BillsFanNC Posted May 8 Author Posted May 8 3 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: It never disappoints. Parrots MSNBC and the statist script. Yep. Worse than Tibs or Billsfuk.c. At least they embrace being the hacks that they are. The King is constantly making a clown of itself while proclaiming to be above the fray. Pure comedy. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Posted May 8 (edited) Walt Nauta's testimony before the Grand Jury: Grand Juror asks him: when Trump got the National Archives demand for return of certain documents, what did you do? Nauta: Trump told me to just send a dozen random boxes to them. https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/07/politics/mar-a-lago-trump-nauta-classified-documents/index.html We learned this week that that's how the prosecution originated. Remember when Nauta kept asking for continuances before entering a plea? He couldn't get counsel. Until two Trump PACs agreed to take care of it. Do you think maybe - just maybe - Nauta flipped back and won't testify because he now sees what side his bread is buttered on? Mafia style tactics. It worked. Trump effectively derailed the prosecution by playing carrot and stick with little Diet Coke Valet Walt. Trump and Nauta being picked on? No. In any normal prosecution this is witness tampering and Trump would've got himself into even more trouble. But launder the funds through a political PAC and I guess it's ok. https://www.newsweek.com/walt-nauta-paid-trump-pac-fec-1816581 Edited May 8 by The Frankish Reich 2 1
ChiGoose Posted May 8 Posted May 8 50 minutes ago, Pokebball said: You said they "normally don't get prosecuted". Prosecuted for what? Elected officials generally do not get prosecuted for retaining documents if they return them when asked by the feds. The government in those instances is more concerned about recovering the documents and conducting an analysis to understand if there is a potential impact to intelligence operations. By coming hard at anyone who has documents, they would create an incentive for people to hide the documents, making an intelligence assessment impossible. So when the government becomes aware someone has documents they shouldn't, it tells them they will not prosecute them if they turn them over. 55 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: It never disappoints. Parrots MSNBC and the statist script. You know I don't watch MSNBC. I've told you before. But you have to stick to your script, because it comforts your from reality. Actually engaging on the facts might hurt your brain or *gasp* make you rethink the conclusions from which you later determine your "facts" I honestly don't understand the appeal of being willfully ignorant, but you seem to enjoy it. 1
L Ron Burgundy Posted May 8 Posted May 8 1 minute ago, ChiGoose said: Elected officials generally do not get prosecuted for retaining documents if they return them when asked by the feds. The government in those instances is more concerned about recovering the documents and conducting an analysis to understand if there is a potential impact to intelligence operations. By coming hard at anyone who has documents, they would create an incentive for people to hide the documents, making an intelligence assessment impossible. So when the government becomes aware someone has documents they shouldn't, it tells them they will not prosecute them if they turn them over. No. All the president has to do is think declassified and it is so. Never mind the tape where The Great Fupa says he's showing classified material that he didn't declassify. This is just a witch hunt. All of them are. Biden is a comatose criminal mastermind perpetuating a scheme to eliminate the rightful president. 1 1
ChiGoose Posted May 8 Posted May 8 21 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said: No. All the president has to do is think declassified and it is so. Never mind the tape where The Great Fupa says he's showing classified material that he didn't declassify. This is just a witch hunt. All of them are. Biden is a comatose criminal mastermind perpetuating a scheme to eliminate the rightful president. Donald Trump could have intentionally taken the documents with him intending to sell them for money, change his mind and then just like having them around for years and years and years, and he *still* wouldn't get prosecuted if, when the feds asked him to return them, he handed them all over. The guy literally refused to turn them over when asked for almost a year, then hid documents from his lawyer causing his lawyer to lie to the government, told the government he had returned all of the documents when he hadn't, ordered his staff to destroy video evidence of all of this, and somehow people think this is the same as turning documents over when asked. 1 1
4th&long Posted May 8 Posted May 8 2 hours ago, JDHillFan said: It’s ok to hate Trump and not feel the need to make excuses for Biden. They’re both awful. Breaking out the “sharp as a tack” routine makes you seem as dumb as Tiberius. Do you really want that? I didn’t say he is sharp as a tack, I said the people I know are. I’m not a doctor, I never met the man. But to say he’s a bumbling idiot who lost it and can’t run the country? That’s quite the stretch. Every president has a cabinet they take advice from. Just like Biden, I hope trump listens to his. I’m not making excuses for Biden, if you don’t like his policies more power to ya. You don’t hear me saying anything about trump and his age related issues, and his are showing also.
