4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

It doesn't matter if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, so why should an Espionage Act violation matter?

---

Funny how the Espionage Act is now being invoked, Obama loved it. Remember, he had people tried under the Espionage act for leaks to the media. Remember Obama on TV saying leaks costs lives. Funny how under Trump, how many people could have been tried using that reationale? Now, it is vogue again to use the Espionage Act with Biden.

But, if you want to sink someone it is a very good weapon. If I remember correctly, it is almost impossible to defend against. You can't use any of the information, it is classified. For National Security, you are basically considered guilty until proven innocent and those determining guilt are those that accused you in fhe first place.

Hear, Hear, Obama finally stepped in and said enough, after all he should know he used it 7 times.. This should be good.

---

Booray said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

It doesn't matter if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, so why should an Espionage Act violation matter?

---

Funny how the Espionage Act is now being invoked, Obama loved it. Remember, he had people tried under the Espionage act for leaks to the media. Remember Obama on TV saying leaks costs lives. Funny how under Trump, how many people could have been tried using that reationale? Now, it is vogue again to use the Espionage Act with Biden.

But, if you want to sink someone it is a very good weapon. If I remember correctly, it is almost impossible to defend against. You can't use any of the information, it is classified. For National Security, you are basically considered guilty until proven innocent and those determining guilt are those that accused you in fhe first place.

Hear, Hear, Obama finally stepped in and said enough, after all he should know he used it 7 times.. This should be good.

---

Yes, Obama was aggressive in using the espionage act against government officals who whistle blew with classified information. How ist that point related to the issue of Donald Trump taking government property, some of whihc may be classified?

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

Dem alternative was not good, but y'all fell for his bull**** and still are. He could **** on your face and you would try to find a diamond. And I'm a republican BTW.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

Dem alternative was not good, but y'all fell for his bull**** and still are. He could **** on your face and house try to find a diamond. And I'm a republican BTW.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

Dem alternative was not good, but y'all fell for his bull**** and still are. He could **** on your face and house try to find a diamond. And I'm a republican BTW.

---

I am not. I actually don't want him to run. But, in a 2 party system, you don't get great choices. His policies are better, regardless of the rest that comes with him. Somebody is going to sit in that seat and voting for the Green Party or Libertarians is not going to do anything. So, life has good times and **** time, you put your head down and grind through the ***** That is where I think we are in politics. I hope some better candidates come forward.

---

HuMcK said:

---

Let's be honest, there is no time frame you would be satisfied with, so enough with the "election year" nonsense. Trump isn't even on the ballot in 2022, it's technically not an election year for him. Your arguments about timing or supposed bias are not persuasive, they are deflections because you can't credibly say that Trump didn't do what he's accused of.

---

RMF5630 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Let's be honest, there is no time frame you would be satisfied with, so enough with the "election year" nonsense. Trump isn't even on the ballot in 2022, it's technically not an election year for him. Your arguments about timing or supposed bias are not persuasive, they are deflections because you can't credibly say that Trump didn't do what he's accused of.

---

Come on, 2022 is not an election year that Trump is involved? Why the delay? If it is so grievous to use the Espionage Act of 1917 for documents that left when he did in January 2020, why are we discussing now in 2022 3 months before the House and Senate come up for the midterms?

Geez, if you think that DOING ANYTHING to get Trump off the ballot is worth it. Great, disagree but I can see the point. But to say something like this? Did you spit your coffee on the keyboard trying to keep a straight face?

Yeah, this on the up and up. They would be doing this for anyone. "I got some ocean front property in Arizona..."

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

Some would say obtaining this information is *checks notes* "un-American, unwarranted, and unnecessary." But if it's what you want, you're in luck. DOJ is on the case!

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

Some would say obtaining this information is *checks notes* "un-American, unwarranted, and unnecessary." But if it's what you want, you're in luck. DOJ is on the case!

---

posting a message doesnt mean it voices my opinion.. signed a real journalist.

Thanks for playing!

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

Some would say obtaining this information is *checks notes* "un-American, unwarranted, and unnecessary." But if it's what you want, you're in luck. DOJ is on the case!

---

posting a message doesnt mean it voices my opinion.. signed a real journalist.

Thanks for playing!

---

What's your real opinion?

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC %A0793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? %A0He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. %A0 %A0articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. %A0as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

Some would say obtaining this information is *checks notes* "un-American, unwarranted, and unnecessary." But if it's what you want, you're in luck. DOJ is on the case!

