The Walls be Closing

[wnyguy]

2 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Trump is by far the most corrupt person in our government. 

I hate to break it to you fine folks but Trump isn't the President any more. In fact he is not even a member of the government in any manner.

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, wnyguy said:

I hate to break it to you fine folks but Trump isn't the President any more. In fact he is not even a member of the government in any manner.

No, he's just the front runner for the GOP nomination. Did you forget that? 

[wnyguy]

11 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

No, he's just the front runner for the GOP nomination. Did you forget that? 

Not in government in any capacity at the moment. Move on to someone who is, if you can.

[cle23]

42 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

Hillary created her own private server in her home therby bypassing the security measures in place on official government servers.

 

But don't worry, she was just careless and there was no intent when she intentionally created her own private unsecured server in her home in order to bypass secure government servers.

You people are friggin clowns.

 

 

 

Then prosecute her too.  By all means they should if they can convince a jury to convict.  

 

ANYONE, regardless of party/position/whatever that breaks the law and abuses their position should be prosecuted.  

[The Frankish Reich]

28 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

So were the documents unclassified when he brought them out of the Office or not, regardless if Trump was dumb?

That requires a legal conclusion. This hasn't been litigated in the courts, so right now we can only say "it depends on what the courts say."

My points:

 

- Trump (assuming the tapes are correctly characterized) himself thinks they REMAINED CLASSIFIED despite the fact that he (knowingly? we think so) took them out of the Office while still President. That is why he apparently said something like "I'd love to talk about this in greater detail, but the documents (and information therein) remain classified," coupled with regret that he DID NOT declassify them when he had the authority to do so

- there is still an argument that it doesn't matter what Trump thought he was or wasn't doing, that even if he THOUGHT they remained classified, the ACT of knowingly taking them out of a secured classified facility and into his personal position while he was still President had the legal effect of declassifying them. 

 

My takeaways:

 

- these tapes, if correctly characterized, change the legal landscape. It's an admission by Trump that he recognizes (as he understands it) that the document/information remained classified long after his departure from office. That takes away his public defense ("I was the President, I could and did declassify, no special magic words required")

- it leaves him with two weaker defenses: (1) even though I believe I had the inherent right to declassify anything I wanted to, THESE particular documents (but maybe not others?) were removed through carelessness, not intentionally (remember, the prosecutor would have to prove a specific violation based on specific documents/information). This argument may be very weak on the facts, particularly since his public statements are fair game with respect to knowledge/intent. (2) even though he THOUGHT he may have removed still-classified information, that belief was incorrect as a matter of law, since his knowing removal of the document in question effectively declassified it as a matter of law.

 

This puts his lawyers in a difficult position. Notice that Defense (1) is incompatible with Defense (2). Defense (1) is based on lack of actual knowledge that this document was removed while still classified. (the Hillary defense). Defense (2) REQUIRES his knowledge - his knowing decision - to remove the document while he was still President and thereby declassify it as a matter of law.

 

So a fairly weak case just became a much stronger case. 

3 minutes ago, cle23 said:

 

Then prosecute her too.  By all means they should if they can convince a jury to convict.  

 

ANYONE, regardless of party/position/whatever that breaks the law and abuses their position should be prosecuted.  

See my comment above. Comey was clear that the investigation did not show knowledge/intent to remove/post classified information and that the case therefore involved carelessness (in law, gross negligence) and that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a criminal case on those facts. Trump is now found to have been recognizing that he had still-classified documents in his possession as late as summer 2001 (at least 6 months after losing the job).

[The Frankish Reich]

One other comment: this is why there's such a thing as White House Counsel! If you think you have the right to take any document with you (and thereby declassify it by operation of law), you ask your counsel whether that's a defensible position. But when you alienate everyone around you, including your Counsel, well, then you do stupid and illegal things.

[Doc]

43 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

The "Everyone is corrupt" argument is just a dodge for Trump 

 

So is "I didn't know I had them in my garage."

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

So is "I didn't know I had them in my garage."

