as sam said, wrong code..Osodecentx said:I don't know if this is where the Feds are headed. From NYTimes:Sam Lowry said:Probably not. I don't think that's the angle here.4th and Inches said:does that one say if you take some records then you cant run for re-election?Sam Lowry said:We're dealing with a different statute, 44 USC 2201-2209 (Presidential Records Act).Redbrickbear said:Ok I'll play along...lets look at the law.Sam Lowry said:Everyone seems to be hypothesizing that Trump is innocent. It's fair to ask what if he isn't.canoso said:Objection, your Honor. Calls for hypothesizing.Sam Lowry said:
What do you all think the Justice Department should do if a former president illegally hoards classified documents?
[Under 18 U.S.C. 2071, individuals who willfully remove or destroy records "filed or deposited" in "any public office" --- or who attempt to do so --- may be subject to fines or up to three years of imprisonment if they deprive the government use of those documents (United States v. Rosner, 352 F. Supp. 915 (S.D.N.Y. 1972)).
Under 18 U.S.C. 1924, individuals who remove classified materials without authority and with intent to retain them at another location may be fined or subject to imprisonment of up to five years.]
Of course a Constitutional argument can be made that the President of the USA, as Chief of the Executive Branch of the Federal Gov., has the authority to retain such documents and chose the location they are stored.
But if the Regime really wants, and gets some loyalist Judges to play along, it can probably put Trump away for a few years.
But the law that has attracted particular attention is Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which makes it a crime if someone who has custody of government documents or records "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies or destroys" them. Section 2071 is not limited to classified information.
If convicted under that law, defendants can be fined up to $2,000 and sentenced to prison for up to three years. In addition, the statute says, if they are currently in a federal office, they "shall forfeit" that office, and perhaps most importantly, given widespread expectations that Mr. Trump will seek re-election again they shall "be disqualified from holding" any federal office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/09/us/politics/trump-fbi-investigation.html
FBI raids Trump's home
151,598 Views |
2081 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by Harrison Bergeron
Even if it is the right code, this says that Congress can't add to requirements for office.4th and Inches said:as sam said, wrong code..Osodecentx said:I don't know if this is where the Feds are headed. From NYTimes:Sam Lowry said:Probably not. I don't think that's the angle here.4th and Inches said:does that one say if you take some records then you cant run for re-election?Sam Lowry said:We're dealing with a different statute, 44 USC 2201-2209 (Presidential Records Act).Redbrickbear said:Ok I'll play along...lets look at the law.Sam Lowry said:Everyone seems to be hypothesizing that Trump is innocent. It's fair to ask what if he isn't.canoso said:Objection, your Honor. Calls for hypothesizing.Sam Lowry said:
What do you all think the Justice Department should do if a former president illegally hoards classified documents?
[Under 18 U.S.C. 2071, individuals who willfully remove or destroy records "filed or deposited" in "any public office" --- or who attempt to do so --- may be subject to fines or up to three years of imprisonment if they deprive the government use of those documents (United States v. Rosner, 352 F. Supp. 915 (S.D.N.Y. 1972)).
Under 18 U.S.C. 1924, individuals who remove classified materials without authority and with intent to retain them at another location may be fined or subject to imprisonment of up to five years.]
Of course a Constitutional argument can be made that the President of the USA, as Chief of the Executive Branch of the Federal Gov., has the authority to retain such documents and chose the location they are stored.
But if the Regime really wants, and gets some loyalist Judges to play along, it can probably put Trump away for a few years.
But the law that has attracted particular attention is Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which makes it a crime if someone who has custody of government documents or records "willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies or destroys" them. Section 2071 is not limited to classified information.
If convicted under that law, defendants can be fined up to $2,000 and sentenced to prison for up to three years. In addition, the statute says, if they are currently in a federal office, they "shall forfeit" that office, and perhaps most importantly, given widespread expectations that Mr. Trump will seek re-election again they shall "be disqualified from holding" any federal office.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/09/us/politics/trump-fbi-investigation.html
The Supreme Court has never ruled on a presidential candidate whose eligibility was challenged based on a conviction under a law whose penalties included disqualification from office. But there have been cases involving Congress that raised analogous disputes.