---

posting a message doesnt mean it voices my opinion.. signed a real journalist.

Thanks for playing!

---

What's your real opinion?

---

ask a specific question, i will do my best to honestly answer it.

---

New from NYT: A least one Trump lawyer signed a statement on June 3 that all documents marked as classified and held in boxes in storage at Mar-a-Lago had been given back.

The FBI search this week turned up more.https://t.co/KwLoL2lNvt

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) August 13, 2022

LateSteak69 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

LateSteak69 said:

---

Have to give him credit here. He actually pulled it off.

---

What does that say about the Democrat alternative?? Hillary was SO BAD that Trump was able to say this stuff and win. Not only that, after all the crap since November 2020 his polling numbers are stronger than ever. As a Dem, don't you look at you platform, policies and candidates and say we are doing something wrong??

---

Dem alternative was not good, but y'all fell for his bull**** and still are. He could **** on your face and house try to find a diamond. And I'm a republican BTW.

---

I am not. I actually don't want him to run. But, in a 2 party system, you don't get great choices. His policies are better, regardless of the rest that comes with him. Somebody is going to sit in that seat and voting for the Green Party or Libertarians is not going to do anything. So, life has good times and **** time, you put your head down and grind through the ***** That is where I think we are in politics. I hope some better candidates come forward.

---

Agreed.

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oh?

A lawyer for former President Donald Trump reportedly signed a written statement in June to the DOJ claiming that all classified material had been returned to the government—despite a search this week proving the opposite, according to The New York Times. https://t.co/sABziu4W88

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) August 13, 2022

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oh?

New from NYT: A least one Trump lawyer signed a statement on June 3 that all documents marked as classified and held in boxes in storage at Mar-a-Lago had been given back.

The FBI search this week turned up more.https://t.co/KwLoL2lNvt

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) August 13, 2022

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oh?

New from NYT: A least one Trump lawyer signed a statement on June 3 that all documents marked as classified and held in boxes in storage at Mar-a-Lago had been given back.

The FBI search this week turned up more.https://t.co/KwLoL2lNvt

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) August 13, 2022

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Oh?

A lawyer for former President Donald Trump reportedly signed a written statement in June to the DOJ claiming that all classified material had been returned to the government—despite a search this week proving the opposite, according to The New York Times. https://t.co/sABziu4W88

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) August 13, 2022

---

He wasn't lying. What he did by making that statement was retroactively declassify everything on behalf of the president in case it should be found at some later time that Trump won the election. Which makes it de facto Trump's property and off limits for investigation. See the Constitution.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC %A0793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? %A0He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. %A0 %A0articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

is that a constitutionally limiting reason?

SCOTUS has already ruled in cases like this, if it isnt a constitutional limitation, it doesnt matter.. %A0as they said in the opinion, let the people decide their leadership

---

I'm talking about the people, you and me. Does it matter to you?

---

sure it matters. I am also smart enough to be informed and wait for information.

Under all my smart/comedic remarks, there is an intellegent person.

---

Some would say obtaining this information is *checks notes* "un-American, unwarranted, and unnecessary." But if it's what you want, you're in luck. DOJ is on the case!

---

posting a message doesnt mean it voices my opinion.. signed a real journalist.

Thanks for playing!

---

What's your real opinion?

---

ask a specific question, i will do my best to honestly answer it.

---

Do you think the search was justified in order to find out whether Trump violated the Espionage Act?

---

Booray said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

It doesn't matter if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, so why should an Espionage Act violation matter?

---

Ends justify the means right ?

Stalin provided the blueprint.....' show trials' .

Just charge Trump for spying for the Russians, for the Chinese .....or for spying for the Vatican. Who cares ?

And it Trump doesn't 'confess' line up his family against the wall.

If he does 'confess' then spare Trump's family but by all means line him up against the wall.





Its for the betterment of the country after all .

To protect democracy .

---

It seems obvious that the government had asked for documents and subpoeaned documents.Trump-as his M.O. blew all that off. At some point, you have to either go take them or say" The law does not apply to former presidents."

But that is the equivalent of mass executions? A bit much even for a drama queen like you.

By the way, when are the Dems going to get around to revoking the filibuster rule, making Puerto Rico and D.C. states and packing the Supremen Court? A point I bring up becuase those were your drama queen points when Biden was elected.

---

whiterock said:

---

Text I just got from a long-time good friend, Trump bashing Democrat, former DOE analyst who lost his career over fighting with Bush Admin over whether or not Saddam had WMDs:

"I agree, so far this looks like a classic case of "can't get them him on anything else, get him on a security violation."

