Trump suggests he is about to be charged in Mar-a-Lago classified documents case

[Didba 5,538]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-classified-documents-charges-mar-a-lago-b2351874.html

[creed 1,818]

And he should be charged, he stole our documents. There is zero reason any present or past federal government employee (our employees) to take any kind of work document away from the office. I think this should include current or past government employee. Employees who steal our documents should be removed from their position and not have the priveledge of returning or being re-elected to a government position. They cannot claim ignorance, because they recieve annual training on identification and protection of documents.

This applies to President Biden too. He should be walked off the job. 

Is it not interesting that once topic secret documents were found to be collected by Biden this story dried up a last year. 

 

Edited June 6, 2023 by creed

[aubaseball 2,898]

4 minutes ago, creed said:

And he should be charged, he stole our documents. There is zero reason any present or past federal government employee (our employees) to take any kind of work document away from the office. I think this should include current or past government employee. Employees who steal our documents should be removed from their position and not have the priveledge of returning or being re-elected to a government position. They cannot claim ignorance, because they recieved annual training on identification and protection of documents.

Do you feel the same about the current president?  He had documents in his car.  

[creed 1,818]

2 minutes ago, aubaseball said:

Do you feel the same about the current president?  He had documents in his car.  

Yep. I edited my post to include him.

[TexasTiger 14,523]

18 minutes ago, creed said:

And he should be charged, he stole our documents. There is zero reason any present or past federal government employee (our employees) to take any kind of work document away from the office. I think this should include current or past government employee. Employees who steal our documents should be removed from their position and not have the priveledge of returning or being re-elected to a government position. They cannot claim ignorance, because they recieve annual training on identification and protection of documents.

This applies to President Biden too. He should be walked off the job. 

Is it not interesting that once topic secret documents were found to be collected by Biden this story dried up a last year. 

 

What do you know about the facts of the two cases you’re equating?

[creed 1,818]

10 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What do you know about the facts of the two cases you’re equating?

That our documents were found somewhere other than the place they should have been without anyone knowing is enough for me. Any work related document found after employment is a no-no.

[TexasTiger 14,523]

1 minute ago, creed said:

That our documents were found somewhere other than the place they should have been without anyone knowing is enough for me. Any work related document found after employment is a no-no.

Ok. Know any distinctions you think are important?

[creed 1,818]

24 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Ok. Know any distinctions you think are important?

Yes. If any documents were created as part of your duties “work related” regardless of classification then they shall remain under security. 

[TexasTiger 14,523]

2 minutes ago, creed said:

Yes. If any documents were created as part of your duties “work related” regardless of classification then they shall remain under security. 

What about clear intentionality? Refusal to respond to a subpoena to return then vs. being fully cooperative? Concealing them from a search? Sharing them with others who lack clearance?

[creed 1,818]

20 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What about clear intentionality? Refusal to respond to a subpoena to return then vs. being fully cooperative? Concealing them from a search? Sharing them with others who lack clearance?

Then you get a weaker sentence but still removed from the job. 

[TexasTiger 14,523]

5 minutes ago, creed said:

Then you get a weaker sentence but still removed from the job. 

So if Biden’s files were from his vice presidency and he was since elected after any “violation” that may exist, then what?

And realistically, these guys don’t pack and move themselves. Absent clear evidence of personal involvement, is there a violation?

[creed 1,818]

Removed from the job immediately. 

[TexasTiger 14,523]

1 minute ago, creed said:

Removed from the job immediately. 

Did you read the second paragraph?

[creed 1,818]

Yes I read it.  
 

plausible deniability is not a defense in my opinion. 
 

Edited June 6, 2023 by creed

[aubiefifty 18,443]

3 hours ago, aubaseball said:

Do you feel the same about the current president?  He had documents in his car.  

he did not hide any after he was asked to give them back......twice either.

[aubiefifty 18,443]

 

Donald Trump is scared shitless right now. he has every ******* reason to be

indictment season heats up

Jeff Tiedrich

Jun 6

things are not looking good right now for the once-indicted twice-impeached popular-vote-losing insurrection-leading serial-sexual-predating casino-bankrupting hush-money-paying real-estate-scamming classified-war-plan-thieving weather-map-defacing tax-cheating charity-defrauding money-laundering fluorescent tangerine ****face holed up in his s***ty vermin-infested Florida golf motel.

allow me to explain.

yesterday morning, Donald Trump’s dime-store lawyers were seen entering DOJ headquarters.

why is this bad news for Donald?

because they were there to beg Jack Smith not to indict their client.

“you want me to what? you make me laugh. now get the **** out of my sight.”

how do we know this? because a meeting between prosecutors and their target’s legal team is generally the one of the last things that happens before indictments are handed down.

let me to turn to an expert who can explain this much better than I can: Renato Mariotti, former federal prosecutor, current practicing lawyer and, with Asha Rangappa, co-host of the It’s Complicated podcast.

here’s Mariotti on the June 2 episode of the podcast, explaining:

“it is very commonplace — in fact, it is, I would say, expected — that before a defendent is charged by a prosecutor, the prosecutor usually lets the defense attorney know. defense attorneys usually come in and they make what’s called a ‘pitch’ to some sort of group of supervisors in that office, to basically try to convince them that actually they’re making a big mistake, and that their guy doesn’t deserve to be charged and that there are all these things they’re missing, and so on and so forth.”

“most of the time, these pitches are, ‘my client’s a fantastic person, Donald Trump has got a great charitable foundation, he’s a great father, he’s very old, he’s going to die in prison,’ all of these things, and it doesn’t persuade them. that’s usually how these go. but you have to go through the motions and take your shot.”

so, that’s what happened yestereday morning. Donald Trump’s lawyers went through the motions, and took their shot.

and how did the meeting go, Donald?

oh dear. enjoy prison, my dude.

everyone is entitled to my own opinion is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

[Didba 5,538]

On 6/6/2023 at 10:51 AM, TexasTiger said:

Absent clear evidence of personal involvement, is there a violation?

Nope.