Trump to be Arrested Tuesday

[Aglaopheme]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1638189988398465025

remember, he's gonna win in a landslide after this.

I cannot find the video, but a lady that organized the “party” in West Palm Beach claims people are not showing up because the police there are using facial recognition, and they are using something far more nefarious in NY. I’ll keep looking for it as it was fairly amusing.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Special counsel prosecutors think Trump deliberately misled his lawyers over missing papers, report says​

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rges-maralago-documents-lawyers-b2305492.html

In case folx don’t read the article, or have not yet heard:

“Attorney-client privilege doesn’t apply to conversations relating to carrying out or concealing a crime.”

 

[HisArpy]

In case folx don’t read the article, or have not yet heard:

“Attorney-client privilege doesn’t apply to conversations relating to carrying out or concealing a crime.”

If you think about it, it's kinda telling that someone would have to already have the conversation details before they would know that the parties are discussing something illegal.

It's called bootstrapping. It's also called CYA when the cops do something illegal like seize confidential information then rifle through it looking for an offense which they can use to justify their illegal conduct.

 

[HisArpy]

Um, It appears he's figured out how. Hisarpy and Icanhelp are the same person, Sugardaddy1 (or should I say, Counselor 706.) Most of us have figured that out by now. Sadly, your comprehension skills seem limited in this respect as well.

A dig about "comprehension skills" from the the guy who insists I'm an Alt even though he's been told many many many times that this is my one and ONLY acct on Lit.

It's no fucking wonder you're progressive, you're dumber than the dirt road Bray123 named himself after.

 

[Aglaopheme]

If you think about it, it's kinda telling that someone would have to already have the conversation details before they would know that the parties are discussing something illegal.

It's called bootstrapping. It's also called CYA when the cops do something illegal like seize confidential information then rifle through it looking for an offense which they can use to justify their illegal conduct.

You could very well be right, but that really doesn’t change anything. Unless you are saying this information came from someone other than Corcoran, which is highly unlikely.

 

[HisArpy]

The evidence that Trump incited a riot is pretty fucking solid. ITs not cherry picked data, if anything they leave a lot of stuff on the table.

No Biden and Hillary are not guilty of the same crimes. I don't care if they go down for what they did do, but its not the same crime.

The Hunter Laptop is misinformation. The Russian collusion was all but proven by Mueller. So there's that.

Call it TDS, we must NEVER forget or forgive what has happened here. A reasonable doubt simply is not an acceptable standard here, we need to do like we do with everybody else where "Good enough" is enough.

Trump is on VIDEO saying to not be violent and to make their voices heard in peaceful protest.

And you know what? The J6 committee LEFT THAT PART OUT of their report completely.

Then there's the fact that they altered emails (fabrication of evidence) and then also altered some of the video clips (more fabrication of evidence) by adding a soundtrack to the video when there was no sound capability for those video cameras.

And you say it wasn't cherry picked...

The Hunter Biden laptop is REAL. How do I know that? Because Hunter himself is suing the repair shop guy for invasion of privacy and you can't bring that claim unless the invasion happened to you. Of course he's alleging that he's not actually making an admission that the laptop is his, only that if it were his, then the repair shop guy illegally looked at the contents while he was trying to fix the laptop that necessitated looking at the contents to find the software bug on it. It will be interesting how he answers the deposition question on whether the laptop is his or not.

Then there's the issue that you seem to believe the LIES created by the legacy media about it. Which only proves that you're partisan AND uninformed.

I very much dislike how you summarily disposed of the legal standard which is enshrined in our justice system since the days of the colonists in your zeal to lock Trump up without evidence, a trial, or even a reason. That also shows how partisan you are, as well as unreasonable in your hatred of someone you've probably never met based on the LIES told about him by the legacy media.

Basically all of that only goes to prove that you're a gullible lackwit pretending to be smart because you can parrot the bullshit you've been fed.

 

[HisArpy]

You could very well be right, but that really doesn’t change anything. Unless you are saying this information came from someone other than Corcoran, which is highly unlikely.

The FBI raided Cohen's office and took everything. They looked at the files and listened to the recordings while Trump was trying to protect his private and confidential information. The courts denied he had any attorney client privilege because the FBI told the court they found "illegal" discussions on the tapes. Tapes they shouldn't have been able to look at in the first place.

The government cannot justify saying that they found evidence of a crime while committing a crime. This is the well known Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree doctrine. Yet in this case they did exactly that.

Now the NY DA is using that illegally gathered evidence to try to indict Trump after the Statute of Limitations has run out by alleging that the conduct isn't just a misdemeanor, it's a felony and that has a 5 year Statute of Limitations. Which is going to run out shortly too and that's why the rush to indict Trump now.

