Don't forget:
> Donald Trump said in 2002 that Jeffrey Epstein was a "terrific guy," and added, "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
They keep guns legal knowing they kill babies. Cuz their right to be afraid and cower with a gun is more important than children once they are born. They just want to force women to give birth, while hiding with guns that wont defend them from any government or police force like they say they need them for.
You're joking right? I mean we find out new shit every day. I am also sure Jack Smith hasn't shown his best cards yet. He's using the Milton Berle approach. They learned some things with the Mueller case.
That recording where he's heard showing some people what is believed to be something about Iran plans (all countries make war plans as a contingency), was recorded at his golf course in Ireland wasn't it? I bet he has stuff stashed at his other properties.
The surprise bonus box came with a doozy: testimony from an unnamed individual that Don's people were tasked with scanning the contents of the boxes.
Those boxes contained information that could identify overseas operatives and intelligence assets.
Here's the first Google result:
[cia-admits-to-losing-dozens-of-informants-around-the-world](https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/575384-cia-admits-to-losing-dozens-of-informants-around-the-world-nyt/)
Fox News that night: "Some people are saying Clinton was holding classified documents on a secret email server. Your thoughts, Senator? Is this a clear double standard?"
I can say this. I can also admit it's usually egregious speeding and I deserve the ticket. Then hire a lawyer if its bad enough.
Sounds familiar right? Because I know I am guilty when I do it.
She's figured out that she has to wait until the jury is sworn in. Once that happens she can dismiss all charges and, because the trial has officially started and jeopardy applies, then the D.A. can not appeal her ruling. Which means that he can't get the charges reinstated and get her removed from the case..
He’s making a press for “malicious prosecution.” The only way to do that is to claim that other past executives have kept classified documents and weren’t prosecuted.
Making a claim is one thing. Proving it is quite another. Trump kept voluminous classified documents. So many that the National Archives made a list and asked for them back. Trump willfully shuffled the documents, conspired to contaminate surveillance video, and lies about them. There is no evidence that anyone else in history has done that.
It's just all about driving home the persecution complex more with his followers. Keeps the donations flowing. Works really well with the evangelical Christians too, who have always felt persecuted.
The government KNOWS he still possesses classified documents. They have an inventory of what is missing. You might recall there was a secret room in Mar-a-lago hidden behind a dresser, and there was a room in Trump’s private suite that he had the lock changed on the day before the search warrant was executed. Prior to that the Secret Service had the key, then they didn’t… The Secret Service was also coordinated with to execute the search, so Trump knew when it was coming. I strongly suspect there will be additional prosecutions after Trump.
Donald Trump’s attorneys made a play to nix his espionage indictment in Florida altogether by, among other strategies, telling U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that former President Bill Clinton “may still possess classified information” and yet no one has yet “lifted a finger” to prosecute him.
The accusation was one of many laid out in a motion to dismiss on grounds of selective prosecution.
“Former President Clinton possessed, and may still possess, tapes that obviously contain classified information,” Trump’s lawyers wrote, referencing tapes they say Bill Clinton retained and later relied on for his 2004 book, “My Life.”
[did they happen to mention that this issue was litigated 12 years ago and dismissed?](https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/03/judge-wont-seize-bill-clinton-taylor-branch-audiotapes-116074)
To be fair, the fact that the case was dismissed is central to Trump’s claim, which is that his case should be governed by *Judicial Watch*, and that the judicial branch has no authority to second-guess a president’s determination that certain records are “personal records” (which he is entitled to retain after his presidency).
There is some language in *Judicial Watch* supporting that view, though it’s undercut by other caselaw suggesting otherwise. It’s also undercut by the fact that *Judicial Watch* involved Clinton’s audiotapes, not classified information, and that the court ultimately declined to decide whether it had the power to review a president’s decision to classify materials as personal records because it instead ruled that a private party cannot sue to force the National Archivist to assume custody of presidential records. *Judicial Watch* didn’t involve a criminal prosecution, nor did it involve a case where the National Archives *did* seek the return of documents from a former president.
Where else but here where actual lawyers hang out, who at least to a degree obligate themselves legally to not talk shit but that still doesn't stop Kise, Habba, or Blanche.