Good, I hope that's Trump's arguments at trial, "Ya, but Hillary, but Biden...but but..." 

[The Frankish Reich]

48 minutes ago, wnyguy said:

I hate to break it to you fine folks but Trump isn't the President any more. In fact he is not even a member of the government in any manner.

Don't tell that to our Q Anon devotees!

13 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

So is "I didn't know I had them in my garage."

Again: "I didn't know I had them in my garage" is different from "I have it right here, but I can't show it to you because it's still classified."

Imagine the distinction between the ordinary defense of "I bought it from a pawn shop and the guy assured me it was legit" and "yeah, I bought it from a guy who told me he just boosted it from Walmart."

[Westside]

36 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Oh I care. I want to see trump held accountable for once for his corruption 

Just Trump?

[wnyguy]

20 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

One other comment: this is why there's such a thing as White House Counsel! If you think you have the right to take any document with you (and thereby declassify it by operation of law), you ask your counsel whether that's a defensible position. But when you alienate everyone around you, including your Counsel, well, then you do stupid and illegal things.

Ok but it hasn't been proven to be illegal, "stupid" I'll give you.

[Tommy Callahan]

39 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Oh I care. I want to see trump held accountable for once for his corruption 

um. from the Mueller report to impeachments, he keeps being found not guilty of said investigations.  

 

 

 

 

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

This is Trump we are talking about

 

True.  Joke will get his own thread in short order...

 

11 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Again: "I didn't know I had them in my garage" is different from "I have it right here, but I can't show it to you because it's still classified."

Imagine the distinction between the ordinary defense of "I bought it from a pawn shop and the guy assured me it was legit" and "yeah, I bought it from a guy who told me he just boosted it from Walmart."

 

Right because having a classified document but realizing it can't be shown to anyone is worse than having classified documents in your garage that any visitor to his house can access, namely his POS son and his cronies.  Good one.

[SoCal Deek]

43 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

That requires a legal conclusion. This hasn't been litigated in the courts, so right now we can only say "it depends on what the courts say."

My points:

 

- Trump (assuming the tapes are correctly characterized) himself thinks they REMAINED CLASSIFIED despite the fact that he (knowingly? we think so) took them out of the Office while still President. That is why he apparently said something like "I'd love to talk about this in greater detail, but the documents (and information therein) remain classified," coupled with regret that he DID NOT declassify them when he had the authority to do so

- there is still an argument that it doesn't matter what Trump thought he was or wasn't doing, that even if he THOUGHT they remained classified, the ACT of knowingly taking them out of a secured classified facility and into his personal position while he was still President had the legal effect of declassifying them. 

 

My takeaways:

 

- these tapes, if correctly characterized, change the legal landscape. It's an admission by Trump that he recognizes (as he understands it) that the document/information remained classified long after his departure from office. That takes away his public defense ("I was the President, I could and did declassify, no special magic words required")

- it leaves him with two weaker defenses: (1) even though I believe I had the inherent right to declassify anything I wanted to, THESE particular documents (but maybe not others?) were removed through carelessness, not intentionally (remember, the prosecutor would have to prove a specific violation based on specific documents/information). This argument may be very weak on the facts, particularly since his public statements are fair game with respect to knowledge/intent. (2) even though he THOUGHT he may have removed still-classified information, that belief was incorrect as a matter of law, since his knowing removal of the document in question effectively declassified it as a matter of law.

 

This puts his lawyers in a difficult position. Notice that Defense (1) is incompatible with Defense (2). Defense (1) is based on lack of actual knowledge that this document was removed while still classified. (the Hillary defense). Defense (2) REQUIRES his knowledge - his knowing decision - to remove the document while he was still President and thereby declassify it as a matter of law.

 

So a fairly weak case just became a much stronger case. 

See my comment above. Comey was clear that the investigation did not show knowledge/intent to remove/post classified information and that the case therefore involved carelessness (in law, gross negligence) and that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a criminal case on those facts. Trump is now found to have been recognizing that he had still-classified documents in his possession as late as summer 2001 (at least 6 months after losing the job).