 

[Aglaopheme]

No one is denying the fact that more classified documents were found after they said all of them were turned over. So, what would you do if you found out a client lord to you? Or, would you lie for a client in the first place?

 

[Aglaopheme]

The FBI raided Cohen's office and took everything. They looked at the files and listened to the recordings while Trump was trying to protect his private and confidential information. The courts denied he had any attorney client privilege because the FBI told the court they found "illegal" discussions on the tapes. Tapes they shouldn't have been able to look at in the first place.

The government cannot justify saying that they found evidence of a crime while committing a crime. This is the well known Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree doctrine. Yet in this case they did exactly that.

Now the NY DA is using that illegally gathered evidence to try to indict Trump after the Statute of Limitations has run out by alleging that the conduct isn't just a misdemeanor, it's a felony and that has a 5 year Statute of Limitations. Which is going to run out shortly too and that's why the rush to indict Trump now.

Um, this is in regards to the classified documents Trump took illegally, and nothing else.

 

[Lazaran]

You could very well be right, but that really doesn’t change anything. Unless you are saying this information came from someone other than Corcoran, which is highly unlikely.

Harpy is a fucking idiot.

Harpy is confusing Corcoran with Cohen as well as two distinctly separate cases.

Harpy

 

[Aglaopheme]

Harpy is a fucking idiot.

Harpy is confusing Corcoran with Cohen as well as two distinctly separate cases.

Harpy

It’s going to be one of those days now just watch.

 

[HisArpy]

Um, this is in regards to the classified documents Trump took illegally, and nothing else.

NO it isn't.

The NY DA case is based on the payment Trump made to Stormy Daniels. That settlement was done through Michael Cohen's representation of Trump. Cohen went to prison for some shady shit he was doing unrelated to Trump and then claimed Trump was the cause of his problems in an attempt to deflect away from his crimes.


The classified documents thing was a search of Mar A Lago. Totally different place, time, and situation. I find it interesting that you say he had them "illegally." Trump took the docs when he was still President and was in legal possession of them at that time. As President he could possess any and all classified docs anywhere at any time. Thus he didn't "take them illegally."

He may not have returned them when he should have, but that's an issue which is under some controversy. Trump claims he declassifed the docs. Opponents say that there's a procedure to do that and Trump didn't follow it, ergo the docs weren't declassified. This argument assumes that the guy who specifies the procedure can't change the procedure without warning to suit his official duties and purposes. Something which the President has the power and authority to do.

Then there's the fact that the National Archives knew the docs were there and had required Trump to secure them in a locked storage room. So, possibly the retention of the docs were with "permission" of the Archives. This negates the "illegal" part of the conversation.

However, none of the classified documents thing has to do with the NY DA case.

 

[Lazaran]

It’s going to be one of those days now just watch.

The RWCJ charter “members” have been restless of late and are posting an inordinate amount of ignorance and stupidity.

I wonder why????

JK

We. Know. Why.

RWCJ

 

[Aglaopheme]

Okay….I guess my in case someone “didn’t read the article” was indeed needed.

That is a whole lot of maybes in your post. I’ll ask you this question, did they find any classified documents that were not locked up in a secure locked storage room?

 

[lazy_literotic]

Why is it that these stupid Republicans can't just grab the inevitable and let this rotten man go? Why do they have to spiral down into sedition with

I'm with you - I don't see the attraction from a reeps point of view.
starting with the dude knocking up those gals while he was married to one.
helsinki.
and the fucker just thinks of himself - everything is for him. even the country.
if you had a friend that was so fucking self serving, how long would you hang around w him.
I don't understand.
and no reep has ever said anything that convinces them or me.
should he be president for life because he pulled his pants down and stormy Daniels spanked him with a magazine.
would you give up your ss and medicare for that?

 

[HisArpy]

Okay….O guess my in case someone “didn’t read the article” was indeed needed.

That is a whole lot of maybes in your post. I’ll ask you this question, did they find any classified documents that were not locked up in a secure locked storage room?

The docs aren't part of the NY case.

However, yes they did (or they say they did) find classified docs in Trump's office. 2 issues with the shortened narrative/conclusion of that fact.

1. Trump says he declassified those docs. If that's true, then there's no issue. The counterpoint to that is being brought by those who are invested in ensuring that everything Trump says/does is said to be a lie or false. Thus their motives are suspect from the outset and unless there's PROOF that Trump didn't do as he says, then his word is gospel on this because he had the power as President to do it irrespective of whatever "procedures" he requires others in his administration use.

