BillStime Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 Good - the POS is a fkn lunatic Yup 👆 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 39 minutes ago, BillStime said: Good - the POS is a fkn lunatic Yup 👆 Not something you’d expect to see for a former president but in line with what you’d expect to see for someone suffering from NPD 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 On 8/5/2023 at 9:46 AM, BillsFanNC said: two tiered justice system and assault on the constitution. yeah gf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 27 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Not something you’d expect to see for a former president but in line with what you’d expect to see for someone suffering from NPD Yeah but Julie Kelly is upset. And well, you know Karen will start another thread on those terrible trans people and corrupt DOJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Jack Smith is very good at his job 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Jackie boy's getting desperate. The question is, do the Repubs impeach Joke over his felonious stealing, storage and sharing of classified material, or do they just continue to let him sink his own re-election bid? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 (edited) Thats a desperation and hail Mary move by Jack. And a sign that the pundits are correct about how shaky that entire case is. Worth mentioning that the nutters have been charged and convicted for attacking judge cannon. Edited April 3 by Tommy Callahan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 16 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Jack Smith is very good at his job I would hope so. He's perpetually playing with a significant home field advantage. Since this began, he's controlled the raid, what was taken within the scope of what was supposed to be taken, what was seized outside the scope of what was supposed to be taken, the leaks that shape the public narrative---all with the full scope, weight an authority of the US government. In addition, he is unrestrained by budgetary or personnel concerns, the ability to formulate legal tactics without concern as to the cost of research v probability of success, and ultimately, no financial downside to him or anyone on his team if he does not prevail in this matter. In addition, it seems obvious that there is anarchy when it comes to the handling of classified/top secret material at the highest levels of our government. It seems there are no safeguards, no hard and fast rules on who can do what, and what the punishment might look like for those that stray. That feeds into the narrative in a big way, imo, providing cover to him with the rather odd notion that anarchy and blatant disregard for the rules by high ranking, obviously well-informed politicians with decades of experience in handling classified materials is fair, reasonable and completely acceptable behavior. Jack Smith has the political power, time, money and power to be the tsunami. It would be quite amazing if he wasn't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: In addition, it seems obvious that there is anarchy when it comes to the handling of classified/top secret material at the highest levels of our government. It seems there are no safeguards, no hard and fast rules on who can do what, and what the punishment might look like for those that stray. That feeds into the narrative in a big way, imo… While I don’t agree with most of your characterizations (and that’s fine, we can agree to disagree) I do agree with this. The controls around handling of sensitive documents by electeds are seriously broken. They seem so lax that you’d expect to be walk out of a White House tour with a top secret document unwittingly stuck to your shoe. Aside from the national security implications, you’re correct that this impacts the narrative for the average person. Does everybody leave the office with national security documents? If so, why punish one guy when everyone does it? That, combined with how poorly the media covers politics, the law, and especially the intersection of politics and the law, leads to people believe that the facts of the Biden and Pence cases are the same as the Trump case. The Feds generally seem content to let things slide in these cases so long as the documents are returned. Trump lied to them about returning the documents, lied to his lawyer, causing him to lie to the Feds, and orchestrated several obstructive acts. Had he just done what Biden and Pence did, he’d be fine. We’d still have an issue with document control, but he wouldn’t have an issue with this indictment. But because of the narrative issues you pointed out, a lot of people are incorrectly conflating his case with Biden’s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 20 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Jack Smith is very good at his job So back to the presidential records act...LOL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 32 minutes ago, Pokebball said: So back to the presidential records act...LOL Yeah, unfortunately Aileen Cannon seems to have an incredibly poor grasp on the PRA. Under her theory, the president of the United States can take a sensitive document prepared by the intelligence community as a "personal document" and therefore treat it as if it were a box of White House jelly beans. That's obviously ludicrous and why Smith replied the way he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 44 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Yeah, unfortunately Aileen Cannon seems to have an incredibly poor grasp on the PRA. Under her theory, the president of the United States can take a sensitive document prepared by the intelligence community as a "personal document" and therefore treat it as if it were a box of White House jelly beans. That's obviously ludicrous and why Smith replied the way he did. Copies probably are personal. We shall see 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 2 hours ago, ChiGoose said: While I don’t agree with most of your characterizations (and that’s fine, we can agree to disagree) I do agree with this. The controls around handling of sensitive documents by electeds are seriously broken. They seem so lax that you’d expect to be walk out of a White House tour with a top secret document unwittingly stuck to your shoe. Aside from the national security implications, you’re correct that this impacts the narrative for the average person. Does everybody leave the office with national security documents? If so, why punish one guy when everyone does it? That, combined with how poorly the media covers politics, the law, and especially the intersection of politics and the law, leads to people believe that the facts of the Biden and Pence cases are the same as the Trump case. The Feds generally seem content to let things slide in these cases so long as the documents are returned. Trump lied to them about returning the documents, lied to his