[Action80]

By now it should be fairly clear that this case isn't going anywhere.

Remember when you spent months saying how well it was going for Trump after the election, quoting lawyers and other "experts" who were saying what you wanted to believe?

At best Trump has been reckless and stupid. He wasn't storing the documents securely and he showed them to people he shouldn't have while telling people they were confidential. And then he resisted initial polite requests for the documents to be returned. TL;DR - This is another fine mess he's got himself in to.

You have no evidence whatsoever he showed anything to anybody.

The US is no longer a constitutional republic.

There is no such thing as "free elections," anywhere in the world.

[AATW]

You have no evidence whatsoever he showed anything to anybody.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html

[Lord Dave]

One of the articles said that former senior officials have security clearances so that they can be on-call when a situation or crisis happens. Trump and his former officials are expected to refer back to the Trump administration events and provide advice, so obviously they have a need-to-know access to the documents, and may have always had their need-to-know since the time they came in contact with the material. The PRA statutes guarantees the former president access to the documents, as previously quoted. President Trump also implicitly gave himself need-to-know access to the documents when he had them transferred to be with Former President Trump at Mar-a-Lago.

By now it should be fairly clear that this case isn't going anywhere. The premise that Trump had no clearance and just became a regular person after presidency is fundamentally wrong. This investigation will morph into comparative absurdism such as "Did the dozens of  Secret Service agents at Mar-a-Lago carry enough guns or deploy enough security measures when they were guarding the classified information that was stored in the security hardened basement?", as seen by the FBI counting locks on doors in their affidavit, assuming the case isn't simply dismissed altogether. Eventually the partisan DOJ will have to stop lumping the Secret Service in with Trump as "TRUMP" in its documents and admit that the Secret Service was guarding Mar-a-Lago and the classified and potentially-classified documents in the security hardened basement.

So why were boxes found in a bathroom?

And yes, typically the outgoing president keeps his clearance just in case, at tge discression of the current president. Tho remember when trump threatened to take away Obama's clearance?

But again, it doesn't matter if he gave himself super permission: Biden can still demand them back and revoke that permission.  Because Biden is the ultimate authority on all classified documents.

[Action80]

You have no evidence whatsoever he showed anything to anybody.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html

So, what do the words on an AUDIO TAPE actually demonstrate in regard to evidence?

Even CNN included the words "SEEMS TO..." in the article.

Jesus, you're dead determined to lose ALL of your credibility...

(HINT - That task has already been accomplished...you can stop typing now, and go away).

[AATW]

You have no evidence whatsoever he showed anything to anybody.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html

So, what do the words on an AUDIO TAPE actually demonstrate in regard to evidence?

Even CNN included the words "SEEMS TO..." in the articel.

That's literally what evidence is. It's:

"the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."

This recording is evidence - not proof, but let's not get into that again - that Trump showed people documents he knew to be confidential and that he knew he couldn't declassify, as he was no longer president. Because, y'know, the things he's saying in the recording.

You can dispute the quality of evidence of course, which is I'm sure what his defence lawyers will do in court. But to say there's "no evidence" is simply incorrect.
If there was no evidence then he wouldn't have been arrested.

[Action80]

You have no evidence whatsoever he showed anything to anybody.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/26/politics/trump-classified-documents-audio/index.html

So, what do the words on an AUDIO TAPE actually demonstrate in regard to evidence?

Even CNN included the words "SEEMS TO..." in the articel.

That's literally what evidence is. It's:

"the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."

This recording is evidence - not proof, but let's not get into that again - that Trump showed people documents he knew to be confidential and that he knew he couldn't declassify, as he was no longer president. Because, y'know, the things he's saying in the recording.

You can dispute the quality of evidence of course, which is I'm sure what his defence lawyers will do in court. But to say there's "no evidence" is simply incorrect.
If there was no evidence then he wouldn't have been arrested.

LOL!!!

As if you need evidence to arrest somebody...