2. I notice that you're omitting Biden's collection of classified docs which has the exact same problem regarding finding more docs after they said all of them were turned over.

The difference between Biden and Trump is that Biden NEVER had the authority to possess those docs in the first place ANYWHERE OR AT ANY TIME. Oops.

Please note this doesn't excuse Trump if he in fact had the docs illegally. However, that issue is not settled and there are factors which point to his possession being legal. Something which cannot be said for Biden (or Pence).

 

[HisArpy]

I'm with you - I don't see the attraction from a reeps point of view.
starting with the dude knocking up those gals while he was married to one.
helsinki.
and the fucker just thinks of himself - everything is for him. even the country.
if you had a friend that was so fucking self serving, how long would you hang around w him.
I don't understand.
and no reep has ever said anything that convinces them or me.
should he be president for life because he pulled his pants down and stormy Daniels spanked him with a magazine.
would you give up your ss and medicare for that?

It probably stems from the fact that there are laws which say that he's innocent until PROVEN guilty. So far that proof hasn't happened and every time someone on the Left insists he's guilty and needs to go to prison (along with everyone else in his family) even though there's no evidence of a crime, it only convinces conservatives who believe that the law is the law that even someone as hated by the Left as Donald Trump is, has Rights too.

 

[Lazaran]

Look at Harpy trying to tap dance around another classic Harpy fuck-up.

Corcoran is STILL not Cohen, and the two incidents are not related in any way.

Harpy

 

[lazy_literotic]

it doesn't have anything to do with proof of anything.
it's been proven that he lost to Biden. proven over and over.
but he just spews out those words and fucks believe it to be true.
spawn out from some shit whose reputation is that of a lying low down guy that likes to get spanked by stormy.

 

[Aglaopheme]

The docs aren't part of the NY case.

However, yes they did (or they say they did) find classified docs in Trump's office. 2 issues with the shortened narrative/conclusion of that fact.

1. Trump says he declassified those docs. If that's true, then there's no issue. The counterpoint to that is being brought by those who are invested in ensuring that everything Trump says/does is said to be a lie or false. Thus their motives are suspect from the outset and unless there's PROOF that Trump didn't do as he says, then his word is gospel on this because he had the power as President to do it irrespective of whatever "procedures" he requires others in his administration use.

2. I notice that you're omitting Biden's collection of classified docs which has the exact same problem regarding finding more docs after they said all of them were turned over.

The difference between Biden and Trump is that Biden NEVER had the authority to possess those docs in the first place ANYWHERE OR AT ANY TIME. Oops.

Please note this doesn't excuse Trump if he in fact had the docs illegally. However, that issue is not settled and there are factors which point to his possession being legal. Something which cannot be said for Biden (or Pence).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rges-maralago-documents-lawyers-b2305492.html

This is the article you started responding to. Granted, it wasn’t really on topic, but it’s another domino that’ll soon topple.

How can you notice me omitting a topic we are not discussing? You’re all over the place after jumping in with a rabbit hole of responses that made zero sense to my reply to the above article.


I noticed you never answered my questions about what you would do if a client lied to you, or would you lie for a client?

 

[HisArpy]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rges-maralago-documents-lawyers-b2305492.html

This is the article you started responding to. Granted, it wasn’t really on topic, but it’s another domino that’ll soon topple.

How can you notice me omitting a topic we are not discussing? You’re all over the place after jumping in with a rabbit hole of responses that made zero sense to my reply to the above article.


I noticed you never answered my questions about what you would do if a client lied to you, or would you lie for a client?

I noticed that you raised the issue and then didn't come clean with all the facts. All I did was try to complete the record. Also, if you're not discussing it, why do you keep bringing it up?

Here's an interesting thing about lawyers and clients; lawyers can't talk about the things their clients say. However, there's an ethics canon which prohibits a lawyer from assisting a client who intends to commit perjury or perpetrate a fraud. This assistance would include any attempt by a lawyer to lie for his client.

Some lawyers have been found guilty of violating this ethics canon. That list doesn't include me.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Out of all the participants on this site, how is it possible that we don't have a single lawyer to chime in with their expertise?

 

[lazy_literotic]

for the documents -
trump instructed a lawyer to tell the fbi that they have all the records.
and there were some still sitting in his desk.
lying to the fbi is a crime - the lawyer just took his word for that.
I'm not a lawyer - but I know when crimes are committed.

 

[DeluxAuto]

I'm not a lawyer - but I know when crimes are committed.

You know more than the simps who claim to be lawyers here

 

[Rightguide]

And not a single one of them comes close to the disgusting behavior shown all day everyday by your hosts. Hell half of the people who you claim are lefties aren't even lefties.

Which "hosts?"