Jump to content

The Walls be Closing


Kemp

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Oh, it's evidence all right. Even if the particular Iran memo is not charged, Trump's idiotic comments (idiotic in the sense of "only an idiot would say that out loud") are evidence because they refute his prior idiotic comment that as President he could declassify anything simply by thinking about it, or that he had some kind of unwritten standing order declassifying everything he'd had boxed up to be sent out of the White House.

Since this particular Iran document was ostensibly still classified (Trump said so) and was at Bedminster NJ, if it is charged it probably needs to be venued in the District of New Jersey. Hence Trump's latest idiotic comment that this was just him bloviating/blustering and that he had no such document. We will see what the people who were in the room where it happened have a different take.

This is a profoundly stupid man.

EDIT: If Biden did something (actually several somethings) this stupid, everyone would say it's evidence of dementia. Well if the shoe fits ...

Its literally Not evidence.

 

Reads like the next blue anon gotcha witch hunt as the current ones are weak and expected to be another DUD.

 

Them walls be still standing.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Where is this document you refer to? The FBI raided his home and confiscated all of the classified documents. Which specific one was he talking about in the audio? Or is it possible…there isn’t one! 

It is possible there isn't one I suppose. So ... Trump just made up a specific document, going so far as to describe its contents and identifying its author, and even pulling it out and waving it in front of observers?

But again: so what? The statement that matters is this: "I could have declassified it as President; I can't do that anymore; it's secret." In other words, I understand that classified documents remain classified even though they were taken out of the White House by me (or at my direction) while I was still President."

 

Remember: this was in July 2021. The National Archives had already (in May 2021) sent Trump and his lawyers a demand letter asking for the return of presidential documents. Presumably he was aware of that request. And yet he's bragging (lying? that's his defense??) about retaining not just some ordinary presidential record, but an extremely sensitive, still-classified presidential record.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In Florida, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the communication. Fla. Stat. § 934.03(2)(d). This means that in Florida you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement.

 

Under New Jersey law only one party to a conversation is required to consent to a recording to make it legal.  This is similar to New York law and less restrictive than states like Florida and California that require two-party consent.  As a result, you can legally record your own conversations with someone else, but recording someone else’s conversation is a felony.

There are different rules for criminal investigations.  A recording is not legal even with one party’s consent if it is going to be used for a law enforcement investigation – unless the law enforcement officer has obtained prior approval from the state Attorney General or a county prosecutor.

 

So who recorded the edited audio tape?  

 

 

Edited by Chris farley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have two ‘tapes’:

 

In example one, the former President has responded to the audio in which its implied he was cavalier in sharing classified documents.

 

In example two, the former Vice President has said absolutely nothing about the ‘tape’ of a conversation in which his son is shaking down a foreign country while claiming his father is sitting next to him. 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Its literally Not evidence

I don't know if this is the influence of non-lawyer Julie Kelly or where it's coming from, but:

Of course it's evidence! It is mentioned in the indictment. Trump's half-baked maybe-I-should-just-keep-my-mouth-shut-and-hire-good-lawyers defense was "everything I took out of the White House was declassified by standing order or by operation of law." And now we have him on audio stating something completely different. It shows that he knew the classified documents he took remained classified. In other words, a "knowing" violation of the laws, which is critically important evidence.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't know if this is the influence of non-lawyer Julie Kelly or where it's coming from, but:

Of course it's evidence! It is mentioned in the indictment. Trump's half-baked maybe-I-should-just-keep-my-mouth-shut-and-hire-good-lawyers defense was "everything I took out of the White House was declassified by standing order or by operation of law." And now we have him on audio stating something completely different. It shows that he knew the classified documents he took remained classified. In other words, a "knowing" violation of the laws, which is critically important evidence.

ITs not evidence in the case.  just stating facts.

 

Who recorded it?  did they have permission?  was it part of a state operation?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

Florida recording law stipulates that it is a two-party consent state. In Florida, it is a criminal offense to use any device to record communications, whether they’re wire, oral or electronic, without the consent of everyone taking part in the communication. Fla. Stat. § 934.03(2)(d). This means that in Florida you are not legally allowed to record a conversation you are taking part in unless all parties are in agreement.

 

So who recorded the edited audio tape?  

You mean New Jersey law? This all happened in New Jersey.

And it was a recorded interview with some kind of writer working on Mark Meadows' memoirs - otherwise probably the most boring book that would have been released this year. So presumably the reporter asked if he/she could record it, and everyone knew it was being recorded. That's how these things work.

But ... try again. Trump is on his 3rd layman's defense now, so maybe he should crowd-source Theory Number 4.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

You mean New Jersey law? This all happened in New Jersey.

And it was a recorded interview with some kind of writer working on Mark Meadows' memoirs - otherwise probably the most boring book that would have been released this year. So presumably the reporter asked if he/she could record it, and everyone knew it was being recorded. That's how these things work.