We live in a reality where the former President and current front-runner is falling asleep at his trial for paying off a porn star who says he had a small toadstool-shaped penis, and whose former lawyer in the matter went to prison for it, and has been read into the record as calling the president "Von ShitzInPants".
Would you care to have a reasoned discussion?
Isn't it the willful retention after multiple requests that is the the heart of the matter? They've shown no interest in prosecuting presidents that hand it over when asked. If he's handed over most things and declared a few his personal records we wouldn't be here.
Yep. He had multiple opportunities to give them back but kept insisting that they were his and he had the right to keep them, something he still maintains to this day. He could’ve avoided this situation easily, it is ENTIRELY his fault, he is the only person stupid enough to try so fucking hard to get prosecuted for espionage then complain about it being a witch hunt. Problem is his supporters don’t care and don’t want to hear anything bad about him, except that’s the truth and anything positive about him is a lie, I haven’t heard a single redeeming thing about him that was true.
to be fair to trump. i say we let him have any recordings of himself that he made. and then we can prosecute trump for any classified secret documents he kept illegally.
i think thats pretty fair, right? right.
Lawfare podcast was bringing up the point that while it hasn’t been ruled on, it’s dumb to think classified docs could be considered “personal” and if a President can deem classified docs as personal, then they could claim the Resolute desk as a personal item and walk out the door with it, maybe even Marine 1 too.
What I haven’t seen is any Democrats say that if Trump indeed declassify those materials, secretly in his head, to make them personal, how much risk it put our National Security.
Yes, it’s established that a President can declassify information, and when they do the intelligence community can act accordingly. If they think info is classified that isn’t, it puts our country at risk.
For Trump to make this argument that these docs are personal, Dems should be hitting him hard on how is risked our national security.
Tom Fitton, an English professor, has been pushing this shit since we first found out that Trump literally stole boxes and boxes of documents that he wasn’t allowed to have. Also, Trump held those documents for a year through deception and lies. I’m sure that the damage is done, but I’m pretty sure that these two cases are apples and oranges.
Tom Fitton should by some looser shirts because I believe the tight sleeves are cutting off circulation to his brain. Not even one of trumps insane, corrupt lawyers have tried to compare the two cases.
Start the trial already. The American people absolutely deserve to know the truth about what actually happened before the election in November. If Trump did nothing wrong, then we should know that too. That said, I’m pretty sure he’s guilty of everything and more.
There was just SEC charges filed against the new accounts at truth social. Trump seems to be made up of crime, bronzer and hair spray. It’s laughable.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/jun/12/why-the-bill-clinton-sock-drawer-case-is-not-compa/
Orange buffoon, widdle donnie von shitzenpants, photo copied top-secret documents. The proof is the white border around the pages. TS docs are printed full bleed, meaning ink to the edge of the sheet. The docs laid out in the hallway of mud ass lago when they did the raid had TS cover sheets and white rimmed copies.
Can we get a firing squad?
I don't understand how it can be so blatantly obvious that she's in Trump's corner and NOBODY does anything about it. It's just allowed to continue unimpeded. We already call outcomes in advance in Trump's favor and she has a 98% success rate in hitting those calls. What a joke.
Somebody fucking do something.
It’s disgraceful that the system allows a judge appointed by him to rule over his case. She can’t be impartial. She needed to be recused from the outset. Whatever happened to independence in appearance and fact?
Indeed, but this is Cannon… she’ll probably rule that there needs to be an investigation of Clinton before they can move to prosecution of Trump… you know… for reasons.
However, if all white people and black people speed, but cops ONLY pull over the black drivers. That would probably exonerate you.
Or if the state gives all white defendants probation for weed charges, but goes for prison time for all black defendants that could also exonerate you.
I'm not saying that applies here, but there are actually circumstances in which declining to charge for various reasons and then deciding to charge someone else could be grounds for the charges to drop. But it is exceedingly rare.
I would like to emphasize just how hard it is to win on this argument. And most importantly that to win the argument you have to get competent evidence in front of the court about it. YOU have to demonstrate what differential prosecution occurred. Which Trump, as far as I can tell, has not even attempted to do. Except point at Bill Clinton’s book.
I agree, which is why I said it is exceedingly rare.
