Mar-a-Largo raided by FBI?

[Shadowy Man]

True, but not among Biden's defenders. Hypocrisy is on display with those failing to see the difference between Trump's blatant obstructionism and Biden's honest cooperation.

To me it's the apoplectic behavior of the "Orange Man Bad" troop. They seeth and gnash that he's the new Hitler (he/him). But then their guy does the same shit, but more embarrassingly. Chef's kiss.

Good news! There is a 4 1/2 minute video that explains why you're dead fucking wrong.



But keep going with your witty rants about hypocrisy on two instances when the context is vastly different. You sound really sane and knowledgeable when you do that.

Trump's latest excuse - and you can't make this stuff up - is that he didn't keep the classified documents at all.

He just kept the folders they came in. Because he thought they would be - his words - a "cool keepsake." You know...because you're a President having a national security briefing in the White House, an aide hands out top secret documents to your advisors, you finish the briefing and when they're gathering up the highly classified material you say "hey, can I take just the folders home with me? I like the pretty words on the front." Then an aide says "Mr. President...you are home. This is where you live. We're having this meeting in your office."

He went on to say that during the "raid," the FBI "planted" actual classified documents in the completely harmless (but totally cool) folders he kept. Because of course.

As weak as it may be, I think the "cool keepsake" thing is to push toward a "no malicious intent" defense on Trump's part. It is what the DoJ looks for in these cases.

If Trump actually had the habit of paying his lawyers they might come up with better defenses.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump rarely gets saddled with the liability of his crimes, so they must be doing well enough. And Trump is so narcissistic, he doesn't even know how stupid he looks. He just knows that it works, so he sticks with it.

 

[TV and credit cards]

.

True, but not among Biden's defenders. Hypocrisy is on display with those failing to see the difference between Trump's blatant obstructionism and Biden's honest cooperation.

To me it's the apoplectic behavior of the "Orange Man Bad" troop. They seeth and gnash that he's the new Hitler (he/him). But then their guy does the same shit, but more embarrassingly. Chef's kiss.

Good news! There is a 4 1/2 minute video that explains why you're dead fucking wrong.



But keep going with your witty rants about hypocrisy on two instances when the context is vastly different. You sound really sane and knowledgeable when you do that.

Trump's latest excuse - and you can't make this stuff up - is that he didn't keep the classified documents at all.

He just kept the folders they came in. Because he thought they would be - his words - a "cool keepsake." You know...because you're a President having a national security briefing in the White House, an aide hands out top secret documents to your advisors, you finish the briefing and when they're gathering up the highly classified material you say "hey, can I take just the folders home with me? I like the pretty words on the front." Then an aide says "Mr. President...you are home. This is where you live. We're having this meeting in your office."

He went on to say that during the "raid," the FBI "planted" actual classified documents in the completely harmless (but totally cool) folders he kept. Because of course.

As weak as it may be, I think the "cool keepsake" thing is to push toward a "no malicious intent" defense on Trump's part. It is what the DoJ looks for in these cases.

Which would have been a barely passable excuse...18 months ago.

As Beau said in the above video, Trump could have staved all this off by saying "wow...had no idea we had this. Here's all the boxes of documents. Whoopsie daisy." Problem solved

DOJ is looking for intent, and they've got it in spades.

Intent to what? Keep classified documents? Harm the United States? I’m wondering what the DoJ is looking to prosecute. I thought it was “intent to harm the United States”. Trying to keep the documents exposes the United States to possible harm but is DoJ looking to prosecute this exposure or are they looking for an attempt to transfer the information?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Intent is huge! Without demonstrating intent for most of the documents, you can't actually prove a crime. Now if there were nuclear docs, mere possession is a crime, if they intended to break the law or not. This is why obstruction is popular because it easier to demonstrate obstruction than intent, because obstruction is upfront and more recent and under the microscope. Where as you have little to go on when a crime is actually being committed.

As we see with the Biden doc issue, the DoJ knows that establishing any precedent can carry phenomenal weight down the road. And the President is provided an unbelievably large amount of leeway to keep these sorts of things from chipping away at the Presidency and partisan bickering. So the DoJ likely needs to demonstrate that Trump committed an act that was well and above what is expected to have been allowed in the past.

Our Constitution really puts Congress in charge of this balance... but Congress started breaking down in the 1980s and fell apart in the last 1990s.

 

[Elixir]

Without demonstrating intent for most of the documents, you can't actually prove a crime.

Bullshit. If you or I had classified material in our possession and defied a subpoena to return it, we’d be in fucking prison. No intent need be considered: you or I would be in jail for breaking the fucking law, regardless of our intent.

 

[Ford]

Yet intent is, as Jimmy said, important. Yuge, even.

Let's step away from high level politics and pick a totally random situation. Let's say you're an actor working on the set of a movie. Names are unimportant, but let's say you're "Alex Maudlin" and the movie is called "Oxidation." It's about taking care of swords in a time before stainless steel.

