Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hector13]

Your metaphor doesn’t work. You’re trying to present the worst actors as the liberals without evidence, and without considering evidence which does not support your narrative, ie suggesting Pelosi is using her position in government to line her pockets via insider trading, as opposed to her husband being good at working the market having founded a venture capitalist/real estate/consultancy firm over a decade prior to her being elected to congress.

You like Occam’s Razor: would you expect more success in the stock market from someone who founded a venture capitalist firm or a homemaker turned politician?

A better metaphor for what your doing would be to suggest that Michael Jordan was only an exceptional player because the NBA manipulated conditions to allow him to perform while suppressing opponents abilities to play against him, and that if that weren’t the case Sam Bowie would be the best.

Equally so, your parroting of conservative talking head lines that the FBI is targeting conservatives while protecting liberals does throw your claim of being impartial onto shaky ground a little bit. If that is indeed the case, how are the Republicans still able to win elections when they have a federal agency trying to thwart them at every turn, and boosting their opponents?

[nenjin]

If that is indeed the case, how are the Republicans still able to win elections when they have a federal agency trying to thwart them at every turn, and boosting their opponents?

I mean, Occam's Razor says that people who love the truth are waging secret war against the biased FBI to protect the ballot boxes and that's the only thing preventing a godless liberal takeover of New Russia.

That's how the razor cuts, right? Wait...is the other side even sharp?

[Max™]

The problem with your argument, Max, is that if they WERE declassified, it is not a crime for those people to have them. In fact, it's not a crime for YOU to have them. So if there is to be an indictment, it has to be over documents that are, in fact, classified.

Again, if the government is missing ANY documents which it is supposed to have, you have them, and are asked to return them it is a crime to say no. Also given how the orange turd had his status revoked, he couldn't even legally have classified docs, but again, nobody with any experience would bring a case involving classification status when there is low-hanging fruit regarding possession/removal/intent to conceal docs right there in the mar a lago search.

If you are a president and leave office there are lots of documents which are supposed to go to NARA according to the PRA. Once you refuse to do that you run afoul of various parts of the laws I linked.

Similarly if you happen to have stuff like nuclear secrets which the government wants back YOU HAVE TO GIVE THEM BACK, and he did not.

You're absolutely wrong about the idea that it has to be classified docs to prosecute, check your facts yo, the fact that they could always be declassified and that there could be any doubt guarantees they would not bring that case, while there are laws including ones I linked which do not depend on classification but simply the fact that the government said "hey, we think you have these, can you give them back" and the dumbfuck said "no, I don't have them" then they got a warrant and found them and HE SAID "GIVE THEM BACK THOSE ARE MINE" and tried to get them back while clearly establishing that he had intent to prevent the government from obtaining them which is absolutely illegal and incredibly stupid.

[Thorfinn]

What metaphor, Hector13? I'm not hectoring Pelosi because she is a liberal, but because by several accounts, she is a most, um, accomplished of traders. It's not illegal though because Congress exempted themselves from insider trading laws. It's still insider trading by the definition, just that they can't be charged with it. I don't know why you are so hyped about talking about something that probably every Congresscritter is doing and that's not even illegal.

But I'd be willing to make you a bet. I'll bet Paul Pelosi cannot keep up his 150% annual ROI going after his wife no longer has access to all that inside information she gets as a member of Congress. How sure are you his VC background is sufficient explanation? What stakes shall we set?

Equally so, your parroting of conservative talking head lines that the FBI is targeting conservatives while protecting liberals does throw your claim of being impartial onto shaky ground a little bit. If that is indeed the case, how are the Republicans still able to win elections when they have a federal agency trying to thwart them at every turn, and boosting their opponents?

Are you saying the FBI also bugged candidate Biden and President Biden? Did they hide Eric Trump's laptop? Is there anything remotely close? Did Hillary's server get a middle of the night raid? Remember, she didn't even have the fig leaf of having authority to declassify. Was there similar vitriol for her when her tech team destroyed the hard drives, first with BleachBit, then with hammers? How about an example or two?