But ... try again. Trump is on his 3rd layman's defense now, so maybe he should crowd-source Theory Number 4.

I mean its not evidence in Jack Smiths case.  Was not submitted.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chris farley said:

I mean its not evidence in Jack Smiths case.  Was not submitted.

 

 

It is mentioned in the indictment. It is only "not evidence" in the sense that nothing is evidence yet, but that's because there is a charging document, a plea, and no formal offering of evidence yet.

That will come at trial. Someone would have to be called as a witness to authenticate the tape, the defense may object to its admission on various grounds, and then the judge will decide whether it will be entered into the record as evidence.

There is a lot of confusion out there because a lot of non-lawyer bloggers are trying to analyze legal issues.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Where is this document you refer to? The FBI raided his home and confiscated all of the classified documents. Which specific one was he talking about in the audio? Or is it possible…there isn’t one! 


So this is all a joke?

 

Trump freaking out every day on social media - clearly guilty af - classified documents everywhere in his motel in Florida and you think this is a joke?

 

giphy.gif?cid=2154d3d7ia8z3fvuvl2o5h2z9z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BillStime said:


So this is all a joke?

 

Trump freaking out every day on social media - clearly guilty af - classified documents everywhere in his motel in Florida and you think this is a joke?

 

giphy.gif?cid=2154d3d7ia8z3fvuvl2o5h2z9z

A joke? I didn’t say it was a joke. It’s actually very serious. 
 

Keep it up BillSy, old friend, but your days as King are long over. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Where is this document you refer to? The FBI raided his home and confiscated all of the classified documents. Which specific one was he talking about in the audio? Or is it possible…there isn’t one! 

 

And even if there is one, the chain of custody was broken...

Edited by Doc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

And even if there is one, the chain of custody was broken...

You guys follow this way closer than I do…for some odd reason. The tape I listened to has him referring to a document in his hand, and maybe even some background paper shuffling. I don’t recall him saying that he was actually showing it to them. Not that it matters, as Trump still maintains he was allowed to declassify documents. 
 

To me the more interesting Constitutional question is what should an ex-President do with documents that might implicate certain high up government officials in a plot to overthrow his current or future administration? Is he compelled to return them to some archive office that’ll then shred them? 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SoCal Deek said:

You guys follow this way closer than I do…for some odd reason. The tape I listened to has him referring to a document in his hand, and maybe even some background paper shuffling. I don’t recall him saying that he was actually showing it to them. Not that it matters, as Trump still maintains he was allowed to declassify documents. 
 

To me the more interesting Constitutional question is what should an ex-President do with documents that might implicate certain high up government officials in a plot to overthrow his current or future administration? Is he compelled to return them to some archive office that’ll then shred them? 

 

I was being facetious, referencing the idiot boy laptop and how certain libs are claiming it's bogus because the chain of custody was broken.  And if they move forward with this, they should immediately impeach Joke for having had documents, much less in his garage.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Department of Justice is prepared to seek indictments against multiple figures in former president Donald Trump’s orbit and may yet bring additional charges against the ex-president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned.

According to sources familiar with the matter

 

unsourced and from the old Sputnik Guy Andrew Feinberg?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/16/2023 at 8:42 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Biden didn’t turn the information in “when found”, he possessed the material for more than 20 years, and after a thorough and exhaustive search, the DOJ found additional documents not previously returned.  You’re free to carry water and defend like a true believer, but you’re not free to make declarations that are obviously false.  
 

You cannot possibly know what material Biden had in his possession, which simply means you’re imaging a fact pattern to suit your bias. 
 

The other guy is Joe Biden, pretending not to know his name doesn’t provide cover for your silliness, and he’s relevant because he took and maintained classified material as a Senator, VP, a private citizen when he would have known he absolutely should not have.  

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-shamed-irresponsible-trump-classified-docs-before-wh-admitted-sensitive-vp-records

 

😂

 

These are facts, Kemp, and all your crusading to the contrary doesn’t change that. 

 

If you're bothered by what Biden did, you must believe that Trump should end up jailed for his acts. Right?

 

There are good people on both sides, part 1,745,689.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-defendant-arrested-obamas-home-guns-400-rounds-ammunition-van-rcna92094

Edited by Kemp
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty bizarre that Trump supporters call his detractors Communist.

Why do Trumpers always project their own issues on others?

What else can they do?

Let's face it.

No matter what damning evidence comes out about Trump, they can never address it directly. They can only scream, Hillary and Hunter.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jan-6-defendant-arrested-obamas-home-guns-400-rounds-ammunition-van-rcna92094

 

The walls be closing.


Edit:

i forgot. They can also post emojis. Thanks for reminding me, Deek.

Edited by Kemp
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...