44 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:43 am to ItNeverRains
quote:
Will the SS be his cell/block mates? That also a serious question.
So we're arguing that Trump can't be jailed?
He'd probably be sent to isolation or protected custody with a SS agent outside the cell.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:44 am to BobBoucher
quote:
They can’t say he illegally retained something when the PRA gives him the authority to take what he wants.
This is all anyone needs to understand. The rest is just noise.
Garland is trying to ignore the PRA. Yet it supersedes everything in this case as long as the documents were in his possession before Biden was sworn in. And I still think Trump has leeway in that.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:44 am to BobBoucher
quote:
PRA - to my knowledge - doesn’t say it only applies to certain documents. So by default it applies to all records.
Again, what courts have specifically ruled on these types of documents?
quote:
Second - disputes over the PRA are not criminal.
He's not charged under the PRA
quote:
Apply some statutes from the Espionage Act to make it criminal.
The statutes can apply, though, theoretically. Again, this hasn't been specifically litigated.
quote:
When this gets slapped down - it will be
embarrassing. If they had any shame.
and if it doesn't, you'll claim the judges were compromised
This post was edited on 6/10/23 at 8:45 am
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
So we're arguing that Trump can't be jailed?
I’m stating Trump won’t be jailed in any fed penitentiary.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:47 am to loogaroo
quote:
Garland is trying to ignore the PRA. Yet it supersedes everything in this case as long as the documents were in his possession before Biden was sworn in.
The PRA may not apply to these specific documents, which also may not be of the type to permit unspoken/uncommunicated "declassification". Assuming a court rules what I just said is true, what is Trump's defense?
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:48 am to ItNeverRains
quote:
I’m stating Trump won’t be jailed in any fed penitentiary.
If he's found guilty is he going to become Escobar and get "jailed" at his compound?
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The PRA may not apply to these specific documents,
Where is your evidence of this? It’s pretty clear the president’s powers to declassify are plenary. It doesn’t matter what kind of documents.
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
If he's found guilty is he going to become Escobar and get "jailed" at his compound?
That’s my bet
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:51 am to SlowFlowPro
U going to be disappointed again jackass 
Posted on 6/10/23 at 8:52 am to loogaroo
quote:
Where is your evidence of this?
I'm waiting for the caselaw. There isn't a controlling opinion b/c the PRA hasn't been litigated that much.
Hence why I said "may not".
quote:
It’s pretty clear the president’s powers to declassify are plenary. It doesn’t matter what kind of documents.
Where is your evidence of this?
What case has specifically authorized the President to mutedly "declassify" nuclear and/or national defense secrets?
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News