@kellyjay saidI'm uninterested in this raving; all I set out to show was that this statement made by you was untrue:
Did you read it? They simply did not want to charge him for what they were charging Trump for, and Biden's disregard for the security of the material and who could see them was clear. Odd that if I'm not mistaken they had to put reasons for Trump's investigation in this report too, if they were unrelated why do that? I imagine the it's painfully obvious that both investiga ...[text shortened]... stice's Principles of Federal
Prosecution. For these reasons, we decline prosecution of Mr. Biden.
KJ: They said he was guilty but because of his diminished capacity they were not going to charge him, that is not saying he wasn't guilty, he was.
I think I easily did so. In fact, the cite you just provided from the Executive Summary does as well: "However, for the reasons summarized below, we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt."
I read the Executive Summary and certain parts of the Report; I cannot say I have perused the entire 388 pages. However, it clearly does not state Biden was "guilty" as you claimed.
@no1marauder saidThis may have been discussed, but if he is too senile to simply be charged, how is he still fit to run our country and dance around the nuclear button? Is it a diff definition of the word senile, conveniently applied?
I'm uninterested in this raving; all I set out to show was that this statement made by you was untrue:
KJ: They said he was guilty but because of his diminished capacity they were not going to charge him, that is not saying he wasn't guilty, he was.
I think I easily did so. In fact, the cite you just provided from the Executive Summary does as well: "However, for th ...[text shortened]... perused the entire 388 pages. However, it clearly does not state Biden was "guilty" as you claimed.
- Joined
- 23 Feb 22
- Moves
- 1798
307d
@averagejoe1 saidSadly, this can only help the Democrats. If Joe is removed or at least told not to run by the powers that be, the Dems will have a different candidate, and any candidate will draw Dems like flies to chit as well as a lot of sad, mistaken Republicans because of TDS.
This may have been discussed, but if he is too senile to simply be charged, how is he still fit to run our country and dance around the nuclear button? Is it a diff definition of the word senile, conveniently applied?
307d
@jj-adams saidWill likely be Michelle, and yes, they will prevail in election.
Sadly, this can only help the Democrats. If Joe is removed or at least told not to run by the powers that be, the Dems will have a different candidate, and any candidate will draw Dems like flies to chit as well as a lot of sad, mistaken Republicans because of TDS.
@no1marauder saidAccording to the evidence he took things he should not have but they are not charging him, he is old and his memory is bad. Who cares about his age or memory if he broke the law, the law was broken. Handling classified documents and information is a serious crime unless you have a “D” behind your name. The rules change for the little people and Republicans.
I'm uninterested in this raving; all I set out to show was that this statement made by you was untrue:
KJ: They said he was guilty but because of his diminished capacity they were not going to charge him, that is not saying he wasn't guilty, he was.
I think I easily did so. In fact, the cite you just provided from the Executive Summary does as well: "However, for th ...[text shortened]... perused the entire 388 pages. However, it clearly does not state Biden was "guilty" as you claimed.
I do believe he is being setup for a fall now by those who want him out!
307d
@kellyjay saidNothing new here. Can you comment on how you can say 'who cares', though. What in the hell?!
According to the evidence he took things he should not have but they are not charging him, he is old and his memory is bad. Who cares about his age or memory if he broke the law, the law was broken. Handling classified documents and information is a serious crime unless you have a “D” behind your name. The rules change for the little people and Republicans.
I do believe he is being setup for a fall now by those who want him out!
307d
@averagejoe1 saidLaw enforcement through the lens of politics is law-fare not a term I was familiar with but it fits. War without rules only agendas, the level playing field is cast aside!
Nothing new here. Can you comment on how you can say 'who cares', though. What in the hell?!
307d
1 edit
@kellyjay saidYou obviously haven't even glanced at the Report and are basing everything, as always, on information you get from rabid right wing propaganda sources.
According to the evidence he took things he should not have but they are not charging him, he is old and his memory is bad. Who cares about his age or memory if he broke the law, the law was broken. Handling classified documents and information is a serious crime unless you have a “D” behind your name. The rules change for the little people and Republicans.
I do believe he is being setup for a fall now by those who want him out!
If you'd like to use your own mind for a change, here's the Report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf
Robert Hur, who headed the investigation which led to the Report, was nominated by Trump to be United States Attorney for the District of Maryland and was confirmed by the Senate in a voice vote in March 2018. He resigned the position just weeks after Biden's inauguration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_K._Hur
The idea that he acted in a manner favorable to a Democrat for partisan political reasons is nonsense.
307d
@no1marauder saidAs I said playing around with classified documentation and knowing you are doing it wrong and unlawful, or even doing it unintentionally is wrong and unlawful! It doesn't matter, the documents were found in places they should NOT have been, and got there by means that were NOT lawful. Do you want to suggest otherwise, he willfully took and kept classified documents, shared some of them with others, and placed in an unsecured location.
You obviously haven't even glanced at the Report and are basing everything, as always, on information you get from rabid right wing propaganda sources.
If you'd like to use your own mind for a change, here's the Report: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf
Robert Hur, who headed the investigation which led to th ...[text shortened]... e idea that he acted in a manner favorable to a Democrat for partisan political reasons is nonsense.
307d
@kellyjay saidYour post is self-contradictory; the law requires "willfulness" yet you seem to think that doing something unintentionally satisfies the legal requirements of this Federal Criminal statute. It doesn't.
As I said playing around with classified documentation and knowing you are doing it wrong and unlawful, or even doing it unintentionally is wrong and unlawful! It doesn't matter, the documents were found in places they should NOT have been, and got there by means that were NOT lawful. Do you want to suggest otherwise, he willfully took and kept classified documents, shared some of them with others, and placed in an unsecured location.
307d
@no1marauder saidYou are a liar and you know it. We have been over this before.
MB: Trump returning classified documents is why NARA knew he had them. They did not know prior to that.
This statement is clearly false and by now, knowingly so.
You are deliberately lying.
307d
@metal-brain saidYou lying about this doesn't change the facts I have outlined.
You are a liar and you know it. We have been over this before.
You are deliberately lying.
NARA was demanding the turnover of documents Trump had illegally kept long before he finally got around to send some boxes over in January 2022. Your refusal to admit this is just another example of your willingness to spread falsehoods in defense of Trump (you've been doing so here for 8 years).
307d
@no1marauder saidI am calling your bluff. What is your source of information?
You lying about this doesn't change the facts I have outlined.
NARA was demanding the turnover of documents Trump had illegally kept long before he finally got around to send some boxes over in January 2022. Your refusal to admit this is just another example of your willingness to spread falsehoods in defense of Trump (you've been doing so here for 8 years).
307d
1 edit
@metal-brain saidI already gave it, moron.
I am calling your bluff. What is your source of information?
The link to the indictment is included in my prior post.
EDIT: Here it is AGAIN: https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/06/trump-indictment.pdf
p. 17 paragraph 37
307d
Here's a letter to Trump's lawyers from the Acting Archivist of the United States:
"As you are no doubt aware, NARA had ongoing communications with the former President’s representatives throughout 2021 about what appeared to be missing Presidential records, which resulted in the transfer of 15 boxes of records to NARA in January 2022. "
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/[WORD TOO LONG]