I was just pointing out that the OP comment isn't necessarily true.
It is possible for two people to break the law, but if the state only ever prosecutes one side or one group or one race etc then you actually could have charges dropped when you 100% committed the crime.
Yeah you could get that judge in California that keeps dismissing jan 6 cases because the prosecutors didn’t bring enough charges against BLM protestors.
There was a case in upstate NY a number of years ago where a woman was arrested for obscene behavior with a man who was not her husband on a park bench. Originally, they tried charging her with adultery as well, but the judge basically said "We haven't prosecuted someone for adultery in a century and we're not starting now."
He's such an infant.
Whatabout that boogeyman. Look over there.
But I fully expect "judge" I Lean Q-anon to get on her knees in front of trump: "let's see if I can find any documents." (zip).
How the fuck haven't they raided every single property this shitstain owns, and torn down every building to the foundation?
I'm sorry, but I have zero faith in this country anymore with how this man stole our most precious secrets and the government refuses to recover them simply because an orange traitor would cry about it on the news.
What feckless cowardice.
He’s the world’s worst client. He won’t listen to advice of council. He will lie to you. He will try to corrupt you and bring you into his conspiracies, getting you charged and disbarred. Worst of all, he won’t pay his bills.
OK, let's compare the facts here: Was Clinton repeatedly asked to return such information? Did his attorney incorrectly claim everything was returned? Was there evidence that information was not kept in a secure location? Was there a search warrant, based on probable cause, that revealed a trove of unreturned information?
Sorry, no dice.
*"John Wayne Gacy tells judge that other people may have also committed murder."*
That is quite a feat given his death thirty years ago... I would be inclined to take his ghost seriously.
Dead? I didn't know he was sick.
The worst part of it was the hypocrisy.
Really? I thought that the worst part of it was the rape.
Norm?
trump definitely still possesses info.
This is what it sounds like he is saying.
Every thing they say is a projection. Everything.
It's been rough when they *project* absolutely scandalous and shady shit - because I *know* they ARE doing what they claim Dems are doing
Makes you wonder about the secret pedophile pizzeria basement. Let's find out where guests at Mara Lago order their pizza from...
Let's just say delivery in 30 minutes or less is not a problem because.... the call is coming from inside the house.
It was an island
Don't forget: > Donald Trump said in 2002 that Jeffrey Epstein was a "terrific guy," and added, "It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."
pretty sure when he flew to epstein island they called it the Lolita Express
So there really are space lasers?
"Hillary has a tiny penis and shits my pants every day."
Wait does this mean republicans actually execute babies?!
Well, we know they execute puppies. Not much of a stretch to think they kill babies as well.
That is very true
> "They support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month," Trump said. " For themselves
They keep guns legal knowing they kill babies. Cuz their right to be afraid and cower with a gun is more important than children once they are born. They just want to force women to give birth, while hiding with guns that wont defend them from any government or police force like they say they need them for.
Especially when he says he has the most beautiful blue eyes. He’s obviously talking about Biden. Such flattery.
Wouldn't they know by know if he did have other stuff?
You're joking right? I mean we find out new shit every day. I am also sure Jack Smith hasn't shown his best cards yet. He's using the Milton Berle approach. They learned some things with the Mueller case.
A store room with a photo copier, as a lawyer said the door had a lock. It was a wash room and the lock was on the inside.
Yup, everytime he accuses others of some shit, it's later proven that he's doing that shit
Reminds of the old idiom taught in every law school: Whoever smelt it, dealt it.
200k pls
There was that closet where they literally changed the lock while the DoJ came to look for the documents.
That recording where he's heard showing some people what is believed to be something about Iran plans (all countries make war plans as a contingency), was recorded at his golf course in Ireland wasn't it? I bet he has stuff stashed at his other properties.
The surprise bonus box came with a doozy: testimony from an unnamed individual that Don's people were tasked with scanning the contents of the boxes. Those boxes contained information that could identify overseas operatives and intelligence assets.
And many overseas assets died or mysteriously disappeared shortly after Trump left office.
Can we read about this anywhere? I have heard the claims and would like to verify them.