Bingo

---

4th and Inches said:

---

"I don't know what, was shipped down there because I wasn't the GSA people moving those documents, only they do," he said. "They packed them. They admitted that they packed them, which is their job and transported them there and stored them somewhere."

The govt put the files and stuff there yet Trump took them.. LOL

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Booray said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

whiterock said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

ScruffyD said:

---

the warrant covers the espionage act. therefore, proof would have to have been provided to a judge.

---

18 USC 793 - also called the Espionage Act. This statute "prohibits communicating, transmitting, or delivering to any person not entitled to receive it 'any document, writing, ... or note relating to the national defense,' or attempting to do so."

So they hve proof he tried to give it to somebody? He is entitled to have it based on 1987 SCOTUS ruling..

---

see above. articles/documents do not have to have formal classification indicators to be treated, properly, as classified material.

---

as soon as trump shows all the records he has are not classified, most of it goes to PRA issues which is an absolute nightmare for the Biden admin as it appears they were targeting a political opponent..

---

That is not going to happen. You're dramatically over-reading both the SCOTUS precedent and the Meadows memo.

---

we will see

Based on what has come out so far, it looks as bad for Biden admin as it does for Trump. If it clears him from the fielf, great!

Watch dems get their rears kicked in November and again in 2024 no matter who is GOP canidate..

---

It doesn't matter if the GOP candidate violated the Espionage Act?

---

It doesn't matter if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, so why should an Espionage Act violation matter?

---

Ends justify the means right ?

Stalin provided the blueprint.....' show trials' .

Just charge Trump for spying for the Russians, for the Chinese .....or for spying for the Vatican. Who cares ?

And it Trump doesn't 'confess' line up his family against the wall.

If he does 'confess' then spare Trump's family but by all means line him up against the wall.





Its for the betterment of the country after all .

To protect democracy .

---

It seems obvious that the government had asked for documents and subpoeaned documents.Trump-as his M.O. blew all that off. At some point, you have to either go take them or say" The law does not apply to former presidents."

But that is the equivalent of mass executions? A bit much even for a drama queen like you.

By the way, when are the Dems going to get around to revoking the filibuster rule, making Puerto Rico and D.C. states and packing the Supremen Court? A point I bring up becuase those were your drama queen points when Biden was elected.

---

Don't give a damn about Trump....you shouldn't either .

Instead you are attempting to 'justify' a blatant abuse of authority for political advantage .

Believe me ....if Republicans were doing such incredible bull**** to Barrack Hussein Obama.........I would be just as angry . Because its implications for the future of the United States and its people would be just as grim.

Of course in THAT case you would be be right there with me .

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Let's be honest, there is no time frame you would be satisfied with, so enough with the "election year" nonsense. Trump isn't even on the ballot in 2022, it's technically not an election year for him. Your arguments about timing or supposed bias are not persuasive, they are deflections because you can't credibly say that Trump didn't do what he's accused of.

---

Come on, 2022 is not an election year that Trump is involved? Why the delay? If it is so grievous to use the Espionage Act of 1917 for documents that left when he did in January 2020, why are we discussing now in 2022 3 months before the House and Senate come up for the midterms?

Geez, if you think that DOING ANYTHING to get Trump off the ballot is worth it. Great, disagree but I can see the point. But to say something like this? Did you spit your coffee on the keyboard trying to keep a straight face?

Yeah, this on the up and up. They would be doing this for anyone. "I got some ocean front property in Arizona..."

---

Man, you are really doubling down on the "negotiations and subpoenas are bad" retcon. Did you even hear yourself a few days ago?

---

C. Jordan said:

---

So now we know:

The government had been negotiating for months to get these documents.

The search came about because of a legally executed search warrant through federal court.

No one would have known about the search had not Trump tried to use it to his political advantage

The FBI found documents that had the highest secret classification.

Trump cannot wave a magic wand and retroactively and proactively declassify documents.

The way the charges are framed, it doesn't matter if he had declassified them or not.

Breaking these laws are serious matters.

What we don't know:

Why Trump took these documents

Trump's specific knowledge about these documents.

What the top secret documents were about.

The rhetoric of Trump and his supporters have put the lives of FBI agents and DOF officials in danger. They already have blood on their hands with the incident in Ohio.

Once again, for Republicans Blue Lives Matter only sometimes.

---