The Walls be Closing

[BillStime]

17 minutes ago, Chris farley said:

the boy that cried wolf is a very old story that you seemed to miss.

 

once integrity is gone, its very hard to get back.

 

 

 

Um, you defend this POS 24 7 365:

 

 

Please do NOT ever use the word integrity again - because you have NONE.

[Tommy Callahan]

^^^^^^^^^^^ absolutely no integrity, lacks basic problem-solving skills, is obsessed with that orange guy^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

 

[BillStime]

3 hours ago, Chris farley said:

^^^^^^^^^^^ absolutely no integrity, lacks basic problem-solving skills, is obsessed with that orange guy^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

 

[JaCrispy]

5 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

Meh…must be a slow news day…I don’t even care about the boxes of documents Biden had…🤣🤣🤣

[Governor]

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Meh…must be a slow news day…I don’t even care about the boxes of documents Biden had…🤣🤣🤣

What about Hillary’s emails?

[ChiGoose]

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Meh…must be a slow news day…I don’t even care about the boxes of documents Biden had…🤣🤣🤣

 

7 minutes ago, Governor said:

What about Hillary’s emails?

It’s almost as if there’s an intent component of the law…

[Joe Ferguson forever]

https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump-denies-reports-hes-been-told-hes-getting-indicted-as-his-own-truth-social-alerts-users-its-imminent/

"Pizzagate conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec also claimed that Trump will be indicted next week, adding further fuel to the flames and hyping up the MAGA base."

This is fun!

Edited June 7, 2023 by redtail hawk

[BillStime]

 

[JaCrispy]

53 minutes ago, Governor said:

What about Hillary’s emails?

Oh, that’s so 2010’s…gotta get with the time my man…😉

[Doc]

1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

It’s almost as if there’s an intent component of the law…

 

Yup.  Good luck proving what Trump intended to do with the classified information.

[ChiGoose]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yup.  Good luck proving what Trump intended to do with the classified information.

You don’t have to prove what he wanted to do with it, you just need to prove that he intended to take or keep it. 

[Westside]

5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

You don’t have to prove what he wanted to do with it, you just need to prove that he intended to take or keep it. 

Then joke biden is dead in the water. Add in bribery, corruption, money laundering, he should spend the last few years in a prison cell.

[ChiGoose]

14 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yup.  Good luck proving what Trump intended to do with the classified information.

What argument are you going to make in a court of law that convinces a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe Biden himself personally intended to take the documents?

 

Remember, mere possession isn’t enough. His defense will be that he didn’t personally pack the boxes, didn’t know the docs were in there, and when he discovered them, he immediately notified authorities and cooperated fully. 
 

Additionally, his defense attorney would seek to admit into evidence the information about Pence’s documents to underscore that there is a problem with security around these documents and spillage is more common that we would think.

[Doc]

1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

What argument are you going to make in a court of law that convinces a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe Biden himself personally intended to take the documents?

 

Remember, mere possession isn’t enough. His defense will be that he didn’t personally pack the boxes, didn’t know the docs were in there, and when he discovered them, he immediately notified authorities and cooperated fully. 
 

Additionally, his defense attorney would seek to admit into evidence the information about Pence’s documents to underscore that there is a problem with security around these documents and spillage is more common that we would think.

 

Ah so all you care about is what a court of law thinks?  You don't care that Biden had them and what he might have done with them.  He's so trustworthy, right?  Having documents all over the place and in unsecured locations means nothing, it was all just accidental and not his fault.  Congrats, you're exactly how they want you to be.

[ChiGoose]

6 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Ah so all you care about is what a court of law thinks?  You don't care that Biden had them and what he might have done with them.  He's so trustworthy, right?  Having documents all over the place and in unsecured locations means nothing, it was all just accidental and not his fault.  Congrats, you're exactly how they want you to be.

No, I care what the facts show. If Biden knew he had them and was using them, he should be indicted. 

[Doc]

1 minute ago, ChiGoose said:

No, I care what the facts show. If Biden knew he had them and was using them, he should be indicted. 

 

Yes because if you can't prove it, it didn't happen, right? 

[ChiGoose]

17 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yes because if you can't prove it, it didn't happen, right? 

No, but if you can’t prove it, it’s difficult to enact consequences.

[Tenhigh]

2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

What argument are you going to make in a court of law that convinces a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Joe Biden himself personally intended to take the documents?

 

Remember, mere possession isn’t enough. His defense will be that he didn’t personally pack the boxes, didn’t know the docs were in there, and when he discovered them, he immediately notified authorities and cooperated fully. 
 

Additionally, his defense attorney would seek to admit into evidence the information about Pence’s documents to underscore that there is a problem with security around these documents and spillage is more common that we would think.

Willful negligence?

[Biden is Mentally Fit]

25 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

Willful negligence?

No. It was repeated accidental spillage that others made happen to Biden over a period of many years back to his senate days. Why is that so hard to believe? 

[ChiGoose]

28 minutes ago, Tenhigh said:

Willful negligence?

The statutes in question generally require actual intention. While you may be able to justify a charge under gross negligence, you’d be very unlikely to succeed, or even survive a motion to dismiss.