In a 1969 case, the Supreme Court rejected an attempt by the House of Representatives, by majority vote, to block Adam Clayton Powell Jr. from taking his seat; voters in his district had re-elected him despite allegations of misconduct. The court ruled that, because he met the Constitution's eligibility criteria to be a House member, "the House was without power to exclude him from its membership."
Citing Alexander Hamilton, Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in that majority opinion that "a fundamental principle of our representative democracy is that "the people should choose whom they please to govern them."
And in a 1995 case, the Supreme Court struck down an amendment to the Arkansas constitution that had attempted to impose term limits on federal House members and senators elected from that state. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the state had no power to add qualifications to the list of eligibility criteria established by the federal Constitution.
Citing those and other precedents in an aside in a 2000 case before the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, Judge Richard Posner, who has been deemed the most cited American legal scholar of all time, asserted that Congress lacked authority to supplement the eligibility requirements for the presidency listed in the Constitution.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/09/us/politics/trump-fbi-investigation.html
What they found:
"It almost looks like the FBI was designed to spy on Americans who might be disagreeing with policy—especially foreign policy" - @RonPaul
— Liam McCollum (@MLiamMcCollum) August 9, 2022
In his 1988 @LPNational presidential run, Ron Paul said we should #AbolishTheFBI.
As always, #RonPaulWasRight. pic.twitter.com/ZqKJzYIN01
FBI attack on Mar-A-Lago reminds immigrant of Cuba 1959
A lot of Americans are saying they woke up this morning, August 9, and did not recognize the country in which they have lived their entire lives.
I received a text from one friend whose family escaped Cuba before the communist revolution there. The text was very short:
"Cuba 1959."
I believe there's a lot of truth to the comparison.
But revolutions and coup plots do not happen overnight. They take months and even years of planning, with most of the heavy lifting of infiltrating and taking over the institutions performed while the masses are sound asleep, busy making money, raising families, enjoying the good times that a free society offers them.
Then when the coup plotters have all their pieces in place, they lower the boom. And everyone is gripped by feelings of confusion, physical and emotional paralysis. But most of all, they feel shock.
We should not have been shocked.
https://leohohmann.com/2022/08/09/fbi-attack-on-mar-a-lago-reminds-immigrant-of-cuba-1959/#more-10683
A lot of Americans are saying they woke up this morning, August 9, and did not recognize the country in which they have lived their entire lives.
I received a text from one friend whose family escaped Cuba before the communist revolution there. The text was very short:
"Cuba 1959."
I believe there's a lot of truth to the comparison.
But revolutions and coup plots do not happen overnight. They take months and even years of planning, with most of the heavy lifting of infiltrating and taking over the institutions performed while the masses are sound asleep, busy making money, raising families, enjoying the good times that a free society offers them.
Then when the coup plotters have all their pieces in place, they lower the boom. And everyone is gripped by feelings of confusion, physical and emotional paralysis. But most of all, they feel shock.
We should not have been shocked.
https://leohohmann.com/2022/08/09/fbi-attack-on-mar-a-lago-reminds-immigrant-of-cuba-1959/#more-10683
Married A Horn
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Scattershooting while wondering how much time Sandy Burger deal from stealing damaging documents from the National Archives.
Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
Did the FBI raid the Clinton compound for attacking our democracy?Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
Just endless, mindless persecution.Sam Lowry said:You mean the one that ended with no prosecution?Wangchung said:Yeah right. You people still call him a Russian agent and now you want us to believe that there is a possibility the people going after him might find him innocent? Even if they did, it wouldn't change the narrative at all. Again, just look at the Russian collusion hoax.TexasScientist said:If everything is "perfect" like Trump says, he has nothing to be concerned about.Redbrickbear said:I have been looking for that for a while now on the internet....I did find this.4th and Inches said:does that one say if you take some records then you cant run for re-election?Sam Lowry said:We're dealing with a different statute, 44 USC 2201-2209 (Presidential Records Act).Redbrickbear said:Ok I'll play along...lets look at the law.Sam Lowry said:Everyone seems to be hypothesizing that Trump is innocent. It's fair to ask what if he isn't.canoso said:Objection, your Honor. Calls for hypothesizing.Sam Lowry said:
What do you all think the Justice Department should do if a former president illegally hoards classified documents?
