So, you really, really, really hate Trump

[Fuzzy1975]

Actually, I have enjoyed this, but the only poll that counts is on November 5th. The rest is just statistics, and when I took statistics in college well, they can say what you want them to say. So I will acknowledge your ignoring anecdotal evidence. After all, we don't have any Obamaphones for the press to report on.

Yes, I've enjoyed it too, you do a bit better dance then some, worse than others. Still no citation to back up your claim. No one here is surprised.

 

[dkovic77]

If you want to have a conversation knock off the insults and childish rhetoric otherwise move on. I'm certainly not trying to cover up for your so-called criminal in chief.

Awww, the Bully can’t take it when it is dished back out? That’s a free lesson for you then. Try coming with facts instead of attacks.

Who is the convict? Who has multiple cases against him? Who couldn’t even front the cash for an appeal and needed a “whoa is me” discount? The “Billionaire” couldn’t afford it…

You are far from ready to have a conversation, just look at your postings…. Everywhere.

You started the insults with me when you thought you were a top notch investigator and oops you were wrong (as you predominately are).

So go back to work, break is over and breakfast rush just keeps coming in.

But make sure to keep that uniform clean, a uniform means something. They give you aprons to help?

 

[dkovic77]

Equal application of the law. Biden had no authority PERIOD and yet Biden walks. Hillary walks!! Both violated 18 USC 1924/798. Those statutes don't state that it's not a criminal violation if you cooperate. You take! you should be charged a felony violation. The cooperation fantasy touted by the dems is a ploy to lessen the scope of a criminal violation, a ploy to run interference for Biden and Clinton. Clinton obstructed justice in it's rawest form, she destroyed evidence pertinent to a congressional oversight investigation.

The same charge aimed at Trump could have been leveled at Obama, Bush and just about every president in the last 50 years.

Biden moved things around at the Wilmington house after being asked to return it. Oh wait… he told them to search everywhere to ensure he had no others after the first set was discovered.

Your boy, and yes a boy, played hide the boxes pressing his employees to do his dirty work-as he ALWAYS has done.

Your boss ask you to hide some evidence too?Or do they want you to just keep those potatoes a-frying’?

 

[AndersonsBiographer]

ya'll

I don't mind those who feel inclined to contract "you all" in common speech, because I've known people far smarter than myself who do it.

But, damn it all, I have a lot of trouble taking anyone seriously who feels the need to write it out, but can't properly do so. I was born in Massachusetts, summered in Vermont or Quebec for most of my formative years, and somehow even I know how where the apostrophe goes.

 

[icanhelp1]

None of the people you mentioned obstructed the process of returning the documents like Trump did.

NARA should never have involved the DOJ, That was political maneuvering by the Biden administration, before he got caught for similar criminal violations.

Awww, the Bully can’t take it when it is dished back out? That’s a free lesson for you then. Try coming with facts instead of attacks.

I didn't attack. Just read what you post. Your insulting and condescending demeaner is not conducive to any kind of dialogue.

Who is the convict? Who has multiple cases against him? Who couldn’t even front the cash for an appeal and needed a “whoa is me” discount? The “Billionaire” couldn’t afford it…

In the Trump fraud case there was no victim. If these proceedings were directed towards Biden you'd be swinging from the highest tree screaming fowl and for good reason. When a prosecutor campaigns on *getting someone* to get votes and then follows through with that promise it should raise all kinds of red flags as to the fairness of the indictment and the political intentions of the prosecutor. Retribution and vengeance should never be a substitute for justice. Because its Trump you justify in your own mind and to the detriment of our justice system that hatred for Trump justifies all legal decisions whether its tethered to sound constitutional law or not. When a conviction is the only acceptable conclusion regardless of the appearance of impropriety or the use of unethical legal wrangling that violates due process, when the levels of power and authority all wrest with biased officers of the court then our legal system becomes the victim. Letitia James replaced her objectivity and oath to uphold the constitution with political vengeance. She suborned the legal system to impose unfair reprisals and punishment on an individual who could not exercise the right of due
process.

Multiple cases stacked on top of each other and timed to interfere with a political campaign cycle is not indicative if guilt but it *IS* indicative of political persecution.

You are far from ready to have a conversation, just look at your postings…. Everywhere.

You started the insults with me when you thought you were a top notch investigator and oops you were wrong (as you predominately are).

Your argument always lean towards condescension. I don't resort to name calling unless provoked.

So go back to work, break is over and breakfast rush just keeps coming in.

Thanks for making my point!!

But make sure to keep that uniform clean, a uniform means something. They give you aprons to help?

AGAIN!!

 

[icanhelp1]

Biden moved things around at the Wilmington house after being asked to return it. Oh wait… he told them to search everywhere to ensure he had no others after the first set was discovered.

Your boy, and yes a boy, played hide the boxes pressing his employees to do his dirty work-as he ALWAYS has done.

Your boss ask you to hide some evidence too?Or do they want you to just keep those potatoes a-frying’?

Apples and oranges.

 

[dkovic77]

NARA should never have involved the DOJ, That was political maneuvering by the Biden administration, before he got caught for similar criminal violations.

Ohhhh I’ll bite. They asked for the docs, he said he didn’t have them. They asked again… then they needed more to get them.

Just because he wanted to keep his love letter from Kim Jong Un (he loves himself a dick-tator) doesn’t mean he gets to.

I didn't attack. Just read what you post. Your insulting and condescending demeaner is not conducive to any kind of dialogue.

So your reading comprehension is an issue, got it.

In the Trump fraud case there was no victim.

Fraud to win an election. Nope, no victim there at all.

If these proceedings were directed towards Biden you'd be swinging from the highest tree screaming fowl and for good reason. When a prosecutor campaigns on *getting someone* to get votes and then follows through with that promise it should raise all kinds of red flags as to the fairness of the indictment and the political intentions of the prosecutor.

Show where this prosecutor said that. Please. Find it. Or you can’t tell people apart… is it because they are democrats? Or is there something else there? Hmmmm… let’s see…

Retribution and vengeance should never be a substitute for justice.

Hmmm, what has your Orange Jesus promised for day one of his second administration? His words of what he will do,

Because its Trump you justify in your own mind and to the detriment of our justice system that hatred for Trump justifies all legal decisions whether its tethered to sound constitutional law or not.

Your boy (yup a boy) is squeaky clean… sure he is. It’s a witch hunt! Nope!

When a conviction is the only acceptable conclusion regardless of the appearance of impropriety or the use of unethical legal wrangling that violates due process, when the levels of power and authority all wrest with biased officers of the court then our legal system becomes the victim.

What due process what he not afforded? Or it just sounds like a fun term to say, since you overheard some customers use it when they were waiting on their food- not their fries, you are speedy with those!

Letitia James replaced her objectivity and oath to uphold the constitution with political vengeance. She suborned the legal system to impose unfair reprisals and punishment on an individual who could not exercise the right of due
process.

Again, is that the person in this case? Or you get confuzzled this easily?

Multiple cases stacked on top of each other and timed to interfere with a political campaign cycle is not indicative if guilt but it *IS* indicative of political persecution.

If he doesn’t want multiple cases, don’t do the multiple things. Just don’t do them.

Your argument always lean towards condescension. I don't resort to name calling unless provoked.

Thanks for making my point!!

AGAIN!!

Awww… poor little Ican’t. Almost turn to switch from breakfast to lunch. Big switchover… hashbrowns to fries.

All you have is own the libs, nothing of substance. Admit if you trade out the name for Clinton you would say it was all legit, then realize your fallacy.

We all have seen your Orange Jesus do the things he has done, he doesn’t hide it (except when in the bunker… and when the insurrection attacked the Capitol).

 

[dkovic77]

Apples and oranges.

Right, one is an apple and one is an orange. Things are different there.

Yet you want them both to be used to make a pie. Only one makes a pie… but you don’t make pies at your place… just fries.

 

[jomar]

Well done @Lone_Hawk, you filled the void post verdict. As a spreadsheet alt you ticked the right boxes for faux credibility - combat vet, a career working for 3 letter agencies, libertarian so no surface dem-Repub bias.

But as with all of your ilk, the MAGA under the veneer soon appears and posts slide into derp. Kudos though for your efforts at sea lioning, though no one fell for those obvious attempts.

See you for the election, or maybe in 2028!

 

[icanhelp1]

Ohhhh I’ll bite. They asked for the docs, he said he didn’t have them. They asked again… then they needed more to get them.

Just because he wanted to keep his love letter from Kim Jong Un (he loves himself a dick-tator) doesn’t mean he gets to.

So your reading comprehension is an issue, got it.


Fraud to win an election. Nope, no victim there at all.

Show where this prosecutor said that. Please. Find it. Or you can’t tell people apart… is it because they are democrats? Or is there something else there? Hmmmm… let’s see…

Hmmm, what has your Orange Jesus promised for day one of his second administration? His words of what he will do,

Your boy (yup a boy) is squeaky clean… sure he is. It’s a witch hunt! Nope!

What due process what he not afforded? Or it just sounds like a fun term to say, since you overheard some customers use it when they were waiting on their food- not their fries, you are speedy with those!

Again, is that the person in this case? Or you get confuzzled this easily?

If he doesn’t want multiple cases, don’t do the multiple things. Just don’t do them.

Awww… poor little Ican’t. Almost turn to switch from breakfast to lunch. Big switchover… hashbrowns to fries.

All you have is own the libs, nothing of substance. Admit if you trade out the name for Clinton you would say it was all legit, then realize your fallacy.

We all have seen your Orange Jesus do the things he has done, he doesn’t hide it (except when in the bunker… and when the insurrection attacked the Capitol).

You never have anything of substance add. All you do is regurgitate bullshit from MSNC talking heads, move the goalpost, change the topic and revert to condescending insults.

I don’t care about libs, I don’t want to own libs, that’s if you can find a true liberal on Lit’s PB. The only platform I see from you and your ilk is the *I HATE TRUMP* platform. You’re incapable of arguing on the merits of the case with any legal variety.

I was discussing the fraud case since you brought up Trump’s inability to fund an appeal.

Your comment; “Who is the convict? Who has multiple cases against him? Who couldn’t even front the cash for an appeal and needed a “whoa is me” discount? The “Billionaire” couldn’t afford it…”

 

[Rightguide]

Biden is sharp as a tack. Trump is in the early stage of dementia.

You're either a gratuitous liar or too dumb to comment.

 

[dkovic77]

You never have anything of substance add. All you do is regurgitate bullshit from MSNC talking heads, move the goalpost, change the topic and revert to condescending insults.

Hmmm what is this MSNC? They have heads on there that talk? And then there are goal posts? Like the ones with a kicker?

(Or is it this damn new version of lit… just keeps you from proofreading… it’s always someone else’s fault and not yours)

I don’t care about libs, I don’t want to own libs, that’s if you can find a true liberal on Lit’s PB.

Wow, you are so fun… and incredibly predictable. It’s so comical to see you dump on anything from a liberal perspective and ignore any disasters that would benefit those that liberal- like those that routinely happen with today’s Republican’ts.

The only platform I see from you and your ilk is the *I HATE TRUMP* platform. You’re incapable of arguing on the merits of the case with any legal variety.

So comical that espouse to have some sort of legal perspective. As you throw things you have googled up there and try to connect them like mad libs, it really is comical.

I was discussing the fraud case since you brought up Trump’s inability to fund an appeal.

Your comment; “Who is the convict? Who has multiple cases against him? Who couldn’t even front the cash for an appeal and needed a “whoa is me” discount? The “Billionaire” couldn’t afford it…”

I did, that is the Fraud that is his entire essence. A billionaire who can’t fund his own appeal, so is he really a billionaire? But I can see how you like him. All flash and no real substance.

DING!
Big lunch rush coming in? Your place making any changes to add another side? So many others have. Or is it always the classic freedom fries?

 

[dkovic77]

You're either a gratuitous liar or too dumb to comment.

Look who it is, Vlad’s boy. Someone who doesn’t seem to understand sourcing is commenting on the veracity of a claim.

Person, woman, man, camera, tv. Yup. Got your proof. What is that test given for again?

 

[icanhelp1]

You're either a gratuitous liar or too dumb to comment.

If you listed or provided videos of all of Biden's gaffs lit's platform would probably crash.

 

[dmallord]

By your logic then any conviction of Donald Trump should at least be mirrored to Joe Biden. The difference is Joe didn’t have the authority to take anything out of a SCIF. Joe Didn’t have the authority to possess outside of security regulated areas. The same statutes apply to Hillary Clinton and she walked. If people are expected to be believe our government law enforcement and judiciary you have to apply the law equally and fairly.

The obstruction case is another facet of this case. Hillary committed obstruction of justice, bleach bit her equipment and destroyed all her cell phones after the house judiciary subpoenaed her E- mails.

This is unrelated to what I said or the thread's remarks. I noted yesterday that you were not on point with your faulty logic, and here you are again, attempting to draw some logical inferences. LOL

Not a convicted felon, but everyone knows when you remove classified documents from a SCIF and take them home that's a felony * big time *

This was your comment that I answered. If everyone knows it is a crime, then Trump knew as well. He knew, and he had the documents at his residences without a SCIF scenario. Therefore, it is/was/remains a felony, according to your statement. That follows logically, not your attempt to spin the scenario. How is it that a lawyer can't draw inferences with reasonable thoughts?

Hillary ... not in the topic or even related to the thread's comment. It's frustrating to see the discussion veer off-topic, creating another red herring. Let's stay focused on the issue at hand.

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Hardcore trumptards don't care about the verdict, they will vote for him regardless. Polls show that 25% of republicans believe trump is guilty and may not vote for him. Trumptards should be worried.

 

[doowdniw]

You mean the “fair” trial? The one who was presided over by a judge whose daughter was a fund raiser for Harris? When does Bill Clinton go to trial for paying hush money?

If Trump's DOJ didn't pursue Bill Clinton, probably never. But it may have been the old pot/kettle thing.

 

[dmallord]

By your logic then any conviction of Donald Trump should at least be mirrored to Joe Biden. The difference is Joe didn’t have the authority to take anything out of a SCIF. Joe Didn’t have the authority to possess outside of security regulated areas. The same statutes apply to Hillary Clinton and she walked. If people are expected to be believe our government law enforcement and judiciary you have to apply the law equally and fairly.

The obstruction case is another facet of this case. Hillary committed obstruction of justice, bleach bit her equipment and destroyed all her cell phones after the house judiciary subpoenaed her E- mails.

As far as I recall, Hur's findings show six classified documents came from Biden's residence. Refresh my memory, did Hur say those documents were classified SCIF level? Not all classified documents are at that level of security. What he had in his possession may have been lower level. I don't know if that is the case. [When I handled classified info, it was kept in a combination, military-grade safe in a building with 24-hour guards. It wasn't a SCIF. And a person with the appropriate authority was able to sign out documents for transport between locations. FWIW.]

If they were lower level, your statements are irrelevant to comparing Trump and Biden's scenarios. Trump did have a SCIF level; that was in the FBI reports.

Get back to me when you have that missing memory element.

Again, we are not discussing Hillary, and you forgot to bring a fishing rod again.

 

[jomar]

You mean the “fair” trial? The one who was presided over by a judge whose daughter was a fund raiser for Harris? When does Bill Clinton go to trial for paying hush money?

lol, bb is that you?

 

[icanhelp1]

Hur's findings, as I recall, show six classified documents came from Biden's residence. Refresh my memory, did Hur say those documents were classified SCIF level? Not all classified documents are at that level of security. What he had in his possession may have been lower level. I don't know if that is the case.

If they were lower level, your statements are not relevant to comparing Trump and Biden's scenarios. Trump did have a SCIF level; that was in the FBI reports.

Get back to me when you have that missing memory element.

Again, we are not discussing Hillary and you forgot to bring a fishing rod again.

Hillary is in the conversation because she mishandled classified documents and wasn't charged, no warrant for her arrest, no DOJ officials knocking down her door. Hillary was interviewed by the FBI, if I remember correctly, not even under oath.

This according to politico:

Intelligence experts told PolitiFact that there is no legal definition for information that is highly or "high classified." However, the special counsel report details that multiple Biden documents included classification markers for "top secret," the highest of the three levels.

 

[icanhelp1]

As far as I recall, Hur's findings show six classified documents came from Biden's residence. Refresh my memory, did Hur say those documents were classified SCIF level? Not all classified documents are at that level of security. What he had in his possession may have been lower level. I don't know if that is the case. [When I handled classified info, it was kept in a combination, military-grade safe in a building with 24-hour guards. It wasn't a SCIF. And a person with the appropriate authority was able to sign out documents for transport between locations. FWIW.]

If they were lower level, your statements are irrelevant to comparing Trump and Biden's scenarios. Trump did have a SCIF level; that was in the FBI reports.

Get back to me when you have that missing memory element.

Again, we are not discussing Hillary, and you forgot to bring a fishing rod again.

18 USC 1924;

(a)
Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

 

[icanhelp1]

As far as I recall, Hur's findings show six classified documents came from Biden's residence. Refresh my memory, did Hur say those documents were classified SCIF level? Not all classified documents are at that level of security. What he had in his possession may have been lower level. I don't know if that is the case. [When I handled classified info, it was kept in a combination, military-grade safe in a building with 24-hour guards. It wasn't a SCIF. And a person with the appropriate authority was able to sign out documents for transport between locations. FWIW.]

If they were lower level, your statements are irrelevant to comparing Trump and Biden's scenarios. Trump did have a SCIF level; that was in the FBI reports.

Get back to me when you have that missing memory element.

Again, we are not discussing Hillary, and you forgot to bring a fishing rod again.

I'm sure being a combat vet in VIETNAM, not sure what your rank was at the time, E-4 and above, any soldier qualified for or who attended PLDC was trained in the handling of classified info, for example failure to protect a CEOI or any extracts from that document ( booklet ) could be severely punished under UCMJ.

 

[dmallord]

Hillary is in the conversation because she mishandled classified documents and wasn't charged, no warrant for her arrest, no DOJ officials knocking down her door. Hillary was interviewed by the FBI, if I remember correctly, not even under oath.

This according to politico:

Intelligence experts told PolitiFact that there is no legal definition for information that is highly or "high classified." However, the special counsel report details that multiple Biden documents included classification markers for "top secret," the highest of the three levels.

Thanks for the update.

I also looked back and saw an article saying ten classified documents, some of them classified Top Secret, were at his home. The report did not mention SCIF, so I surmise that those two TOP SECRET documents are not SCIF stamped, given that significant marking level. If so, Hur's report would have called that out.

As you may or may not know, Top Secret doesn't necessarily mean they go in a SCIF and are treated at that level.

While a violation, it was handled in a discretionary manner. Biden, unlike Trump, invited the FBI to search and cooperated fully. Given his status as a President now, the special counsel declined to take further action than removing and storing the documents appropriately.

Trump's situation was far different. No one can contest that, given the public awareness. He claimed he had no documents. After some further FBI discussions, he arranged through his attorneys to give some back. The FBI learned that more were suspected to be on-site and sought and obtained a warrant. As you know, a judge must sign off on a warrant that some element of wrongdoing probably exists. Trump made up excuses about mentally declassifying them, then more evidence showed how he tried to move documents around to confound his lawyers as well. Possibly, yet to be determined, he ordered the video surveillance tapes destroyed. [Hillery, you say?]

Well, there's more to that story, of course. Yet the obvious point here is that if Trump had acted like Biden did and returned the documents, he would not have been caught up in the legal mess he is today. Being belligerent obviously had consequences. Trump could have avoided it all, but he chose not to.

Clinton, what can I say...That was a while ago so I don't recall or really need to review that matter since it is water under the bridge. Past history. Did the FBI screw up? How far back can one prosecute such matters? Is there a statute of limitations?

 

[icanhelp1]

Thanks for the update.

I also looked back and saw an article saying ten classified documents, some of them classified Top Secret, were at his home. The report did not mention SCIF, so I surmise that those two TOP SECRET documents are not SCIF stamped, given that significant marking level. If so, Hur's report would have called that out.

As you may or may not know, Top Secret doesn't necessarily mean they go in a SCIF and are treated at that level.

While a violation, it was handled in a discretionary manner. Biden, unlike Trump, invited the FBI to search and cooperated fully. Given his status as a President now, the special counsel declined to take further action than removing and storing the documents appropriately.

Trump's situation was far different. No one can contest that, given the public awareness. He claimed he had no documents. After some further FBI discussions, he arranged through his attorneys to give some back. The FBI learned that more were suspected to be on-site and sought and obtained a warrant. As you know, a judge must sign off on a warrant that some element of wrongdoing probably exists. Trump made up excuses about mentally declassifying them, then more evidence showed how he tried to move documents around to confound his lawyers as well. Possibly, yet to be determined, he ordered the video surveillance tapes destroyed. [Hillery, you say?]

Well, there's more to that story, of course. Yet the obvious point here is that if Trump had acted like Biden did and returned the documents, he would not have been caught up in the legal mess he is today. Being belligerent obviously had consequences. Trump could have avoided it all, but he chose not to.

Clinton, what can I say...That was a while ago so I don't recall or really need to review that matter since it is water under the bridge. Past history. Did the FBI screw up? How far back can one prosecute such matters? Is there a statute of limitations?

Very rarely are politicians prosecuted for mishandling classified material. We’ll see how that goes with the trial. NARA should never have gone to the DOJ. Everything could have been handled between NARA and Trump’s White House counsel. Fair and equal application of the law.

 

[SmokingFap]

The last thing that Biden was on top of was his daughter...

Oh. You're one of those morons. Dismissed.