daz28 Posted May 8 Posted May 8 1 minute ago, 4th&long said: I didn’t say he is sharp as a tack, I said the people I know are. I’m not a doctor, I never met the man. But to say he’s a bumbling idiot who lost it and can’t run the country? That’s quite the stretch. Every president has a cabinet they take advice from. Just like Biden, I hope trump listens to his. I’m not making excuses for Biden, if you don’t like his policies more power to ya. You don’t hear me saying anything about trump and his age related issues, and his are showing also. Apparently, an old guy with poopy pants dozing off at his criminal proceedings is better than some other old guy with poopy pants sleeping in the oval office. They're both HORRIBLE options. 1
4th&long Posted May 8 Posted May 8 11 minutes ago, daz28 said: Apparently, an old guy with poopy pants dozing off at his criminal proceedings is better than some other old guy with poopy pants sleeping in the oval office. They're both HORRIBLE options. This i agree with totally! 5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Oh so he didn’t have all these docs at his house? Right! I don’t need left wing stuff to destroy trump. People on the right say it, especially those who were closest to trump. just like I’ll beat you with my team then I’ll take your team and beat you again! 1
daz28 Posted May 8 Posted May 8 2 minutes ago, 4th&long said: Oh so he didn’t have all these docs at his house? Right! The problem here is that the maga clowns are forgetting that even if this evidence was tainted, it was never shown to a jury yet, but somehow that equates to mistrial and TOTAL EXHONERATION! Fantasy land. At worst, Jack Smith should be replaced IF true. It's basically the same ad Fani slept with a coworker = TOTAL EXHONERATION! Funny how they are rooting for the criminal to get off on technicalities here, but every black guy wrongly shot by police was a dirtbag anyways. 2 1
Tommy Callahan Posted May 8 Posted May 8 Lol. How is Casey Hutchinson a thing after being cought plagiarizing and lying on the stand.
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Posted May 8 (edited) 21 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: If these morons would actually read the news instead of these second-hand Julie Kelly commentaries on the news, they'd see this: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/03/mar-a-lago-trump-classified-documents-00156124 The documents were not all in the same boxes in which they were found because classified documents were removed and replaced with a placeholder card before scanning by a contractor. In other words, unlike Trump, they protected the still-classified materials. There was a mistake, and it was in saying to the court that everything was as found. But they admitted that mistake, and explained exactly what it was. It is not "tampering." As far as the cover sheets and the photo on the carpet - I don't think anyone was saying that this was the crime scene as it was found. The documents, including classified cover sheets, were laid out on the carpet after they were discovered. I regret I had to click on Julie from Monsanto's substack to see what she's really saying, and it's this: that the FBI arrayed the documents on the floor, including classified cover sheets that weren't in the same box, in order to make it look worse to the public. If so, that wasn't a great idea, but arranging things to make for a more striking photo isn't the same thing as fabricating evidence or lying to the court. There is a tiny molehill here, but Julie, as usual, knows she can send her fanboys (and aren't they all boys?) into a tizzy by trumpeting this as some kind of Sacco and Vanzetti cause celebre. Edited May 8 by The Frankish Reich 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Posted May 8 2 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Agreed, Trump is actually arguing that Biden should be above the law. Thankfully, Trump is wrong. What has actually happened is that people who have no idea what they are talking about are unable to tell the difference between obstructing an investigation and not obstructing an investigation. It's a sad reflection of our very dumb world. Not really, it's more a reflection of mismanagement and government at the highest levels of our country. When presidents, senators and representatives are allowed to make up their own rules, run their own game, and--as evidenced by Clinton/Biden--do pretty much as they see fit, confusion about what's right or wrong is almost certain to follow. It's human nature, just as it was human nature for those who rather naively postulated that Trump was the only one holding on to documents because their guy hadn't been outted yet. When it became apparent it would be hard for a senator/vp/president to be more guilty of reckless handling and potential disclosure....well, then came slippage. With respect to the big picture, it seems obvious that when laws are written, and selectively enforced, by definition the person who broke said law are above it, or outside its reach. Comey made a point on that issue, as I recall. 2
4th&long Posted May 8 Posted May 8 6 minutes ago, daz28 said: The problem here is that the maga clowns are forgetting that even if this evidence was tainted, it was never shown to a jury yet, but somehow that equates to mistrial and TOTAL EXHONERATION! Fantasy land. At worst, Jack Smith should be replaced IF true. It's basically the same ad Fani slept with a coworker = TOTAL EXHONERATION! Funny how they are rooting for the criminal to get off on technicalities here, but every black guy wrongly shot by police was a dirtbag anyways. That’s all they got. All these cases trump did what they said he did. Like I told my brother once “are you going to try to tell me I didn’t hear what trump said on that phone call to the Georgia Secretary looking for 11,000 votes? “ I’m just happy teeter are some republicans with some morales. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted May 8 Posted May 8 Lefties big mad when the law is not bent to the will of the highly funded mob and it's leaders