Jesus...

the recording is certainly evidence that Donald Trump has spoken some words to somebody...yeah, I'll give you that...Why don't you just admit you want him shot for ever being alive?

I mean, the guy is a lifelong democrat who just switched parties for chrissake...

[Dr Van Nostrand]

You can dispute the quality of evidence of course, which is I'm sure what his defence lawyers will do in court. But to say there's "no evidence" is simply incorrect.
If there was no evidence then he wouldn't have been arrested.

The MAGAnoids aren't interested in truth or real evidence. They are going to believe whatever they want. Some believe that Trump's real estate sales techniques can help them flip their way to financial independence. Some believe he's the Second Coming of Christ. Some believe he's an innocent patriot being persecuted. Of course, they all feel differently after The Donald screws them and throws them under the bus. Pretty much everyone who supported Trump now hates him.

He waves the Mueller report in the air saying he's exonerated and the idiots believe him. Fox Broadcasting hides the Jan 6th hearings and the idiots have no awareness that Trump and his orks tried to overthrow our government. The idiots pay $20,000 for a day at a shabby airport banquet room watching videos of Trump talking about how rich he is and they still believe him. Trump said it himself about his gullible followers, he could shoot someone and they would still support him.

If these redneck buffoons fell so easily for a dumbass like Trump, they're going to line up like soldiers when the real Anti-Christ arrives.

[garygreen]

suppose a grand jury subpoenas my personal diaries. now suppose i tell my lawyer to go through my home on june 2nd and collect all my diary entries and turn them over to the grand jury. but on june 1st, i direct someone to remove some of my diaries out of my home and put them into a storage locker, even though i know for a fact that they have been subpoenaed. to top it all off, i have one of my other attorneys certify to the grand jury that all my diaries have been turned over, even though she wasn't present in my home on june 2nd, and even though, again, i know for a fact that the certification is not true.

i have just committed a felony.

notice that at no point did i ever have to use the words confidental, or president, or presidental records act, or anything else like that. nor would it matter if the security locker is the deepest vault in fort knox. none of that shit matters.

now, the fact that "diaries" in this particular case is actually "extremely confidential and sensitive government work-product that i had absolutely no legal right to possess in the first place" makes the magnitude of my criminal act very very bad and adds a bunch of additional criminal penalties. but it's really not relevant to the underlying felony: intentionally lying to a grand jury.

read the fucking indictment. goddamn.

[Action80]

We read the fucking indictment. goddamn.

The fact you believe any of it is laughable.

[Tom Bishop]

By now it should be fairly clear that this case isn't going anywhere.

Remember when you spent months saying how well it was going for Trump after the election, quoting lawyers and other "experts" who were saying what you wanted to believe?

At best Trump has been reckless and stupid. He wasn't storing the documents securely and he showed them to people he shouldn't have while telling people they were confidential. And then he resisted initial polite requests for the documents to be returned. TL;DR - This is another fine mess he's got himself in to.

Actually I recall that I told you in 2020 that it would take years to process a fraud case. I explained to you that the vast majority of cases during the election up to the presidential swearing-in were consequentially not even about fraud, and were about election rules that had been broken. Some judges had agreed that rules were broken but still declined to nullify the election.

Election fraud cases were indeed brought fourth, and are still in the legal process. There was news on this last week.

June 21, 2023 - Jury Trial Finally Possibility For 2020 Election Fraud Claims As Philly Judge Rejects Protective Order Request - "Erdos said that none of the various cases regarding 2020 election fraud allegations ever went before a jury and that the eyes of the world will be on Philadelphia when this case goes to trial."

Looks like I was correct. It did take years to work its way through the legal system.

[Lord Dave]

By now it should be fairly clear that this case isn't going anywhere.

Remember when you spent months saying how well it was going for Trump after the election, quoting lawyers and other "experts" who were saying what you wanted to believe?