Again, if the government is missing ANY documents which it is supposed to have, you have them, and are asked to return them it is a crime to say no.

That's the classic begging the question fallacy. You are assuming the government has a right to those documents, which Trump and his lawyers disagree with. Traditionally, that would be handled in a court, where the two arguments are made and the stronger argument prevails. When was that process replaced by whatever Max™ says goes?

Also given how the orange turd had his status revoked, he couldn't even legally have classified docs,

Again, begging the question. I get that you are too emotionally invested in this to think rationally, but the whole question hinges on whether or not something in his possession was declassified as of Jan 20, 2020, because, as you note, he no longer had authority to declassify after (p)Resident Biden was sworn in.[/quote]

You're absolutely wrong about the idea that it has to be classified docs to prosecute, check your facts yo, the fact that they could always be declassified and that there could be any doubt guarantees they would not bring that case, while there are laws including ones I linked which do not depend on classification but simply the fact that the government said "hey, we think you have these, can you give them back" and the dumbfuck said "no, I don't have them" then they got a warrant and found them and HE SAID "GIVE THEM BACK THOSE ARE MINE" and tried to get them back while clearly establishing that he had intent to prevent the government from obtaining them which is absolutely illegal and incredibly stupid.

I'm reasonably sure that is almost completely in error. The matter before the court was whether this was personal property and not subject to NARA or property of the US Government and was. You've gone way behind the Queen of Hearts' "Sentence first—verdict afterwards."

Not even the government can legally say, "Gibmedat" without establishing in a court of law that it is theirs. Well, until we go full Banana Republic.

[Lord Shonus]

I'm reasonably sure that is almost completely in error. The matter before the court was whether this was personal property and not subject to NARA or property of the US Government and was. You've gone way behind the Queen of Hearts' "Sentence first—verdict afterwards."

Not even the government can legally say, "Gibmedat" without establishing in a court of law that it is theirs. Well, until we go full Banana Republic.

Ignoring everything else in this, which is blatant "anyone who doesn't immediately believe this without question is a baby-eating liberal traitor" MAGAganda that has been extensively debunked, Presidents do not get to simply keep governemnt documents as personal property when they leave office. The government doesn't have to prove in a court of law it belongs to them than you would have to prove that a checkbook embossed with "PROPERTY OF THORFINN" was yours.

Again, we know at least some of what Trump had. Claiming it is personal property is blatant bad-faith that has no purpose other than deceiving particularly gullible idiots.

[Thorfinn]

Presidents do not get to simply keep governemnt documents as personal property when they leave office. The government doesn't have to prove in a court of law it belongs to them than you would have to prove that a checkbook embossed with "PROPERTY OF THORFINN" was yours.

Again, we know at least some of what Trump had. Claiming it is personal property is blatant bad-faith that has no purpose other than deceiving particularly gullible idiots.

Ignoring all the nonsense you keep repeating in hopes that some day it will become true, what do we know? I heard about some cocktail napkin with Kim Jong Un's signature, which isn't self-evidently government property. Some other stuff that sounded pretty innocuous, though I admit I wasn't really paying attention. Nothing I thought was worth running around with your hair on fire, regardless of who was holding onto it.

I'm not a fan of whataboutism, but holy cow, can you imagine applying the same standard to Clinton or especially Obama? Not too long ago, the Chicago media reported a warehouse full of papers due for the yet unbuilt Obama Library that were in no-security storage. Or little enough that someone snuck onto the site one night and allegedly left a noose. Any calls for return of presidential papers, or overly dramatic concerns over irresponsibility? Crickets.

[Frumple]

Those library papers were in the possession of the bloody archives, dude. Take two seconds to actually look into the circumstances of something before spouting off horseshit, for the love of everyone's time.

[Thorfinn]

I looked up the court filings to see what the Presidential Records Act argument was all about, and the exception Trump's lawyers were talking about was that personal records are exempt.

