- 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 6/11/23 at 7:40 pm to Jjdoc
Posted on 6/11/23 at 7:40 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Again... Already settled law.
Presidential Records Act, not Espionage Act,
Neither of those laws apply to charges of concealment or giving false statements.
quote:
Former presidents can have their presidential records. No criminal component to PRA.
Can former Presidents conceal documents demanded pursuant to a valid subpoena?
Can former Presidents give false statements to federal investigators?
I'll ask again: How does the classification status even apply to the concealment or false statements charge?
quote:
Therefore, it’s legally impossible to obstruct investigations into non-crimes.
Other than the fact this is wrong, show me where I referenced the obstruction charge.
1
Posted on 6/11/23 at 7:45 pm to Decatur
cajunangelle, for you benefit, here is the case:
LINK
You are quoting from a guy who is fabricating what the judge said.
Anyone who spends twenty minutes reading the case will see that it has laughably limited relevance to the Trump case, which alleges that Trump clearly new and admitted that the information was not "personal records".
LINK
You are quoting from a guy who is fabricating what the judge said.
Anyone who spends twenty minutes reading the case will see that it has laughably limited relevance to the Trump case, which alleges that Trump clearly new and admitted that the information was not "personal records".
Posted on 6/11/23 at 7:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
uote:
Again... Already settled law.
Presidential Records Act, not Espionage Act,
Neither of those laws apply to charges of concealment or giving false statements.
The fact that the investigation was meritless is, as I stated at the bottom of the last page.
quote:
Can former Presidents conceal documents demanded pursuant to a valid subpoena?
Again... You are starting with there was a crime. There was not. It’s legally impossible to obstruct investigations into non-crimes.
I again, point out the fact that this is settled law:
quote:
President Clinton taped his "oral history of his 8 years in office."
He hid the 79 audio tapes in his sock drawer.
These tapes include the most classified secrets imaginable.
Q. Why wasn't he charged for espionage, theft of gov't property, or obstruction?
A. The President.
I get that you think the files have zero to do with what you HOPE Trump is found guilty of.
But it's the whole purpose of the case. Without that case, everything else crumbles.
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:01 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
The fact that the investigation was meritless
It wasn't meritless. They found classified documents he was ordered to turn over (via subpoena) and did not.
quote:
Again... You are starting with there was a crime.
No I'm not. I asked you a direct question. I'll ask again:
Can former Presidents conceal documents demanded pursuant to a valid subpoena?
quote:
There was not. It’s legally impossible to obstruct investigations into non-crimes.
a. This is wrong
b. I am not discussing obstruction charges
quote:
Without that case, everything else crumbles.
Those documents could be ruled to have been declassified and it does not matter regarding the concealment charge or the false statements charge.
Can former Presidents conceal documents demanded pursuant to a valid subpoena?
Can a former President give false statements to an investigating federal officer?
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:05 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
Therefore, it’s legally impossible to obstruct investigations into non-crimes.
You are terrifically ill-informed. You just need to obstruct on "official proceeding". There is no "criminal investigation" let alone a requirement of a crime.
18 USC 1512 and 1515
If that were true you'd be encouraging obstruction at every turn.
Section 1512 of Title 18 constitutes a broad prohibition against tampering with a witness, victim or informant. It proscribes conduct intended to illegitimately affect the presentation of evidence in Federal proceedings or the communication of information to Federal law enforcement officers. It applies to proceedings before Congress, executive departments, and administrative agencies, and to civil and criminal judicial proceedings, including grand jury proceedings. See 18 U.S.C. § 1515(a)(1). In addition, the section provides extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over the offenses created therein. See 18 U.S.C. § 1512(g); 128 Cong. Rec. H8469 (daily ed. Oct. 1, 1980); H. R. Rep. No. 1369, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 20-22 (1980).
LINK
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
They found classified documents he was ordered to turn over
Allegedly. Could they have been planted?
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:10 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
Allegedly.
Well classified or not classified, it doesn't really matter when they were part of the subpoena.
I'll try to be more careful with my wording.
quote:
Could they have been planted?
Sure, but they have texts from his employees discussing moving the boxes of documents that weren't turned over
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Sure, but they have texts from his employees discussing moving the boxes of documents that weren't turned over
Alleged documents.
Correct?
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:19 pm to jimmy the leg
quote:
Alleged documents.
Correct?
No I think they have texts about them containing classified information, too
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:23 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
No I think they have texts about them containing classified information, too
You think they do?
I expect a link my friend.
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:32 pm to jimmy the leg
His employees were moving boxes they knew Trump was reviewing for classified documents.
Read the Statement of Facts starting on paragraph 41
Read the Statement of Facts starting on paragraph 41
This post was edited on 6/11/23 at 8:33 pm
Posted on 6/11/23 at 8:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
(no message)
This post was edited on 6/11/23 at 8:45 pm
Posted on 6/12/23 at 1:17 am to jimmy the leg
Lol
Posted on 6/12/23 at 9:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Again. Ask Martha Stewart.
Again, I did. Martha Stewart said she was only 63 when she went in.
Trump would be 77 or 78.
Posted on 6/12/23 at 9:35 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the appeals will be heard while he's in jail
A TDS Prog's wet dream. Wake up idiot
Posted on 6/12/23 at 10:01 am to SlowFlowPro
We are talking about the boxes of documents mentioned below(shown in picture at link)which were dropped on the sidewalk of the White House by NARA..... who can assure nothing was planted or otherwise tampered with? Was chain of custody followed?
Good article.
LINK
Good article.
quote:
The fact that the National Archives and Record Administration refused to take custody of the documents upon the end of the White House tenure, combined with the fact the NARA dumped those documents in the parking lot of the White House for Trump to deal with, is a direct statement the bureaucracy was telling President Trump these are your records. His records – not their records on loan to him.
LINK
Posted on 6/12/23 at 1:08 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
President Clinton taped his "oral history of his 8 years in office."
He hid the 79 audio tapes in his sock drawer.
These tapes include the most classified secrets imaginable.
I know this is not relevant to your point, but Clinton stored the tapes in his sock drawer in the White House while he was President. I don't know where he stored them after he left office, but I suppose it could be his sock drawer at his own home. Anyway, he identified the tapes as personal records before his term ended.
Also, we don't really know if those tapes include "the most classified secrets imaginable" because no one has heard them. The tapes were recorded over 8 years during clandestine meetings late at night with the writer. Seems unlikely he would relay national security issues to the writer...
But, maybe.
Also, while the NARA has no official power to review whether retained documents are personal or Presidential, it does have the ability to discuss those designations with the former President. And the PRA expressly says that NARA - at it's sole discretion, may ask the DOJ to assist in recovering disputed documents.
Posted on 6/12/23 at 1:14 pm to Strannix
it's pretty clear Trump knew what he was doing was illegal. he just didn't care because he is a rich, spoiled kid that knows the laws don't apply to him
This post was edited on 6/12/23 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 6/12/23 at 5:07 pm to Corinthians420
OMB! So if it’s in the indictment it’s fact?
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News