lawyer, causing him to lie to the Feds, and orchestrated several obstructive acts. Had he just done what Biden and Pence did, he’d be fine. We’d still have an issue with document control, but he wouldn’t have an issue with this indictment. But because of the narrative issues you pointed out, a lot of people are incorrectly conflating his case with Biden’s. No, you’re wrong here. It borders on the absurd to think that the controls supposedly in place to protect our national secrets in a post 9/11 world are simply broken. It’s infinitely more likely that Biden’s actions (and Clinton’s and Pence) represent the standard, not the exception. That is to say, powerful people are often above the law, and what passes for an explanation to the masses starts with some vague explanation of shrinkage and ultimately morphs into how acceptable it is to reveal classified documents and/or leave top secret info wherever the 🤬you want so long as you’re part of the inside crew. I’m under no illusion that Trumps case is the same as Biden’s case. I accepted long ago that certain people are in a protected class while others are not. Whether Trump returned material or not, the Biden DOJ was coming for him. All it takes is a novel theory of prosecution, or an aggressive prosecutor, or enough political support and popular support. All this does is bring me back to the beginning. The government is a very formidable foe, and holds all the cards. It’s nothing new. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Whether Trump returned material or not, the Biden DOJ was coming for him. Preposterous - why didn’t Trump just return the documents when asked a million times? Why did he have his lawyers sign affidavits stating all materials were returned? Trump brought this on himself. Why does the law have to constantly tip toe around this entitled POS? Enough is a fkn nuff. And here you are again, Leo - bailing Trump out. Once a hack - always a hack. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 16 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: No, you’re wrong here. It borders on the absurd to think that the controls supposedly in place to protect our national secrets in a post 9/11 world are simply broken. It’s infinitely more likely that Biden’s actions (and Clinton’s and Pence) represent the standard, not the exception. That is to say, powerful people are often above the law, and what passes for an explanation to the masses starts with some vague explanation of shrinkage and ultimately morphs into how acceptable it is to reveal classified documents and/or leave top secret info wherever the 🤬you want so long as you’re part of the inside crew. I’m under no illusion that Trumps case is the same as Biden’s case. I accepted long ago that certain people are in a protected class while others are not. Whether Trump returned material or not, the Biden DOJ was coming for him. All it takes is a novel theory of prosecution, or an aggressive prosecutor, or enough political support and popular support. All this does is bring me back to the beginning. The government is a very formidable foe, and holds all the cards. It’s nothing new. This is just factually incorrect. Instead of taking the very simple and correct explanation (leeway is granted to electeds if they don't obstruct), it paints Trump as a victim of a vast conspiracy that just does not exist. The idea that there is a "protected class" of powerful people who are above the law that exists but doesn't include the guy with a golden toilet is laughable. If Trump had intentionally taken the documents, told his people that he did so to sell them to Iran for cash, but the government asked for them before he did so and he returned them all, he'd be fine. It's not some grand conspiracy, it's an idiot being an idiot and causing himself problems. FYI: If you hire a lawyer, listen to them... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 15 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: No, you’re wrong here. It borders on the absurd to think that the controls supposedly in place to protect our national secrets in a post 9/11 world are simply broken. It’s infinitely more likely that Biden’s actions (and Clinton’s and Pence) represent the standard, not the exception. That is to say, powerful people are often above the law, and what passes for an explanation to the masses starts with some vague explanation of shrinkage and ultimately morphs into how acceptable it is to reveal classified documents and/or leave top secret info wherever the 🤬you want so long as you’re part of the inside crew. I’m under no illusion that Trumps case is the same as Biden’s case. I accepted long ago that certain people are in a protected class while others are not. Whether Trump returned material or not, the Biden DOJ was coming for him. All it takes is a novel theory of prosecution, or an aggressive prosecutor, or enough political support and popular support. All this does is bring me back to the beginning. The government is a very formidable foe, and holds all the cards. It’s nothing new. Even they know Biden willfully took, kept and improperly stored and shared classified material. They have to convince themselves that he's innocent while gaslighting everyone else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 1 minute ago, Doc said: Even they know Biden willfully took, kept and improperly stored and shared classified material. They have to convince themselves that he's innocent while gaslighting everyone else. If anyone is looking for a perfect example of Dunning-Kruger, this is it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: If anyone is looking for a perfect example of Dunning-Kruger, this is it. Like I said... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Like I said... And Biden returned them. Just like Pence did. Why didn't Trump? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 4 minutes ago, Doc said: Like I said... Yes, we all understand that you struggle to grasp basic concepts. You don't need to keep pointing it out to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 33 minutes ago, BillStime said: And Biden returned them. Just like Pence did. Why didn't Trump? He returned them in 2017, after showing them to his ghostwriter? 