Anyway, you're swinging around a very sharp katana, and an assistant bringing you your 3rd latte of the morning walks up behind you while you're about to practice the big "twirling blade of death" scene.

Accidentally (of course), you go full Dewey Cox and cut little Nate in half. Doctors try to attach his lower half to his upper half, but fail (gods I hope at least someone gets the reference) and he dies.

Nate is dead. Was it first degree murder? No. You had no intention of slicing through him and the latte. Second degree? Not that either. Yet after an extensive investigation, you are charged with involuntary manslaughter, and your movie career is cut short like Nate's life.

 

[Gun Nut]

Let's keep the double standards rolling.

When Trump does it, "How could that possibly happen, how could anyone be that irresponsible?" When Brandon does it. . . . .

Enumerate the "who did what" for us so we can understand your comment.
What did one person do the same as the other?

I'm just asking for visibility, not because this poster shows any intention on discussing anything... just a one-liner-drop and run.
I washed my hands this morning... killed about a billion bacteria. Hitler round up and murdered millions of Jewish people.
Hitler and myself.. we're exactly the same... murderers, the both of us... apparently it would be a double standard to consider the differences.

Trolls know the difference, but faking obliviousness of the concept of nuance and proportionality is at the core of their MO.

 

[Gun Nut]

.

More embarrassment for Brandon!

THIRD batch of classified documents found at Biden's Delaware home: White House Special Counsel uncovers five more pages after he was sent to investigate when President's attorneys were told they didn't have clearance to keep searching

Daily Mail

Time for the FBI to start a proper search.

Huh?? I thought we were supposed to focus on Hunter?!

Hunter was selling them for coke when he was living in Joe's Garage.

Daily Mail

I thought it was supposed to have been for Russian secrets or Ukrainian something or whatever... get your lies straight!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Without demonstrating intent for most of the documents, you can't actually prove a crime.

Bullshit.

No, not it isn't. You might not agree (and you probably actually do agree), but the law in our country is what it is. And state of mind or mens rea which is Latin for pork with applesauce, is a huge player in court cases. So, don't blame me.

If you or I had classified material in our possession and defied a subpoena to return it, we’d be in fucking prison.

Or we'd need a really good lawyer. Rich people (or people that allege to be rich) have good lawyers. Dots on i's and crosses on t's get exploited by lawyers that good.

No intent need be considered: you or I would be in jail for breaking the fucking law, regardless of our intent.

The nuclear documents I think were illegal to have, regardless of intent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yet intent is, as Jimmy said, important. Yuge, even.

Let's step away from high level politics and pick a totally random situation. Let's say you're an actor working on the set of a movie. Names are unimportant, but let's say you're "Alex Maudlin" and the movie is called "Oxidation." It's about taking care of swords in a time before stainless steel.

Anyway, you're swinging around a very sharp katana, and an assistant bringing you your 3rd latte of the morning walks up behind you while you're about to practice the big "twirling blade of death" scene.

Accidentally (of course), you go full Dewey Cox and cut little Nate in half. Doctors try to attach his lower half to his upper half, but fail (gods I hope at least someone gets the reference) and he dies.

Nate is dead. Was it first degree murder? No. You had no intention of slicing through him and the latte. Second degree? Not that either. Yet after an extensive investigation, you are charged with involuntary manslaughter, and your movie career is cut short like Nate's life.

Or we could just bring up Alec Baldwin.

 

[Gun Nut]

.

True, but not among Biden's defenders. Hypocrisy is on display with those failing to see the difference between Trump's blatant obstructionism and Biden's honest cooperation.

To me it's the apoplectic behavior of the "Orange Man Bad" troop. They seeth and gnash that he's the new Hitler (he/him). But then their guy does the same shit, but more embarrassingly. Chef's kiss.

Good news! There is a 4 1/2 minute video that explains why you're dead fucking wrong.



But keep going with your witty rants about hypocrisy on two instances when the context is vastly different. You sound really sane and knowledgeable when you do that.

Trump's latest excuse - and you can't make this stuff up - is that he didn't keep the classified documents at all.

He just kept the folders they came in. Because he thought they would be - his words - a "cool keepsake." You know...because you're a President having a national security briefing in the White House, an aide hands out top secret documents to your advisors, you finish the briefing and when they're gathering up the highly classified material you say "hey, can I take just the folders home with me? I like the pretty words on the front." Then an aide says "Mr. President...you are home. This is where you live. We're having this meeting in your office."

He went on to say that during the "raid," the FBI "planted" actual classified documents in the completely harmless (but totally cool) folders he kept. Because of course.

As weak as it may be, I think the "cool keepsake" thing is to push toward a "no malicious intent" defense on Trump's part. It is what the DoJ looks for in these cases.

Which would have been a barely passable excuse...18 months ago.

As Beau said in the above video, Trump could have staved all this off by saying "wow...had no idea we had this. Here's all the boxes of documents. Whoopsie daisy." Problem solved

DOJ is looking for intent, and they've got it in spades.