[Under 18 U.S.C. 2071, individuals who willfully remove or destroy records "filed or deposited" in "any public office" --- or who attempt to do so --- may be subject to fines or up to three years of imprisonment if they deprive the government use of those documents (United States v. Rosner, 352 F. Supp. 915 (S.D.N.Y. 1972)).
Under 18 U.S.C. 1924, individuals who remove classified materials without authority and with intent to retain them at another location may be fined or subject to imprisonment of up to five years.]
Of course a Constitutional argument can be made that the President of the USA, as Chief of the Executive Branch of the Federal Gov., has the authority to retain such documents and chose the location they are stored.
But if the Regime really wants, and gets some loyalist Judges to play along, it can probably put Trump away for a few years.
Or maybe there's absolutely no enforcement mechanism in the Presidential Record Act and there's no administrative enforcement provision
[Anne Weismann, a lawyer who represented watchdog groups that have sued Trump over violations of the Presidential Records Act, told CBS News that the former president "clearly violated" the Presidential Records Act in "multiple ways," including by ripping up records.
But "the real problem is there's absolutely no enforcement mechanism in the Presidential Record Act and there's no administrative enforcement provision," she said. ]
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-presidential-records-act-mar-a-lago-fbi-national-archives/
So let me get that straight. There is no enforcement provision in the Act? Then what does the FBI hope to achieve with this other than embarrass Trump?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
You need new lies, Sam. That one's stale and worn out.Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
or maybe..Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking corruption for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the corrupt system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
You and I will be in prison long before any of these Dem radicals .Married A Horn said:GrowlTowel said:
All bull***** Democrats going to take a bath in November. They may never hold power again. Nor should they.
They all gonna be in jail
They are going to do whatever it takes to stay in power.
There is no turning back .
Someone needs to post the pics of the ballot harvesting again. I think intentionally blind sam here missed them. He's so brainwashed he ignores visual confirmation.
Married A Horn
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
The conservative governors really need to step in here. I expect to hear something from Desantis within 24 hours.
Married A Horn
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
Hutto Hippo
Trinity Trojan
The Clintons were investigated and rightly so. It didn't cost them their freedom, but it probably cost Hillary the election. I had no complaints. That's the way the ball bounces.Harrison Bergeron said:Did the FBI raid the Clinton compound for attacking our democracy?Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
So home was raided for threatening our democracy (this occurred after the election)?Sam Lowry said:The Clintons were investigated and rightly so. It didn't cost them their freedom, but it probably cost Hillary the election. I had no complaints. That's the way the ball bounces.Harrison Bergeron said:Did the FBI raid the Clinton compound for attacking our democracy?Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
As long as the nation's response is just words.......the Dem radicals are going to get away with this outrage .Harrison Bergeron said:So home was raided for threatening our democracy (this occurred after the election)?Sam Lowry said:The Clintons were investigated and rightly so. It didn't cost them their freedom, but it probably cost Hillary the election. I had no complaints. That's the way the ball bounces.Harrison Bergeron said:Did the FBI raid the Clinton compound for attacking our democracy?Sam Lowry said:Well, no, we shouldn't have been. Trump has been openly attacking our democracy for a couple of years now, so it makes sense that the system would fight back.Married A Horn said:
We should not have been shocked.
They will then continue to utilize the KGB and DOJ towards a 'shocking victory ' come November .
At that point either a handful of governors are going to lead a counter insurgency ....or its all over.
Hi Sam, got this for you..
The question is why hasn't the FBI, with dozens of agents, raided hunter biden's love nest or why no raid when they were investigating hillary clinton? Anthony Weiner as well, where were the 2 dozen agents?Sam Lowry said:Everyone seems to be hypothesizing that Trump is innocent. It's fair to ask what if he isn't.canoso said:Objection, your Honor. Calls for hypothesizing.Sam Lowry said:
What do you all think the Justice Department should do if a former president illegally hoards classified documents?