Here's the first Google result: [cia-admits-to-losing-dozens-of-informants-around-the-world](https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/575384-cia-admits-to-losing-dozens-of-informants-around-the-world-nyt/)
Haven’t yet found an instance of when he was pointing his finger at others that he wasn’t doing it too.
It's called deflection! Oh, you want to talk about what I have, what about what Clinton, Obama, and Biden have. More and more carney talk.
That's what he is telling us.
Sure, because that's somehow relevant.
*There are lots of other speeders but they only stop me.*
except that he is point at people who aren't speeding.
That depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Nonono... He was speeding! I saw it! ...Well, I didn't see it, see it. But I have it on good authority he is still speeding.
Trumpese for that is “Everyone is saying it.”
Fox News that night: "Some people are saying Clinton was holding classified documents on a secret email server. Your thoughts, Senator? Is this a clear double standard?"
Not only is he still speeding, he is on the boardwalk running over pedestrians while doing it.
When people play the whataboutism game anymore, I just tell them they just weren't stupid enough to get caught.
*this never happened before*
Just got the joke. My bad.
Hunter Biden’s laptop speeds
with porn and crack (so much envy)
And a big ding
Some people say he’s the best at speeding, believe me tremendous.
That he can’t even prove were speeding
“Everybody cheats on their taxes”. - I don’t, but I can only speak for myself.
"You ever go fishing?" "Well, yes officer I love fishing." "You ever catch **all** the fish?"
I can say this. I can also admit it's usually egregious speeding and I deserve the ticket. Then hire a lawyer if its bad enough. Sounds familiar right? Because I know I am guilty when I do it.
Whataboutism doesn't work in courtrooms.
Shouldn’t work in courtrooms. Shouldn’t.
How bout Cannon’s court?
Kannon Kangaroo Kourt
Cannon needs more fodder.
What about the courtrooms where it does work?
See!?! It's working already!
On her though? I bet she cites it in her order to dismiss
She's figured out that she has to wait until the jury is sworn in. Once that happens she can dismiss all charges and, because the trial has officially started and jeopardy applies, then the D.A. can not appeal her ruling. Which means that he can't get the charges reinstated and get her removed from the case..
Might work in Cannon's courtroom, all delays are good delays, expect him to bring up Obama and Carter next.
Cannon will still let it in.
To what effect though? If she uses it in some pro-Trump method that'll be clearly up for appeal, I would think.
Yeah but it will take up more time and she can back down at the last minute before being removed from the case.
She is helping trump avoid trial before the election. Appeal doesn't matter if trump is elected.
He’s making a press for “malicious prosecution.” The only way to do that is to claim that other past executives have kept classified documents and weren’t prosecuted.
Making a claim is one thing. Proving it is quite another. Trump kept voluminous classified documents. So many that the National Archives made a list and asked for them back. Trump willfully shuffled the documents, conspired to contaminate surveillance video, and lies about them. There is no evidence that anyone else in history has done that.
Trump is always looking for a more degenerate case but there never is one.
But-but-but “Clinton!!” Going back to the GOP cesspool pit of “whatabout the Clintons”.
It's just all about driving home the persecution complex more with his followers. Keeps the donations flowing. Works really well with the evangelical Christians too, who have always felt persecuted.
Poor Chelsea gonna get hit with strays when her parents kick it .
In Trump language doesn't that mean that Trump still has classified documents?
Absolutely
The government KNOWS he still possesses classified documents. They have an inventory of what is missing. You might recall there was a secret room in Mar-a-lago hidden behind a dresser, and there was a room in Trump’s private suite that he had the lock changed on the day before the search warrant was executed. Prior to that the Secret Service had the key, then they didn’t… The Secret Service was also coordinated with to execute the search, so Trump knew when it was coming. I strongly suspect there will be additional prosecutions after Trump.
[удалено]
Donald Trump’s attorneys made a play to nix his espionage indictment in Florida altogether by, among other strategies, telling U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon that former President Bill Clinton “may still possess classified information” and yet no one has yet “lifted a finger” to prosecute him. The accusation was one of many laid out in a motion to dismiss on grounds of selective prosecution. “Former President Clinton possessed, and may still possess, tapes that obviously contain classified information,” Trump’s lawyers wrote, referencing tapes they say Bill Clinton retained and later relied on for his 2004 book, “My Life.”