Excellent discussion Frank. 

It is indeed a complex one. It sounds like you’re saying that the crime’s been committed as soon as the documents are taken out of the building. And therefore what you do with them, or where you store them after that, has no bearing on guilt or innocence. In essence, possession is 10/10ths of the law. 

[Tommy Callahan]

Just now, SUNY_amherst said:

 

Well the impeachment trials were stacked with a jury of his political beneficiaries so he lucked out there. 

 

The Mueller Report though fortunately operated outside that corrupt vacuum and resulted in the plenty of convictions, pleas and jail time. Felons include trumps closest advisors, attorney, and campaign manager.

reads like blue anon .  yes, individuals did crimes and were found guilty in those investigations, he was not.  it's kind of simple like that. 

 

some would argue the entire thing was theatre by his political opponents that had been trying to keep him out of office, before he was even elected.

 

crossfire hurricane might have been a cool song, but it was also a conspiracy to spy on the opposition running for office.   based on what everyone in the room knew was political opposition research.  When did Mueller realize Sussman worked for Hillary?  

 

 

 

 

[SoCal Deek]

31 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

reads like blue anon .  yes, individuals did crimes and were found guilty in those investigations, he was not.  it's kind of simple like that. 

 

some would argue the entire thing was theatre by his political opponents that had been trying to keep him out of office, before he was even elected.

 

crossfire hurricane might have been a cool song, but it was also a conspiracy to spy on the opposition running for office.   based on what everyone in the room knew was political opposition research.  When did Mueller realize Sussman worked for Hillary?  

 

 

 

 

As many on here know, I try and simplify things. The fact that Mueller testified that he’d never heard of Fusion GPS it said EVERYTHING you needed to know about the entire process. Period! Full stop. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

5 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Excellent discussion Frank. 

It is indeed a complex one. It sounds like you’re saying that the crime’s been committed as soon as the documents are taken out of the building. And therefore what you do with them, or where you store them after that, has no bearing on guilt or innocence. In essence, possession is 10/10ths of the law. 

I don't know any other way to say it but I'm going out on a limb to make a wild guess and say that a lot of these documents are classified for the purpose of hiding illegal or unethical government activity or actions by the intelligence community in violation of the law or acts of Congress. 

 

Let's hypothetically say I'm correct.  So if that proves true, are we still going after Trump or the people that broke the law and tried to hide it?  

 

I should have added some context.  The US government "classifies" about 50 million documents a year.  That's 50 million secrets.  And that smacks of overuse of the classified designation as it's very hard to comprehend there are that many legitimate national security secrets and concerns to keep hidden from friends and enemies alike.  What it amounts to is giving the American citizen the mushroom treatment.  Keep us in the dark and feed us BS.     

Edited June 1, 2023 by All_Pro_Bills

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

As many on here know, I try and simplify things. The fact that Mueller testified that he’d never heard of Fusion GPS it said EVERYTHING you needed to know about the entire process. Period! Full stop. 

Off topic, but Mueller really appeared to be losing it by the time of his testimony (and likely during the investigation itself). Let's stop entrusting key governmental functions to the elderly.

[Tommy Callahan]

16 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Off topic, but Mueller really appeared to be losing it by the time of his testimony (and likely during the investigation itself). Let's stop entrusting key governmental functions to the elderly.

Lol, is that why he never found the connections so many others have? 

[L Ron Burgundy]

5 hours ago, Chris farley said:

um. from the Mueller report to impeachments, he keeps being found not guilty of said investigations.  

 

 

 

 

So was OJ.  You want him to hang with your wife?

[ChiGoose]

7 hours ago, Chris farley said:

um. from the Mueller report to impeachments, he keeps being found not guilty of said investigations.  

 

 

 

 

Please let me know of all of the trials in which Trump has been found not guilty. 
 

I also suggest actually reading the Mueller Report because you seem to think it said something it never said. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

7 hours ago, cle23 said:

 

Then prosecute her too.  By all means they should if they can convince a jury to convict.  