daz28 Posted May 8 Posted May 8 1 minute ago, 4th&long said: That’s all they got. All these cases trump did what they said he did. Like I told my brother once “are you going to try to tell me I didn’t hear what trump said on that phone call to the Georgia Secretary looking for 11,000 votes? “ I’m just happy teeter are some republicans with some morales. While I'm 100% certain the phone call was to pressure them, and any jury is likely to feel the same way, I'm not sure he was demanding for them to commit a crime. I've listened to the entire call a few times. I think that call and several other similar moves were to create smoke and doubt, so people would fall for the fake electors plot, and accept it. 1
daz28 Posted May 8 Posted May 8 8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Not really, it's more a reflection of mismanagement and government at the highest levels of our country. When presidents, senators and representatives are allowed to make up their own rules, run their own game, and--as evidenced by Clinton/Biden--do pretty much as they see fit, confusion about what's right or wrong is almost certain to follow. It's human nature, just as it was human nature for those who rather naively postulated that Trump was the only one holding on to documents because their guy hadn't been outted yet. When it became apparent it would be hard for a senator/vp/president to be more guilty of reckless handling and potential disclosure....well, then came slippage. With respect to the big picture, it seems obvious that when laws are written, and selectively enforced, by definition the person who broke said law are above it, or outside its reach. Comey made a point on that issue, as I recall. This idiot Supreme Court ruled the Constitution is not self-executing, so that opens a can of worms that can NEVER be undone. Imagine a world where a president can commit any crime in the world, including treason or a coup, as long as his party holds the House, and refuses to impeach him. Basically, saying the House is above the Constitution. Very very sad times. 1
ChiGoose Posted May 8 Posted May 8 10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Not really, it's more a reflection of mismanagement and government at the highest levels of our country. When presidents, senators and representatives are allowed to make up their own rules, run their own game, and--as evidenced by Clinton/Biden--do pretty much as they see fit, confusion about what's right or wrong is almost certain to follow. It's human nature, just as it was human nature for those who rather naively postulated that Trump was the only one holding on to documents because their guy hadn't been outted yet. When it became apparent it would be hard for a senator/vp/president to be more guilty of reckless handling and potential disclosure....well, then came slippage. With respect to the big picture, it seems obvious that when laws are written, and selectively enforced, by definition the person who broke said law are above it, or outside its reach. Comey made a point on that issue, as I recall. Biden and Pence cooperated with investigators. Trump obstructed investigators. That's really all it is. If Trump didn't want to get prosecuted, he could have just cooperated. If Biden, or Pence had obstructed, they would have been in the same boat as Trump (though for Biden they'd have to wait until he was out of office). There are serious issues with how documents are handled and the laws we have were written for the millions of people who have clearances for their non-elected jobs. Unfortunately, electeds fall in a gray area. We can say we want to change the document controls to make them better, and change the laws to hold electeds more accountable, but today we have to deal with the controls and laws as they are. 9 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: Lefties big mad when the law is not bent to the will of the highly funded mob and it's leaders Righties big mad because they can't understand very basic things so they need to make up big conspiracies to avoid recognizing that even their people might do crimes. 1
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Posted May 8 31 minutes ago, 4th&long said: I didn’t say he is sharp as a tack, I said the people I know are. I’m not a doctor, I never met the man. But to say he’s a bumbling idiot who lost it and can’t run the country? That’s quite the stretch. Every president has a cabinet they take advice from. Just like Biden, I hope trump listens to his. I’m not making excuses for Biden, if you don’t like his policies more power to ya. You don’t hear me saying anything about trump and his age related issues, and his are showing also. 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: If these morons would actually read the news instead of these second-hand Julie Kelly commentaries on the news, they'd see this: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/03/mar-a-lago-trump-classified-documents-00156124 The documents were not all in the same boxes in which they were found because classified documents were removed and replaced with a placeholder card before scanning by a contractor. In other words, unlike Trump, they protected the still-classified materials. There was a mistake, and it was in saying to the court that everything was as found. But they admitted that mistake, and explained exactly what it was. It is not "tampering." As far as the cover sheets and the photo on the carpet - I don't think anyone was saying that this was the crime scene as it was found. The documents, including classified cover sheets, were laid out on the carpet after they were discovered. Come on Frank, you're like Gumby here. The photo was staged, captured and released for maximum effect. It is completely on brand for a special counsel. You shouldn't have to 'think' about what that photo represented--that's what captions and explanations are for. The decision to not offer clarity is the decision made by those who took the photo. The 'mistake' may or may not be intentional, but as I understand it, the acknowledgment of the action was reactionary, not proactive. It's not on the casual observer or Trump legal team to accept the rather convenient explanation. The SC initially grabbed quite a bit of information outside the scope of the warrant. Seems mistakes are par for the course.
Recommended Posts