Intent to what? Keep classified documents? Harm the United States? I’m wondering what the DoJ is looking to prosecute. I thought it was “intent to harm the United States”. Trying to keep the documents exposes the United States to possible harm but is DoJ looking to prosecute this exposure or are they looking for an attempt to transfer the information?

Great questions... ones that should be answered.
Some indicators of intent are the juxtaposition of the contraband to other items... for example, Trump had one particularly sensitive document in his desk drawer along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????). WHY was that one document being kept with his passport? what does that say about intent? (it says to me that he intended to flee the Country with something valuable to trade to not get extradited back to the USA)

Trump actively hid documents that he knew were being looked for and obstructed investigation in every possible way he could... what does THAT say about intention?

These are important to answer to be able to determine if he should get the death penalty for Treason or just the rest of his wretched life in prison for all of his intentional, and highly illegal acts.

 

[Gun Nut]

Not to mention, even if the documents were declassified, they are still the government's documents. Declassification doesn't give Trump ownership.

No. Declassification makes them available to every single US citizen. all one needs to do is simply file a freedom of information request and all of the highly sensitive national security secrets that he says were declassified MUST be provided without redaction to anyone that asks for it... .hey, but as long as it serves as some form of maybe potentially usefull defense, then fuck the US national security... Trump needs to expose all of those documents to everyone just in case it might help him stay out of jail for the crimes he committed.
But he knows that wont help him in criminal court... it only can help his drooling cunts that follow him hold on to a three-word-trolline "HE Declassified Them" (therefore no collusion).

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[bilby]

along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????)

I have two passports. It's not uncommon.

In the case of a president or former president, I would suspect that they were not dual citizens, like I am, but rather that they would have both a regular passport and a diplomatic passport. But that's just speculation on my part.

 

[TV and credit cards]

along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????)

I have two passports. It's not uncommon.

In the case of a president or former president, I would suspect that they were not dual citizens, like I am, but rather that they would have both a regular passport and a diplomatic passport. But that's just speculation on my part.

Might have still been in possession of his black diplomatic passport which he should have also surrendered during the transfer of power such as it was, I would think. Sitting next to his regular blue passport.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Intent to what? Keep classified documents? Harm the United States? I’m wondering what the DoJ is looking to prosecute. I thought it was “intent to harm the United States”. Trying to keep the documents exposes the United States to possible harm but is DoJ looking to prosecute this exposure or are they looking for an attempt to transfer the information?

Great questions... ones that should be answered.
Some indicators of intent are the juxtaposition of the contraband to other items... for example, Trump had one particularly sensitive document in his desk drawer along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????). WHY was that one document being kept with his passport? what does that say about intent? (it says to me that he intended to flee the Country with something valuable to trade to not get extradited back to the USA)

Trump actively hid documents that he knew were being looked for and obstructed investigation in every possible way he could... what does THAT say about intention?

These are important to answer to be able to determine if he should get the death penalty for Treason or just the rest of his wretched life in prison for all of his intentional, and highly illegal acts.

My thinking is, there are plenty of people working for the government that work with classified material day in and day out. They likely have to take it home from time to time unless they are expected to stay at the office all hours of the night. They likely have to travel with classified material and/or may have it on a laptop. I'm guessing, but my point is, they need enough latitude with these documents to do their job effectively. This is why I think the DoJ leans heavily on intent of harm to the country.

 

[ZiprHead]

along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????)

I have two passports. It's not uncommon.

In the case of a president or former president, I would suspect that they were not dual citizens, like I am, but rather that they would have both a regular passport and a diplomatic passport. But that's just speculation on my part.

IIRC, one was Trump's diplomatic PP and the other his personal one.

Oops. Ninja'd.

 

[Elixir]

E; No intent need be considered: you or I would be in jail for breaking the fucking law, regardless of our intent.

JH: The nuclear documents I think were illegal to have, regardless of intent.

I agree that the most serious charges that could be levied against Cheato require "proof" of intent, and overwhelming evidence is the lowest bar that needs to be cleared to satisfy that requirement and get a conviction. But there are lesser charges that don't require proof of intent that would get (at least) most of us here some serious incarceration.

 

[Elixir]

ACTUAL MAGA: We're going to crash the economy and pretend we have cause
to lock up the bad bad people doing this witch hunt!

 

[Gun Nut]

along with TWO passports (why does he even have two????)

I have two passports. It's not uncommon.

In the case of a president or former president, I would suspect that they were not dual citizens, like I am, but rather that they would have both a regular passport and a diplomatic passport. But that's just speculation on my part.

Oh, that's interesting.. didn;t know about presidents (and presumably many other gov officials) getting some other passport.
I thought it was that he had dual citizenship in Scotland and that was the other passport... I said LONG ago (like 2017) that he would flee to Scotland where I suspect he has citizenship there.

regardless... the point is the document, not how many passports... but thank you for that!