 

ANYONE, regardless of party/position/whatever that breaks the law and abuses their position should be prosecuted.  

Except that’s not the way it works, and it never has.  Power has its privileges, and drawing this particular line in the sand means next to nothing in context.  Bill Clinton commits perjury, Eliot Spitzer traffics in call girls, Andre Cuomo cooks the books on nursing home deaths and is directly responsible for many, and W Bush lies about intelligence and war for oil.  What they all have in common is they get off, scottso freezo (as an old friend used to say, RIP). 
 

To belabor a point we discussed the other day, Dems going around spreading election misinformation and withholding information critical to the published Russia narrative is approached completely differently than Trump’s “stop the steal” program.   The establishment allows for politicians to deliberately and at times catastrophically lie/misrepresent and contribute to public unrest.  
 

It happens because it works, and the reality is that in spite of clear laws governing the handling of classified information, Donald Trump will be handled by a completely different standard than Joe Biden and his decades of disregard for the laws that govern the rest of us. 
 

So, yeah, in a perfect world, everyone gets the same carrot and stick.  In reality, it’s imperative to understand the rules of the game and conduct oneself accordingly.    Stop the steal is Ilegitimate Election/Russian collusion.  

[Joe Ferguson forever]

53 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

, and it never has.  Power has its privileges, and drawing this particular line in the sand means next to nothing in context.  Bill Clinton commits perjury, Eliot Spitzer traffics in call girls, Andre Cuomo cooks the books on nursing home deaths and is directly responsible for many, and W Bush lies about intelligence and war for oil.  What they all have in common is they get off, scottso freezo (as an old friend used to say, RIP). 
 

To belabor a point we discussed the other day, Dems going around spreading election misinformation and withholding information critical to the published Russia narrative is approached completely differently than Trump’s “stop the steal” program.   The establishment allows for politicians to deliberately and at times catastrophically lie/misrepresent and contribute to public unrest.  

Except that's the way it's supposed to work.  Shouldn't we aim for that?  Even if it isn't currently true, we should be able to make it more so.  Do you really believe we are that powerless?  I don't.

 

Stop the steal (Jan 6) and the Russia info are not even close to equal issues

[The Frankish Reich]

For people wondering about my posts trying to manufacture a defense for Trump on the classified documents investigation ... it looks like new Trump buddy, old Epstein buddy Alan Dershowitz is thinking along the same lines:

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jun/1/did-trump-declassify-documents-criminal-indictment/

 

I do take issue with this:

 

"Theoretically, there could be evidence that Mr. Trump told an associate that he was taking classified material with him, knowing it was still classified. It is extremely unlikely, however, that any such evidence exists."

 

Theoretically, Alan? The reports we just read yesterday involve exactly that type of evidence! Trump is allegedly on tape saying "I have a document about our Iran defense strategy, but I can't talk to you about that because it's still classified."

 

Other than that, a solid article.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

15 hours ago, redtail hawk said:

Except that's the way it's supposed to work.  Shouldn't we aim for that?  Even if it isn't currently true, we should be able to make it more so.  Do you really believe we are that powerless?  I don't.

 

Stop the steal (Jan 6) and the Russia info are not even close to equal issues

"The Russia info"...?  Is that what the kids are calling it?  It was a wholesale assault on the notion of free and fair elections, and election denialism (and in some cases, allegations of treason and a coup were raised) of the highest order by virtually every prominent democrat in the country.  It just aligned with your political views.  

 

As for being 'powerless', quite the contrary.  Prior to Trump taking up the flag on stolen elections---you and yours were all for outrageous claims that the 2016 election was illegitimate, even though the Mueller report ended up in the trash bin.  I think you're getting exactly what you told the dem leadership you wanted---from government persecution to the intelligence community spreading false stories about potentially damaging information to FISA abuse etc.  Your only standard is it has to be in your party's favor--and you got that when you voted in a 5 decade establishment politician. I'm not sure what more you are looking for. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

40 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

persecution

yes, we know...