At best Trump has been reckless and stupid. He wasn't storing the documents securely and he showed them to people he shouldn't have while telling people they were confidential. And then he resisted initial polite requests for the documents to be returned. TL;DR - This is another fine mess he's got himself in to.

Actually I recall that I told you in 2020 that it would take years to process a fraud case. I explained to you that the vast majority of cases during the election up to the presidential swearing-in were consequentially not even about fraud, and were about election rules that had been broken. Some judges had agreed that rules were broken but still declined to nullify the election.

Election fraud cases were indeed brought fourth, and are still in the legal process. There was news on this last week.

June 21, 2023 - Jury Trial Finally Possibility For 2020 Election Fraud Claims As Philly Judge Rejects Protective Order Request - "Erdos said that none of the various cases regarding 2020 election fraud allegations ever went before a jury and that the eyes of the world will be on Philadelphia when this case goes to trial."

Looks like I was correct. It did take years to work its way through the legal system.

Corcoran is representing  former Delaware County, Pa. Voting Machine Warehouse supervisor James Savage in a defamation suit regarding claims that the 2020 election was rigged in Delco.

A defermation suit... Wow... Thats definitely sorta maybe linked to the actual election.
>_>

Is that really all you could find?
Espwcially one filed by James Savage, the voting machine warehouse supervisor who had his character nationally assassinated?

[Tom Bishop]

The sentence you picked out appears to be talking about an adjacent case the lawyer in the article was involved in.

See the first sentence in the article I linked:

"Jury Trial Finally Possibility For 2020 Election Fraud Claims As Philly Judge Rejects Protective Order Request — Attorney Conor Corcoran got a solid spanking when Judge Michael E. Erdos denied his request for a protective order against election whistleblowers Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrom, today, June 20, in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court."

If you are filing frivolous protective orders against whistleblowers as a legal tactic it does suggest that you have something to hide. Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrop are whistleblowers claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-503/247712/20221130140221082_20221130-135712-00003900-00012672.pdf

[Lord Dave]

The sentence you picked out appears to be talking about an adjacent case the lawyer in the article was involved in.

See the first sentence in the article I linked:

"Jury Trial Finally Possibility For 2020 Election Fraud Claims As Philly Judge Rejects Protective Order Request — Attorney Conor Corcoran got a solid spanking when Judge Michael E. Erdos denied his request for a protective order against election whistleblowers Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrom, today, June 20, in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court."

If you are filing frivolous protective orders against whistleblowers as a legal tactic it does suggest that you have something to hide. Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrop are whistleblowers claiming fraud in the 2020 election.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-503/247712/20221130140221082_20221130-135712-00003900-00012672.pdf

1. They did use potentially threatening language with the three boxes comment.  And they have lots of guns.  And they really hate that guy.  Not sure its frivilous.  Being told that a gun is a valid use for defending freedom to the guy you think is destroying freedom, sounds threatening to me.

2. Why are you showing me an obviously rejected writ of certiorari?  Anyone can file those.

[AATW]

By now it should be fairly clear that this case isn't going anywhere.

Remember when you spent months saying how well it was going for Trump after the election, quoting lawyers and other "experts" who were saying what you wanted to believe?

At best Trump has been reckless and stupid. He wasn't storing the documents securely and he showed them to people he shouldn't have while telling people they were confidential. And then he resisted initial polite requests for the documents to be returned. TL;DR - This is another fine mess he's got himself in to.

Actually I recall that I told you in 2020 that it would take years to process a fraud case.

Even if you did say that, you said a lot of other things before that. You started out right after the election saying how Trump knew he'd "got it":

After his golf game today he took the time to take wedding pictures.

Video of him leaving the golf course and encountering wedding ceremony. So calm and collected. He already knows he's got it.

You then said, when it was clear he hadn't "got it", how good it was that the judges and other decision makers were conservatives, appointed by Trump or other Republicans:

You guys may have a severe case of the TDS, but the hundreds of conservative judges and otherwise decision making appointees by the Bush, Bush Sr., and Trump administrations who are following this don't. Elected senators, etc.