(3) The term 'personal records' means all documentary
materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, of a purely
private or nonpublic character which do not relate to or have
an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory.
or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. Such term
includes—
"(A) diaries, journals, or other personal notes serving as
the functional equivalent of a diary or journal which are not
prepared or utilized for, or circulated or communicated in the
course of, transacting Government business;
"(B) materials relating to private political associations,
and having no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying
out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial
duties of the President; and
"(C) materials relating exclusively to the President's own
election to the office of the Presidency; and materials directly
relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional,
statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the
President.

[EDIT]
If we are talking about an autographed cocktail napkin, it's hard to see how that has any direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President. If we are talking official documents, they are not unique, unless he scribbled something significant on them. Then I think there is a good argument it falls under the Act. So what did they have probable cause to think should have been included? I don't know, and neither do you. Most of the warrant, allegedly specifying what it is that they are planning to seize and why they believe it to be at that location, has been redacted.
[/EDIT]

Frumple, THOSE papers, yes, and obviously the Archivist couldn't care less how secure those were, while with these, a Secret Service detail is not sufficient. What's at issue is not those, but the papers that were not turned over to the Archivist, that Obama declared to be "personal records." Despite the hair on fire types who think Republicans are pure evil, I don't know of a single Republican who said, "Dude, are you sure those boxes are all personal records? Care if we take a look?"

[Lord Shonus]

The "cocktail napkin with Kim Jong Un's Signature" was official diplomatic correspondence between North Korea and the United States, which is by Federal law the property of the government. You're outright making shit up to declare Trump innocent.

What you are blatantly ignoring is that all Presidential documents are government property cataloged by the National Archives. They have a list of all such documents generated by every President. if an item is on that list, there is no burden of proof on the part of the government, because that list IS proof. You have one of those documents, you refuse to hand it over when they notice it is missing, that's a crime. The only thing they have to prove is that this is the document the list says it is, and that you refused to give it to them. Full stop.

Literally the only person directly connected to the case that claims "PERSONAL PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" or "I MENTALLY DECLARED IT UNCLASSIFIED SO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO OWN IT!!" is Trump himself, who -as per his own statements- is absolutely convinced that no rules apply to him. His lawyers aren't trying to make this claim hold up in court, because if they lie about it THEY will go to jail.

The Obama library claim is pure bullshit. All Obama documents destined for the library are accounted for and currently under the administration of the National Archives. The National Archives have confirmed they have every single one of them. If there were such a breach, it would be on them, not Obama. And there was none. There was allegedly a noose left late last year - at the site of the under-construction library where no documents are yet stored. A member of the construction crew -who quite obviously has access to the site- is the primary suspect. There are a large number of unclassified documents currently stored in a Chicago warehouse - by the Archives. The claim is nothing more than yet another "I didn't do it! Nobody saw me do it! I did it but everybody else does it too! "Ok, only I did it, but that's okay because I'm God"
deflection exercise from Trump.


EDIT 2: You seem to be suffering under the delusion that there's no paper trail. The National Archives lists are generated when a document is CREATED. Nobody has to paw through the departing President's papers because everything's tracked already - if anything is taken, an audit will find them. Which is exactly what happened here. The stuff with Biden and Carter are extremely low priority stuff that nobody checked, and almost certainly went missing during routine business - somebody forgot to shove a folder in a briefcase or similar.

EDIT: This took a long time to write - "personal records" are not on the NARA list in the first place. The claim he's trying to make is that some of his personal records that fall under that provision were taken along with the documents they were seeking. He's done so in a vague way in the hope that people will be duped into thinking that only personal documents were taken, but he hasn't actually outright claimed that. Because if he tries to claim that the National Archives documents were his personal property, it would amount to a confession of stealing them.

[Thorfinn]

The "cocktail napkin with Kim Jong Un's Signature" was official diplomatic correspondence between North Korea and the United States, which is by Federal law the property of the government.