Excuse some people for being a little skeptical, but it's not like operatives for the democrat party haven't fabricated evidence, been caught spying, fixing elections (Bernie Sanders says hi), work in tandem with the media to supress legitimate news stories or flat out lie about them.
Yea, I'd recuse myself too.4th and Inches said:
Hi Sam, got this for you..
Have to avoid a future "suicide" at all cost.
Hunter Biden's laptop?br53 said:4th and Inches said:what was in the safe?Sam Lowry said:What makes you think a president can take away unclassified documents?4th and Inches said:
Remember the president has the ability to declassify materials before leaving the White House. So this is even more dicey for the FBI and DOJ than usual, requiring real specifics. This is a narrow path of appropriate surrounded by a very slippery slope banana republic..
Geraldo didn't find anything
Oh wait, nevermind the FBI has had it for awhile. Probably sitting in the backroom on a shelf collecting dust.
#FreeDonny
#OrangeManNotSoBad
- KKM
#OrangeManNotSoBad
- KKM
arbyscoin - the only crypto you can eat.
Rawhide said:Hunter Biden's laptop?br53 said:4th and Inches said:what was in the safe?Sam Lowry said:What makes you think a president can take away unclassified documents?4th and Inches said:
Remember the president has the ability to declassify materials before leaving the White House. So this is even more dicey for the FBI and DOJ than usual, requiring real specifics. This is a narrow path of appropriate surrounded by a very slippery slope banana republic..
Geraldo didn't find anything
Oh wait, nevermind the FBI has had it for awhile. Probably sitting in the backroom on a shelf collecting dust.
So my question, if Joe Biden legitimately beat Trump so badly, so bigly with the most votes ever in the history of the world ever... then why go so hard after Trump to take him out of the 2024 election? Just let Biden run against Trump again and beat him again...Forest Bueller_bf said:To which I disagree, they could come up with a "reason" on any past president if they wished to. This is a focused political attack meant to disqualify Trump from ever running again.Sam Lowry said:You asked why they don't do it to every president. The simple answer is that they don't have a reason and they generally don't just make one up.Forest Bueller_bf said:A simple yes would have done.Sam Lowry said:At least three reasons. First, no one has referred other presidents to the FBI or established probable cause on a public records issue. Second, if other presidents did keep records they shouldn't have, it was probably unintentional. There's evidence of extraordinarily poor record-keeping and routine destruction of documents in the Trump administration, which makes the case more compelling. Third and most important, they're looking for evidence tying him to the Capitol riot.Forest Bueller_bf said:So you are cool with this raid?Sam Lowry said:Trump did destroy some documents as well. The subpoena was directed to NARA. They can't be subpoenaed for documents that they don't possess or control.Forest Bueller_bf said:Sam Lowry said:
What do you all think the Justice Department should do if a former president illegally hoards classified documents?Quote:
The intensifying inquiry suggests that the Justice Department is examining the role of Mr. Trump and other officials in his White House in their handling of sensitive materials during the final stages of his administration.
In recent days, the Justice Department has taken a series of steps showing that its investigation has progressed beyond the preliminary stages. Prosecutors issued a subpoena to the National Archives and Records Administration to obtain the boxes of classified documents, according to the two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.
The authorities have also made interview requests to people who worked in the White House in the final days of Mr. Trump's presidency, according to one of the people.
The investigation is focused on the discovery by the National Archives in January that at the end of Mr. Trump's term he had taken to his home at the Mar-a-Lago resort 15 boxes from the White House that contained government documents, mementos, gifts and letters.
After the boxes were returned to the National Archives, its archivists found documents containing "items marked as classified national security information," the agency told Congress in February. In April, it was reported that federal authorities were in the preliminary stages of investigating the handling of the classified documents.
So this article seems to say the 15 boxes had already been returned to the national archives, were there more boxes or something.
If there were more boxes could they not issue an additional subpeona to aquire those boxes, rather than a gestapo style raid, such as they just performed.
From the article above it seems they had complied with returning the 15 boxes. Wheras a Clinton would just destroy the information that was requested. Which they have done in the past.