Then you said that the Supreme Court would decide

Sky News: Supreme Court will decide next US President

Lots of fraud, questions, Supreme Court will likely decide.

And you even tried to desperately claim that it was a good thing that the cases were getting thrown out by lower courts

In this linked PA case it's a good thing that the state continues to deny and censor and dismiss so that the case can get through the process to the Supreme Court in a timely manner, so that they can decide the matter as final arbitrator.

The only thing that matters is the independent assessment by the Supreme Court, so it's good that these lower courts in the state don't want to deal with these cases. Best outcome.

You bought in to Powell's bullshit

Sydney Powell: “We have so much evidence I feel like its coming in through a fire hose.”  "We have evidence of kickbacks"

Sydney Powell reads part of an affidavit about the voting machines. Not looking good for Joe Biden's election campaign.

And got excited when you were able to cherry pick some sources who said what you wanted to believe

Your opinion, or the sources you read, may not be a qualified source though.

Liberal law professor says Trump will win.

Look at you here getting all excited about how bad things looked for Biden:

If the information in that Trump Press Conference is true, it's really bad news for Biden. This is why MSM has been trying to misrepresent the truth and focus on Guliani's hair today.

Dems in trouble in Arizona

BREAKING: Arizona Governor Announces He Won’t Accept Election Results Until All Lawsuits Are Settled

bye bye biden

When stack asked you how you were going to cope after the inauguration, what your strategy would be, you said:

The strategy will be to enjoy the win, since Trump won the 2020 election.

Look at you desperately trying to cling to hope:

You claim nothing is going to happen, that no one is believing the fraud claims, and Biden is going to win, yet less than two hours ago it has escalated to a point to where the Arizona legislature just invoked a constitutional statue to give the Arizona election a contested outcome.

You want Biden to win so much that you can't see that he's trending towards losing. There has rarely been this much conflict about the results of an American election. Foolish to think it's going to reverse course.

That means Joe Biden is more likely to lose. What a dumb shoe. Republicans and conservatives are in power in state legislatures, supreme court, senate, and will have sway on deciding the outcome of this election.

There's loads more, but you get the gist. And here you are years later still trying to pretend it's all going to plan. Chuckle. You are trying to do the exact same with all this. Forgive us if we don't take you that seriously,

Looks like I was correct.

lol.

[Tom Bishop]

1. They did use potentially threatening language with the three boxes comment.  And they have lots of guns.  And they really hate that guy.  Not sure its frivilous.  Being told that a gun is a valid use for defending freedom to the guy you think is destroying freedom, sounds threatening to me.

The judge determined that it was frivolous and rejected the protection order request. The three boxes comment is in reference to a popular phrase, and is not a direct threat towards an individual -

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/06/jury-trial-finally-possibility-2020-election-fraud-claims/

Corcoran based his request on Stenstrom’s frequent used of Frederick Douglass’s boxes of liberty during interviews and public speaking engagements.

Douglass said liberty depends on three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge or powder box, depending on the version.

Corcoran said that Stenstrom’s use of powder box made him fear that Stenstrom was planning to blow him up.

It was a ridiculous stretch as was indicated by the decision. Why would Corcoran waste the court’s valuable time with this foolishness? Was he hoping that the pair, who are representing themselves, would not show? That they would not be prepared? Well, they did and were, and the professional attorney ended up with pie on his face, albeit Savage will be getting the bill.

Stenstrom and Mrs. Hoopes noted that several figures in American history have used the phrasing.

The judge tossed this argument out and denied the protection order.

2. Why are you showing me an obviously rejected writ of certiorari?  Anyone can file those.

I don't see that the case was denied. Just last week the Judge Michael Erdos said that the case was still active and progressing - 

"Erdos said that none of the various cases regarding 2020 election fraud allegations ever went before a jury and that the eyes of the world will be on Philadelphia when this case goes to trial."