If you are correctly representing that napkin, you are probably right. What did it say?

Literally the only person directly connected to the case that claims "PERSONAL PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" or "I MENTALLY DECLARED IT UNCLASSIFIED SO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO OWN IT!!" is Trump himself, who -as per his own statements- is absolutely convinced that no rules apply to him. His lawyers aren't trying to make this claim hold up in court, because if they lie about it THEY will go to jail.

Trump filed his own motions? Seriously?

EDIT: This took a long time to write - "personal records" are not on the NARA list in the first place. The claim he's trying to make is that some of his personal records that fall under that provision were taken along with the documents they were seeking. He's done so in a vague way in the hope that people will be duped into thinking that only personal documents were taken, but he hasn't actually outright claimed that. Because if he tries to claim that the National Archives documents were his personal property, it would amount to a confession of stealing them.

So long as they are not personal records, you are probably right. But wasn't that the whole point of going to court to establish whether or not they were personal records? That's what the filing said.

[Max™]

Also if you're talking about the only court which was involved in this case so far, you mean the mook in Florida that he judge-shopped for in order to have her whip up some bullshit calvinball excuse for why the documents should be returned to the guy who got her seated as a judge.

She wrote up some of the stupidest legalistic bullshit ever seen, so bad that a panel with a judge appointed by fucking dubya and the orange turd told her to get the fuck out of there with that garbage.

Then the stupid fucks nominated a by-the-books good retired judge for the special master, the DOJ went "SURE, HE'S GREAT" and by the time they went "wait what" he looked at the evidence and said "this is dumb calvinball bullshit, the DOJ can use the docs" and then the fucking judge tried to invalidate it all anyways because they're all so very bad at what they do, and this all happened, factually, recently.

Again, if the government is missing ANY documents which it is supposed to have, you have them, and are asked to return them it is a crime to say no.

That's the classic begging the question fallacy. You are assuming the government has a right to those documents, which Trump and his lawyers disagree with. Traditionally, that would be handled in a court, where the two arguments are made and the stronger argument prevails. When was that process replaced by whatever Max™ says goes?

We know he had lots of documents with no reasonable claim to being personal records were there, we know they were requested, we know they had to get a warrant to return them, there's no doubt about that. It is as they say a matter of record.

The only reason he tried to claim they were his is because someone pointed out it is REALLY bad that he had them and didn't return them, typically when an ex-pres wants to claim something as a personal record they do it properly or afterwards, they don't just steal a bunch of shit and then argue it ex-post-facto.

Also given how the orange turd had his status revoked, he couldn't even legally have classified docs,

the whole question hinges on whether or not something in his possession was declassified as of Jan 20, 2020

No, in fact it doesn't, you want it to for some reason, I know that classification doesn't matter for the numerous crimes he did commit, and yes I admit it is because I want to see the shitbag try to run for office from a prison cell. I'll be happy if he just keels over dead from a heart attack before then, but he absolutely deserves to suffer for everything he's done, as do those who do awful shit on his behalf/in support of him.

You're absolutely wrong about the idea that it has to be classified docs to prosecute, check your facts yo, the fact that they could always be declassified and that there could be any doubt guarantees they would not bring that case, while there are laws including ones I linked which do not depend on classification but simply the fact that the government said "hey, we think you have these, can you give them back" and the dumbfuck said "no, I don't have them" then they got a warrant and found them and HE SAID "GIVE THEM BACK THOSE ARE MINE" and tried to get them back while clearly establishing that he had intent to prevent the government from obtaining them which is absolutely illegal and incredibly stupid.

I'm reasonably sure that is almost completely in error. The matter before the court was whether this was personal property and not subject to NARA or property of the US Government and was.

No, though it is true that his fans WANT that to be the case because he could conceivably avoid prison if the case focuses exclusively on nonsense like magical declassification or personal records.