Seems like a very shady action by the Justice Department.
Why not raid all past still living and current Presidents then, besides Jimmy Carter.
They all are shady at some level, Clintons are at the highest level of crooked.
Yet, no other president has been raided like this.
No way this raid was necessary, they could come up with a "reason" for any president, this is just a fishing expedition. The Justice department has crossed a line that should never have been crossed. Of course they can come up with a "reason".They are trying to disqualify him for ever running again. So why in hell did they let Hillary run again since she was certainly guilty of the same, under U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071.Quote:
Such reporting had Marc Elias, the top lawyer for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign who has drawn scrutiny for his role in pushing Trump-Russia collusion claims, pointing to U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071. "The media is missing the really, really big reason why the raid today is a potential blockbuster in American politics," Elias said in a tweet.
18 U.S. Code 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
The dems keep telling us that no one liked Trump because soooooooooooo many people voted for dementia joe.... so why the worry?
I've asked the same thing about biden and democrats in general.C. Jordan said:So many lies in this statement, it's difficult to know where to start.Doc Holliday said:JUST IN - FBI raids Trump's home Mar-A-Lago in Florida. pic.twitter.com/7dK0bhRtLr
— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) August 8, 2022
DJT is above the law, apparently.
How can such a sniveling whiner ever command such worship?
Projection…
There have been half a dozen judges recused from that case. It could well turn out this one was at Hillary's request.4th and Inches said:
Hi Sam, got this for you..
Didn't that guy actually go in there and shove documents in his pants?Harrison Bergeron said:
Scattershooting while wondering how much time Sandy Burger deal from stealing damaging documents from the National Archives.
Damn, they're already going for the planted evidence shtick, guess the search might have been fruitful.
Trump attorney Christina Bobb suggests that the FBI may have planted evidence in Mar-a-Lago pic.twitter.com/bgJWlF2F8W
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 9, 2022
What I expect to find in a year or 2 is that the justification for this raid is as flimsy as that used to start russiagate. If one accepts that the FBI simply works for the Democratic Party (and no longer the American People), none of their behavior is surprising.
If Republicans ever take back the White House they would be wise to defund what is clearly a partisan operation.
I'll give them credit. When unable to pass laws to enact their vision, democrats are able to install activists in government bureaucracies to do it in other ways. Currently they have complete control of the fbi/doj.
If Republicans ever take back the White House they would be wise to defund what is clearly a partisan operation.
I'll give them credit. When unable to pass laws to enact their vision, democrats are able to install activists in government bureaucracies to do it in other ways. Currently they have complete control of the fbi/doj.
Don't blame them from bringing it up. After all, it's not like evidence hasn't been fabricated against Trump before (Steele Dossier says hi)HuMcK said:
Damn, they're already going for the planted evidence shtick, guess the search might have been fruitful.Trump attorney Christina Bobb suggests that the FBI may have planted evidence in Mar-a-Lago pic.twitter.com/bgJWlF2F8W
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 9, 2022
HuMcK said:
Damn, they're already going for the planted evidence shtick, guess the search might have been fruitful.Trump attorney Christina Bobb suggests that the FBI may have planted evidence in Mar-a-Lago pic.twitter.com/bgJWlF2F8W
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 9, 2022
Yea because the Regime does not ever fake evidence right?
Amazing to see how the Left in this country has become 100% supporters of the unaccountable security services as soon as Trump came on the scene.
He made rulings from March through June 2022 in that case and now he signs a warrant to search Mar A Lago.Sam Lowry said:There have been half a dozen judges recused from that case. It could well turn out this one was at Hillary's request.4th and Inches said:
Hi Sam, got this for you..
Doc Holliday said:He made rulings from March through June 2022 in that case and now he signs a warrant to search Mar A Lago.Sam Lowry said:There have been half a dozen judges recused from that case. It could well turn out this one was at Hillary's request.4th and Inches said:
Hi Sam, got this for you..
What does it mean?
If they find anything you can bet that will be the story. A little over half of America wont believe anything Trump says. A little under half will believe in anything he says.
I have found theres only two ways to go:
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.