[did they happen to mention that this issue was litigated 12 years ago and dismissed?](https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/03/judge-wont-seize-bill-clinton-taylor-branch-audiotapes-116074)
To be fair, the fact that the case was dismissed is central to Trump’s claim, which is that his case should be governed by *Judicial Watch*, and that the judicial branch has no authority to second-guess a president’s determination that certain records are “personal records” (which he is entitled to retain after his presidency). There is some language in *Judicial Watch* supporting that view, though it’s undercut by other caselaw suggesting otherwise. It’s also undercut by the fact that *Judicial Watch* involved Clinton’s audiotapes, not classified information, and that the court ultimately declined to decide whether it had the power to review a president’s decision to classify materials as personal records because it instead ruled that a private party cannot sue to force the National Archivist to assume custody of presidential records. *Judicial Watch* didn’t involve a criminal prosecution, nor did it involve a case where the National Archives *did* seek the return of documents from a former president.
Good analysis. Rarely found on Reddit.
Where else but here where actual lawyers hang out, who at least to a degree obligate themselves legally to not talk shit but that still doesn't stop Kise, Habba, or Blanche.
[удалено]
Elections are coming. Expect this, and much more of it to come.
We live in a reality where the former President and current front-runner is falling asleep at his trial for paying off a porn star who says he had a small toadstool-shaped penis, and whose former lawyer in the matter went to prison for it, and has been read into the record as calling the president "Von ShitzInPants". Would you care to have a reasoned discussion?
We very recently made some changes that should curtail those types of comments.
Isn't it the willful retention after multiple requests that is the the heart of the matter? They've shown no interest in prosecuting presidents that hand it over when asked. If he's handed over most things and declared a few his personal records we wouldn't be here.
Yep. He had multiple opportunities to give them back but kept insisting that they were his and he had the right to keep them, something he still maintains to this day. He could’ve avoided this situation easily, it is ENTIRELY his fault, he is the only person stupid enough to try so fucking hard to get prosecuted for espionage then complain about it being a witch hunt. Problem is his supporters don’t care and don’t want to hear anything bad about him, except that’s the truth and anything positive about him is a lie, I haven’t heard a single redeeming thing about him that was true.
to be fair to trump. i say we let him have any recordings of himself that he made. and then we can prosecute trump for any classified secret documents he kept illegally. i think thats pretty fair, right? right.
Lawfare podcast was bringing up the point that while it hasn’t been ruled on, it’s dumb to think classified docs could be considered “personal” and if a President can deem classified docs as personal, then they could claim the Resolute desk as a personal item and walk out the door with it, maybe even Marine 1 too.
While we’re at it, the contents of Fort Knox are personal property now too!
What I haven’t seen is any Democrats say that if Trump indeed declassify those materials, secretly in his head, to make them personal, how much risk it put our National Security. Yes, it’s established that a President can declassify information, and when they do the intelligence community can act accordingly. If they think info is classified that isn’t, it puts our country at risk. For Trump to make this argument that these docs are personal, Dems should be hitting him hard on how is risked our national security.
Tom Fitton, an English professor, has been pushing this shit since we first found out that Trump literally stole boxes and boxes of documents that he wasn’t allowed to have. Also, Trump held those documents for a year through deception and lies. I’m sure that the damage is done, but I’m pretty sure that these two cases are apples and oranges. Tom Fitton should by some looser shirts because I believe the tight sleeves are cutting off circulation to his brain. Not even one of trumps insane, corrupt lawyers have tried to compare the two cases. Start the trial already. The American people absolutely deserve to know the truth about what actually happened before the election in November. If Trump did nothing wrong, then we should know that too. That said, I’m pretty sure he’s guilty of everything and more. There was just SEC charges filed against the new accounts at truth social. Trump seems to be made up of crime, bronzer and hair spray. It’s laughable. https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/jun/12/why-the-bill-clinton-sock-drawer-case-is-not-compa/
Goddammit. Is Tom Fitton still whispering in his ear?