32 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Yes, we all understand that you struggle to grasp basic concepts. You don't need to keep pointing it out to everyone. You struggle with the truth. But you're a lawyer so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 2 minutes ago, Doc said: He returned them in 2017, after showing them to his ghostwriter? "Hur’s report says no criminal charges are warranted against Biden." Keep trying, Doc After all these years, it must suck to continuously support the most corrupt POTUS in our lifetime, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 5 minutes ago, Doc said: He returned them in 2017, after showing them to his ghostwriter? You struggle with the truth. But you're a lawyer so... I’m sorry you have such reading comprehension problems but maybe take some time to get professional help before continuously embarrassing yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 Just now, BillStime said: "Hur’s report says no criminal charges are warranted against Biden." Keep trying, Doc After all these years, it must suck to continuously support the most corrupt POTUS in our lifetime, isn't it? He also said Biden is senile. Pick one or the other. Just now, ChiGoose said: I’m sorry you have such reading comprehension problems but maybe take some time to get professional help before continuously embarrassing yourself. I'm sorry you're a partisan hack. The only embarrassment is you continuing to deny Biden knew he had classified material. It says more about you than anything else. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 4 minutes ago, Doc said: He also said Biden is senile. Pick one or the other. Yeah, well, he couldn't prosecute Biden, so the Federalist Society's chosen one had to take dramatic action to avoid repercussions from Trump. Isn't it exhausting to constantly defend Trump? You do realize how predictable your defenses for Trump are, correct, Doc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 54 minutes ago, BillStime said: And Biden returned them. Just like Pence did. Why didn't Trump? because they were personal records Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 3 minutes ago, Pokebball said: because they were personal records But they weren't... and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 Just now, BillStime said: Yeah, well, he couldn't prosecute Biden, so the Federalist Society's chosen one had to take dramatic action to avoid repercussions from Trump. Isn't it exhausting to constantly defend Trump? You do realize how predictable your defenses for Trump are, correct, Doc? LOL! Oh, the hypocrisy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 Just now, Doc said: LOL! Oh, the hypocrisy! lmao - Oh, the hypocrisy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokebball Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 7 minutes ago, BillStime said: But they weren't... and you know it. I don't know it, actually. I don't know how you, me or anyone else would know it. We shall see Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 27 minutes ago, Doc said: I'm sorry you're a partisan hack. The only embarrassment is you continuing to deny Biden knew he had classified material. It says more about you than anything else. I don’t want to be a jerk, but is English not your native language? Or do you have some learning issue? You keep claiming I said things that I’ve never said and I don’t want to embarrass you if there’s something else going on here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: I don’t want to be a jerk, but is English not your native language? Or do you have some learning issue? You keep claiming I said things that I’ve never said and I don’t want to embarrass you if there’s something else going on here. No I just realize when I'm dealing with people who aren't as smart as they think they are and/or are merely partisan hacks. I deal with far more intelligent people on a daily basis and many have egos the size of Texas. If you truly believe Biden didn't know he had classified material for years, you're a moron. But I realize that you have to believe it because Biden just has to be different from Trump in your eyes to help you sleep at night. So go hiding behind your legal standards. I live in the real world, not a courtroom. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 3 minutes ago, Doc said: No I just realize when I'm dealing with people who aren't as smart as they think they are and/or are merely partisan hacks. I deal with far more intelligent people on a daily basis and many have egos the size of Texas. If you truly believe Biden didn't know he had classified material for years, you're a moron. But I realize that you have to believe it because Biden just has to be different from Trump in your eyes to help you sleep at night. So go hiding behind your legal standards. I live in the real world, not a courtroom. I appreciate you proving my point that you are incapable of reading comprehension and instead just pretend you know what people said regardless of the actual text, so long as it meets your preconceived notions. You don’t live in the real world. You live in a pretend world that brings you comfort and tells you that you were always right all along despite the evidence to the contrary. I would laugh, but it’s actually quite sad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 50 minutes ago, Doc said: He returned them in 2017, after showing them to his ghostwriter? You struggle with the truth. But you're a lawyer so... So let's make sure I understand the theory here. Biden retained classified documents in violation of law, but he shouldn't be charged because that is consistent with him being a well-meaning, elderly man with memory issues. Trump also retained classified documents in violation of law, and he too shouldn't have been charged because that was consistent with him being a well-meaning, elderly man with memory issues. It's a tie! (You can't have it both ways) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 7 hours ago, ChiGoose said: I appreciate you proving my point that you are incapable of reading comprehension and instead just pretend you know what people said regardless of the actual text, so long as it meets your preconceived notions. You don’t live in the real world. You live in a pretend world that brings you comfort and tells you that you were always right all along despite the evidence to the contrary. I would laugh, but it’s actually quite sad. I'll laugh for you. At you. 7 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: So let's make sure I understand the theory here. Biden retained classified documents in violation of law, but he shouldn't be charged because that is consistent with him being a well-meaning, elderly man with memory issues. Trump also retained classified documents in violation of law, and he too shouldn't have been charged because that was consistent with him being a well-meaning, elderly man with memory issues. It's a tie! (You can't have it both ways) Yes on the bolded parts but no on the rest. I've been saying all along that either they both should be charged or neither should be. It's the Dems who are trying to have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 9 minutes ago, Doc said: Yes on the bolded parts but no on the rest. I've been saying all along that either they both should be charged or neither should be. It's the Dems who are trying to have it both ways. You keep ignoring that Trump obstructed the investigation. That’s the crucial difference between the two. Had he just done what Biden did, he wouldn’t have been charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 THE KING! In fine form! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts