Eric Trump reveals HE told Donald FBI raided Mar-a-Lago: Ex-President's son claims agents 'ransacked

Espionage Act
Obstruction of Justice
Abuse of Power

 

And yet the FBI blamed her mishandling of classified on ignorance.

 

You’re flailing.

 

Whether the docs were declassified is irrelevant........... as he should NOT have taken them in the firs t pace. No one is addressing that critical point.

They were not his to take.........they belong to the people.........and in a gov't secure location.

He made no move to return them...........WHY??

They have been trying to get them back for a long time.......and he has been playing games with the authorities..........as he is now. This is nothing but a cat and mouse game to him but it is saturating the airwaves......and discussion boards..........and he love s it. aNd it has managed to take the attention away form Biden's successes. Which suits Trump just fine.

 

Why is it you (and others) have this assumption that if a president has the power to declassify at will, that means he can just hand over nuclear codes?
Where does this thinking come from?
You can't understand how you can have absolute power and accountability at the same time?
Police have arresting powers. But they are accountable for abusing such power.
Why is this such a huge leap for you?

 

I guess the motto is, don't start nuthin, won't be nuthin

 

I have asked the righties that multiple times. I've gotten nothing.

 

You're the one claiming a President has the unrestricted and complete power to unclassify documents - free of oversight and free of obligation
to protocol. The very definition of an unclassified document is that it is free to be distributed to people without security clearance. We're
all saying that the President doesn't have that unrestricted power for extremely sensitive documents.

 

Intelligent folks cando silly things too.

 

Post something I made up and be specific else stop the trolling. I gave you a good place to start.

Here is where you left off and went to the dark side

That is baseless conjecture on your part. He has not put us all in danger that you or I know of but please explain what danger that is and backing it up. President's take their personal items and notes and mementos and they were in a cooperative review of them.

 

After the first years his ability becomes more limited yes as I said but he has FOIA control when he first leaves office for HIS records.

 

They avoid those questions like the plague. I have posed several questions that are relevant...... and noting............except some distracting tactics.

 

Yep.

 

is this the record for the longest thread??

206...

what is the record??

 

I related a story I heard on one of the shows from a form NSA official under Bush. A lower level guy was giving a briefing and during it an aid came in and told Bush there was a cable from some admiral concerning the subject and it is SCHIFF level. The aid giving the briefing stood and said he would have to leave the meeting because he did not have that level security. Bush looked at him and said son take your seat you have SCHIFF level clearance until this meeting is over. That's all it took by order of the President.

 

"Stole" yes it is. They were packed and shipped by the Government Services Administration at government expense. They were openly available to the NARA and FBI. They were told to take whatever they wanted. That is hardly stolen. Presidents are not banned from their own records.

 

ok Bush was president at the time..but could he do the same today now that he is not president??

my guess is no.

 

She did "silly" things for years. At some point it should become apparent that it is illegal and dangerous.

 

and he can not take them home for whatever reasons he might make up


Maybe it was just because he could get away with it. Or felt entitled....... but like other issues....it is coming back to bite him.

as it should.

 

At the end of the day, Trump will not face any punishment for this - and the next President will feel more entitled, and the next
will do the same - and the next - and the next ... and people wonder how governments get more power - cause they always
point back to the other party and claim, "Well, they got away with it so ..."

Until we get back to each case being judged on it's own merits, we will be handing more and more power to government.
BOTH parties are out of control.

 

No, what Trump is saying he declassified was declassified WHILE he was still President. He could do so up to 12 noon on Jan, 20th 2021. When the GSA packed it up and shipped it to him they had been declassified.

 

Now Trump just has to prove he declassified those items, and explain why he didn't return ALL the boxes with the original batch that the FBI picked up .

 

Just as no one is above the law no one is below the law and equal treatment UNDER the law is a constitutional guaranty. You do agree with that premise don't you?

As AG Garland said

" “All Americans are entitled to the evenhanded application of the law, to due process of the law, and to the presumption of innocence.”"

And Prof. Dershowitz writes today in the WSJ

".....
Those who reject this comparison accuse those who make it of “whataboutism.” But treating like cases alike is crucial to the equal protection of the laws. The way in which Berger and Mrs. Clinton were treated is highly relevant in determining whether Mr. Trump is being subjected to a double standard of justice.

The facts, especially the degrees of culpability, may be different; and if so, that would provide a good answer to the “what about” question. But if the facts are similar and the treatment is different, Americans are entitled to ask whether this constitutes the even application of the law that Mr. Garland promised. The shoe must fit comfortably on the other foot if justice is to be done and seen to be done. There can’t be one rule for Democrats and another for Republicans.

So the question “What about her emails?” is an appropriate one. Mocking it is no answer. Neither is the cliché “two wrongs do not make a right.” A second wrong doesn’t justify or excuse the first, but unequal treatment of two comparable wrongs should raise concerns about fairness and equality. Unequal treatment of two equal wrongs is a third wrong.


The “whataboutism” argument applies as well to the manner in which Trump loyalists such as Peter Navarro, Roger Stone and Paul Manafort were arrested. In comparable cases involving similar charges, the defendants weren’t handcuffed, shackled or subjected to restraints generally reserved for those who pose a risk of violence or flight....
https://www.wsj.com/articles/but-he...records-act-11660482495?mod=opinion_lead_pos5

So would you agree this should be handled in the same manner as the Clinton espionage investigation?

 

No. It isn't. Each case needs to be judged on it's own merits.

You are arguing that a bank robber can get away with his crime if he can just prove that another bank robber wasn't caught.

Clinton wasn't caught because Trump put together a crappy Justice Department.

 

I actually thought the Jussie Smollett thread was longer, but I checked and it was closed by the management at 155 pages. Usually too long threads get locked.