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

yes, we know...

#metoo

[Tommy Callahan]

7 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Establishment… from the Latin “stablis” ie, stable/firm

 

why wouldnt we want someone who is stable and experienced?

 

I swear, just because the reality tv actor lost badly tells you it must be rigged you don’t have to believe it. God have us big brains, use it 

 

 

Amen. We just have to trust the people and groups that got us into this long term mess, are the solutions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

6 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Grown men should not be relying on the government to solve their problems

I only expect the government to not be in my business or be the problem.

 

like most on the right side of the hard left.

 

but 81 M of you voted for the problem, to fix the problem.

 

oh yeah. and debt cancellation.

 

When do the college payments become due again?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 2, 2023 by Chris farley

[Tommy Callahan]

I get it. that college debt part struck a nerve.

 

It's got to be tough to have a crap load of debt and no actual marketable skills.  Then folks stuck trying to pay back all that debt while working some menial and low paying job.  

 

 

 

 

 

[Tommy Callahan]

4 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

Are you talking to me or to a cloud? I have no college debt anymore 

 

 

musing on why so many voted for the problem, under the guise of college debt reduction.

 

 

[ChiGoose]

2 minutes ago, SUNY_amherst said:

is it that hard to believe that the majority of the public thought the reality tv actor sucked at his job?

 

 

Only if you live in a bubble. 
 

Trump was deeply unpopular and chaotic while the country was in the midst of a pandemic. Biden was boring old normalcy. It’s not a surprise at all to anyone actually paying attention. 

[Tommy Callahan]

1 hour ago, SUNY_amherst said:

boring has been kinda nice

LMAO. aint nothing been boring about Biden. 

 

but good examples of media programming. 

 

 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Only if you live in a bubble. 
 

Trump was deeply unpopular and chaotic while the country was in the midst of a pandemic. Biden was boring old normalcy. It’s not a surprise at all to anyone actually paying attention. 

 

Yeah, he promised to shut down the virus and people believed him.  This is what you get when you vote out of fear.

[Tenhigh]

Queue the "republicans are evil but Dems are only incompetent" in 3....2...1...

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Yeah, he promised to shut down the virus and people believed him.  This is what you get when you vote out of fear.

Or you’re just so tired of the immature, chaotic dumbassery of the current guy that you just want to move on to someone else. 

[Doc]

11 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Or you’re just so tired of the immature, chaotic dumbassery of the current guy that you just want to move on to someone else. 

 

Yes, I really do want to move on to someone other than Joke...

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Or you’re just so tired of the immature, chaotic dumbassery of the current guy that you just want to move on to someone else. 

Sure, but your guy(s) spread election misinformation, your guy(s) lied about evidence tying Trump to the Kremlin, fostered and encouraged national discord, spread COVID misinformation and vax confusion, and the leader of the crew stumbles around like a punch drunk boxer making all sorts of claims that reflect immaturity, dumbassery, and lies to rival the old guy.   
 

These facts are indisputable. 
 

In the end, people vote for ideas that help them at home.  It would be silly to argue that some people voted for Biden because they didn’t like Trump—of course that happened.  
 

Importantly though— policy  matters , for example—it sure gets a lot easier to vote for the tired old punch drunk boxer when he offers to take care of a your personal debt.  It’s silly to argue otherwise. 
 

 

 

Edited June 3, 2023 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[Joe Ferguson forever]

6 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

Importantly though— policy  matters , for example—it sure gets a lot easier to vote for the tired old punch drunk boxer when he offers to take care of a your personal debt.  It’s silly to argue otherwise. 

Did he not sacrifice that token for the debt ceiling deal?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

51 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

Did he not sacrifice that token for the debt ceiling deal?

The debt ceiling deal was not made prior to the 2020 election, Red, when folks like yourself voted the party line and all that came with it.    
 

I’m all for respectful dialogue but you’re starting to sound a bit like JB. Soon you’ll be calling me Molly Hatchet.