336d
@shavixmir saidSo the report says that Biden has done nothing wrong. Do you believe that Biden has done nothing wrong? Is it wrong for an elected official not to explain questionable receipts of money? Do you know that the govt (citizens) have a right to know what YOU received an unreported amount of money for?
No. The report said that.
@no1marauder saidWell, they sure seem drastic, I guess that they could do 191 of them.....for the obvious reason of making it easier for you socialists to defeat him in an election.
Gee, 91 felony charges sure seem "significant".
Politicians get prosecuted when they break the law here in the US; a Senator is also currently under indictment. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/22/politics/bob-menendez-charges/index.html
Running for President isn't a "get out of jail free card".
Trump said last week that he would not be revengeful, too busy. Hmmm, I hope he will be a little bit revengeful, you hyenas have got it coming. Hey, who the hell is this Hur guy, a name with which I am unfamiliar. Who were his parents?
"Politicians get prosecuted when they break the law (Source: Marauder.)" Hillary broke the law. Intent is a factor in assessing the particulars of law-breaking. Does one intend to destroy evidence, obstruct justice, or destroy government property? Would you like for me to more-complicate the question? Make it easier?
336d
@averagejoe1 saidThe Trump administration had four years to prosecute Hillary if they disagreed with Comey's and the DOJ's decision in July 2016 that no charges were warranted.
Well, they sure seem drastic, I guess that they could do 191 of them.....for the obvious reason of making it easier for you socialists to defeat him in an election.
Trump said last week that he would not be revengeful, too busy. Hmmm, I hope he will be a little bit revengeful, you hyenas have got it coming. Hey, who the hell is this Hur guy, a name with which I am ...[text shortened]... destroy government property? Would you like for me to more-complicate the question? Make it easier?
They never did so.
@no1marauder saidYeah, I think Trump said he had more fish to fry, not interested in putting it to that horrible person
The Trump administration had four years to prosecute Hillary if they disagreed with Comey's and the DOJ's decision in July 2016 that no charges were warranted.
They never did so.
......but you do agree, you cannot deny the fact, that she committed crimes?
336d
@no1marauder saiddid you miss this question?
The Trump administration had four years to prosecute Hillary if they disagreed with Comey's and the DOJ's decision in July 2016 that no charges were warranted.
They never did so.
'@mott-the-hoople said
was it legal for a senator to have possession of classified documents?
axin fer a bro
336d
@mott-the-hoople saidGive him time, he is pulling it up on his LexisNexis. And also answering my question, do you admit that Hillary committed crimes? And he need not mention Comey, nor need his answer be in more than one sentence. It is difficult to wrangle them fellers.
did you miss this question?
'@mott-the-hoople said
was it legal for a senator to have possession of classified documents?
axin fer a bro
@AverageJoe1
Did you actually find out what the docs BIden had? If you actually cared and looked you would have found the docs were his personal hand written notes in his diary about his time as VP. And a lot of presidents and VP's did the same which is why he was pronounced innocent.
But of course that means nothing to you, you will continue to make it look like the docs Biden had which he gave back with no subpoena needed BTW, but you will continue to make it like Biden is the criminal not your god king Trump.
You talk about Biden getting money but totally excuse the fact your god king got MILLIONS from guess where? That would be China, to the tune of about 5 million.
But OF COURSE it is Biden who is the grifter.
Funny I don't hear you talk about Justice Thomas who got lavish gifts, hundreds of thousands and Scalia also but I guess in Joe world no big deal, stuff paid for by billionaires who just happened to have cases adjudicated by SCOTUS.
No big deal, right?
@mott-the-hoople saidActually it was and is.
did you miss this question?
'@mott-the-hoople said
was it legal for a senator to have possession of classified documents?
axin fer a bro
As the Hur report points out, members of Congress are exempt from the general requirements restricting access to classified materials.
336d
@averagejoe1 saidIn the US, the way you determine if someone committed crimes is through the legal process.
Yeah, I think Trump said he had more fish to fry, not interested in putting it to that horrible person
......but you do agree, you cannot deny the fact, that she committed crimes?
To my knowledge, HRC has never been convicted of a crime, nor has she even been charged.
So no it is not a "fact" I would agree to i.e. that she "committed crimes".
336d
@mott-the-hoople saidThe Report on page 15 makes the following statement:
did you miss this question?
'@mott-the-hoople said
was it legal for a senator to have possession of classified documents?
axin fer a bro
The 1994 statute-and, by implication, the current executive order governing
classified information-do not apply to a sitting president or vice president, members of Congress, justices of the Supreme Court, and federal judges.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf
The statute referred to is this one: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3161
It's first sentence states:
"(a)Not later than 180 days after October 14, 1994, the President shall, by Executive order or regulation, establish procedures to govern access to classified information which shall be binding upon all departments, agencies, and offices of the executive branch of Government. "
However, 50 USC 3163 provides:
Except as otherwise specifically provided, the provisions of this subchapter shall not apply to the President and Vice President, Members of the Congress, Justices of the Supreme Court, and Federal judges appointed by the President.
Both statutes are in Title 50, Chapter 44, Subchapter VI of the United States Code.
Hope that helps.
336d
@no1marauder
Please see new thread on the Report. Stuff you have left out. There is more, I got tired of reading it.
336d
@no1marauder saidAnd they are silly - the 41charges against him in Georgia for the election are not substantiated in any significant way other than him making statements being misconstrued as him wanting to defraud the vote.
Gee, 91 felony charges sure seem "significant".
Politicians get prosecuted when they break the law here in the US; a Senator is also currently under indictment. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/22/politics/bob-menendez-charges/index.html
Running for President isn't a "get out of jail free card".
He is being charged with a conspiracy to overturn the election when the actual intention of what he was doing was getting to the bottom of suspicious swings in the ballot counts.
He's guilty of believing the election was stolen - as are many Americans - and that is no crime, nor is calling for authorities to properly investigate it.
The Jan 6 case is, of course, the greatest joke of them all - care to try to prove anythign about that one, Kangaroo Lawyer? He gave a speech stating that people should peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard, and dingbat dorks are pretending that there is a crime in that.
How does it feel to undermine democracy?
336d
@philokalia saidGee siccing a mob on the Congress to disrupt the Electoral College count (which the President has no lawful role in) isn't "undermining democracy" but calling someone to account for it is?
And they are silly - the 41charges against him in Georgia for the election are not substantiated in any significant way other than him making statements being misconstrued as him wanting to defraud the vote.
He is being charged with a conspiracy to overturn the election when the actual intention of what he was doing was getting to the bottom of suspicious swings in the ...[text shortened]... bat dorks are pretending that there is a crime in that.
How does it feel to undermine democracy?
336d
@averagejoe1 saidYou obviously haven't read a single word of the Report.
@no1marauder
Please see new thread on the Report. Stuff you have left out. There is more, I got tired of reading it.
336d
@no1marauder saidFeel free to make your case, bud.
You obviously haven't read a single word of the Report.
I think ya still got it in ya.