On the other hand, I've been following this the whole time, all the twists and turns, and distinctly remember the gleeful satisfaction I felt over realizing not only did he potentially commit numerous serious crimes... he ruined his best defense against them by repeatedly shouting out that he fully intended to take them and keep them.

That Biden and Pence were discovered to have docs they shouldn't have and turned them over just fucks the orange cunt harder because he is too fucking stupid to shut the fuck up.

[Starver]

though I admit I wasn't really paying attention.

Pretty much your entire schtick. Except for (often outright disproven) attack-arguments from one side, which you seem to have picked up wholesale.

You're building much of your (claimed) opinion around holes in your knowledge that you are liberally (NPI!) interpretting as being full of the kind of bedrock the rest of your house needs to be built on. But it's sand, in the middle of a whole field of quicksand. You can build upon such foundations, but not your way. Not seriously. And I think you know this.

[hector13]

What metaphor, Hector13? I'm not hectoring Pelosi because she is a liberal, but because by several accounts, she is a most, um, accomplished of traders. It's not illegal though because Congress exempted themselves from insider trading laws. It's still insider trading by the definition, just that they can't be charged with it. I don't know why you are so hyped about talking about something that probably every Congresscritter is doing and that's not even illegal.

But I'd be willing to make you a bet. I'll bet Paul Pelosi cannot keep up his 150% annual ROI going after his wife no longer has access to all that inside information she gets as a member of Congress. How sure are you his VC background is sufficient explanation? What stakes shall we set?

Source on the 150% ROI?

Pelosi may be immune from prosecution for insider trading, but I very much doubt that would extend to husband Pelosi. Why hasn’t he been investigated and prosecuted for insider trading? Just because he’s not the one with access to the information, using non-public information to benefit from buying or selling stocks is illegal.

Equally so, your parroting of conservative talking head lines that the FBI is targeting conservatives while protecting liberals does throw your claim of being impartial onto shaky ground a little bit. If that is indeed the case, how are the Republicans still able to win elections when they have a federal agency trying to thwart them at every turn, and boosting their opponents?

Are you saying the FBI also bugged candidate Biden and President Biden? Did they hide Eric Trump's laptop? Is there anything remotely close? Did Hillary's server get a middle of the night raid? Remember, she didn't even have the fig leaf of having authority to declassify. Was there similar vitriol for her when her tech team destroyed the hard drives, first with BleachBit, then with hammers? How about an example or two?

If Biden associated with criminals being tracked by the FBI I imagine they’d do that to him too. If Trump didn’t associate with criminals being tracked by the FBI, he wouldn’t end up on FBI recordings

They didn’t hide the laptop. The laptop had 130,000 emails on it, and the NYP broke the story with… two emails I think it was? Do you think the FBI has the resources to go through 130,000 emails in 20 minutes?

Why would they smash the drives to bits after having used BleachBit? Why would they use BB if they intended to smash the drives to bits anyway?

Equally so, why would they use BB in the first place, a free to use program described by Jonathan Zdzairski as amateur?

Like… I’m one that believes conspiracies are undone by the incompetence of the participants, but really? A free to download program to try to hide… whatever it is she’s supposed to have done? Breaching national security or whatever.

Remember how she was investigated for it though? Twice!

Again, though, do you have anything more interesting to rail against? These are all re-hashed conservative conspiratorial codswallop. I want some Q-Anon level of nonsense, like a cabal of pedophile Satan-worshippers in pizzerias running the country or something. You can do it.

[anewaname]

H.R. 25, "To promote freedom, fairness, and economic opportunity by repealing the income tax and other taxes, abolishing the Internal Revenue Service, and enacting a national sales tax to be administered primarily by the
States."

State-controlled 30% taxes? Yeah... that won't inspire 50 corrupt fiefdom-building operations.

[Frumple]

I mean, it wouldn't, but primarily because it would completely destroy the US (and thus global) economy, leading to far more than just 50 corrupt fiefdom-building operations in the hellscape that used to be the states.