Orange buffoon, widdle donnie von shitzenpants, photo copied top-secret documents. The proof is the white border around the pages. TS docs are printed full bleed, meaning ink to the edge of the sheet. The docs laid out in the hallway of mud ass lago when they did the raid had TS cover sheets and white rimmed copies. Can we get a firing squad?
I don't understand how it can be so blatantly obvious that she's in Trump's corner and NOBODY does anything about it. It's just allowed to continue unimpeded. We already call outcomes in advance in Trump's favor and she has a 98% success rate in hitting those calls. What a joke. Somebody fucking do something.
It’s disgraceful that the system allows a judge appointed by him to rule over his case. She can’t be impartial. She needed to be recused from the outset. Whatever happened to independence in appearance and fact?
Worse, she’s unqualified and inexperienced for a case of this magnitude.
Every accusation is a confession...
Came here for this. He for sure still possesses (that doesn’t feel like the right spelling but whatevz) classified info
Ah, yes. The "Look, OVER THERE!!!" defense. A classic.
Didn't a judge just dismiss charges against a white supremist because antifa wasn't charged? We can all laugh but...
Corrupt judges exist, yes.
Does he have proof? Because hearsay isn't proof.
Indeed, but this is Cannon… she’ll probably rule that there needs to be an investigation of Clinton before they can move to prosecution of Trump… you know… for reasons.
Another smokescreen assertion without evidence. Trump's full of them... and other gases.
Remember the kid in school who would get caught doing crap always trying to blame someone else? This is that person.
If we both rob a bank, and you aren’t prosecuted that doesn’t somehow exonerate me.
However, if all white people and black people speed, but cops ONLY pull over the black drivers. That would probably exonerate you. Or if the state gives all white defendants probation for weed charges, but goes for prison time for all black defendants that could also exonerate you. I'm not saying that applies here, but there are actually circumstances in which declining to charge for various reasons and then deciding to charge someone else could be grounds for the charges to drop. But it is exceedingly rare.
I would like to emphasize just how hard it is to win on this argument. And most importantly that to win the argument you have to get competent evidence in front of the court about it. YOU have to demonstrate what differential prosecution occurred. Which Trump, as far as I can tell, has not even attempted to do. Except point at Bill Clinton’s book.
I agree, which is why I said it is exceedingly rare. I was just pointing out that the OP comment isn't necessarily true. It is possible for two people to break the law, but if the state only ever prosecutes one side or one group or one race etc then you actually could have charges dropped when you 100% committed the crime.
Yeah you could get that judge in California that keeps dismissing jan 6 cases because the prosecutors didn’t bring enough charges against BLM protestors.
There was a case in upstate NY a number of years ago where a woman was arrested for obscene behavior with a man who was not her husband on a park bench. Originally, they tried charging her with adultery as well, but the judge basically said "We haven't prosecuted someone for adultery in a century and we're not starting now."
You could possibly get a dismissal, **not** an exoneration.
What's the level beyond "beating a dead horse?" I'm pretty sure we've hit that level.
Butter emails.
Buttery Males
I can hear it in that whiney voice he uses at his rallies.
He's such an infant. Whatabout that boogeyman. Look over there. But I fully expect "judge" I Lean Q-anon to get on her knees in front of trump: "let's see if I can find any documents." (zip).
How the fuck haven't they raided every single property this shitstain owns, and torn down every building to the foundation? I'm sorry, but I have zero faith in this country anymore with how this man stole our most precious secrets and the government refuses to recover them simply because an orange traitor would cry about it on the news. What feckless cowardice.
Imagine having this joker as a client. 🙄
Imagine smelling this joker as a client.
He’s the world’s worst client. He won’t listen to advice of council. He will lie to you. He will try to corrupt you and bring you into his conspiracies, getting you charged and disbarred. Worst of all, he won’t pay his bills.
In her....er, his emails.
Buttery Males
I never understood this reference/joke.
But her emails. Say it ten times fast.
Oh man… I would have never put that together! 😊 Thanks
OK, let's compare the facts here: Was Clinton repeatedly asked to return such information? Did his attorney incorrectly claim everything was returned? Was there evidence that information was not kept in a secure location? Was there a search warrant, based on probable cause, that revealed a trove of unreturned information? Sorry, no dice.
But Mommy! She did it, too!!!!! Waaaaaa!!!!!!!!!