Even if you did say that, you said a lot of other things before that.

And if you follow those discussions around the time of the election you will find that I was expecting Trump to win at least some of the cases about broken election rules at the time. I also recall posting an image of a shotgun blast against a target. Only some of the lawsuits needed to win since the election was so close.

Indeed, Trump did win some. Trump won arguments that the ballots were illegally counted, but the court still declined to nullify the election in the state or do a re-do.

https://web.archive.org/web/20201214171552/https://electionwiz.com/2020/12/14/breaking-wisconsin-supreme-court-says-election-officials-were-wrong-ballots-may-not-be-counted/amp/



The court agreed with the Trump/GOP complaint about improper ballot counting and ruled that according to the law the the state could not automatically categorize people as confined due to the pandemic and send out mass absentee or mass mail-in ballots -

https://web.archive.org/web/20201214174152/https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=315283



Even though Trump won and the court ruled that the ballots were illegally distributed and counted, the courts were neglectful on providing a remedy or re-do of the election.

[markjo]

It is patently obvious that LD, AATW, markjo, and Kramer, believe absolutely nothing of what they type regarding this latest nothing burger...any and all Trump-related news is just fluff to fill the airwaves, while actual criminals continue to line their pockets with money received from trafficking drugs and humans through Ukraine - based switchpoints.

It’s pretty obvious that neither you or Tom understand just how serious the charges are and how much damage Trump has done to our credibility with the intelligence agencies of our allies as well as our own.  If it was just about anyone else facing the same charges, then they would have been in jail a year ago with out bail.  Just ask the kid who posted defense secrets on a gamer site just to impress his friends.

[Tom Bishop]

If it was just about anyone else facing the same charges, then they would have been in jail a year ago with out bail.

Well yes, I don't have continued post-presidency top secret security clearance, a platoon of secret service agents protecting me and my papers,  a guarantee to access to the papers with the Presidential Records Act, a president who ordered the papers to stay with me at my mansion, a basement that a known SCIF was located in to store the papers, or prior court judgements saying that anything a president decides to take from the Whitehouse on Jan 20 is a personal paper and beyond reproach.

Without that I am sure I would be arrested and sent to jail. In fact, with your insightful query I think we have solved the mystery of why Trump is not in jail now.

[Action80]

just how serious the charges are...

Serious charges are only leveled by serious people. The ilk here check no boxes...

how much damage Trump has done to our credibility with the intelligence agencies of our allies as well

Ah...the beloved "WMD," crowd...

LMMFAO!!!

[honk]

I actually agree that the "If it were anyone else..." argument is weak. This is a unique situation, and there really is no way that "anyone else" could be in the same position as a former president.

[markjo]

If it was just about anyone else facing the same charges, then they would have been in jail a year ago with out bail.

Well yes, I don't have continued post-presidency top secret security clearanceo…

What makes you think that Trump does?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/president-joe-biden-donald-trump-intelligence-briefings-b918841.html

…a guarantee to access to the papers with the Presidential Records Act…

No, the PRA does not say that he still has access to classified documents.

…a president who ordered the papers to stay with me at my mansion, a basement that a known SCIF was located in to store the papers…

Oh? Which president ordered that?   And why weren’t the documents stored in the SCIF instead of a bathroom or ballroom? Does Bedminster have a SCIF?

…or prior court judgements saying that anything a president decides to take from the Whitehouse on Jan 20 is a personal paper and beyond reproach.

If only that were true.

Without that I am sure I would be arrested and sent to jail. In fact, with your insightful query I think we have solved the mystery of why Trump is not in jail now.

Donald Trump is not in jail because because he's Donald Trump and the Justice Department is showing him a lot more courtesy than Trump has been showing to just about anyone else.

It’s really too bad that Trump spent so much time and effort fighting the election results and playing golf for the past two years and didn’t just sort through his stuff so that he could return the documents that he was legally required to return.  If he did, then he could have avoided this whole mess.