Judge Cannon rejects a bid by Trump to dismiss criminal charges in classified documents case

Trump's truth is an oxymoron.

I'm with Rex Tillerman
"he's a ****ing moron."

 

That kind of conduct is ACCEPTAB:E to Trump supporters.

 

In a nutshell. !!

 

There should be signs on the bathroom entries too.
"The Cannon Crapper"


'Dem Reps Intro Bill to Rename Miami Prison After Trump'
Seems appropriate.

• Ron Filipkowski
• 4 hours ago

https://www.meidastouch.com/news/dem-reps-intro-bill-to-rename-miami-prison-after-trump

 

That's very thoughtful of the Dems. Appropriate , indeed.

 

Pat yourself on the back for imagining that you hold morals that others don't just because they make a different political choice than you. Remember that everyone in this life has a purpose even if it is only to serve as someone for others to look down their nose upon.

And don't kid yourself, Biden has done many of the same things and then some more.

And there are many people that would gladly attend a public execution

 

Butt-butt Trump wants the espionage CRIMINAL statute charges against him negated using the PRA CIVIL statutes act.

 

Well, he's The Chosen One, surely a miracle through a corrupted naiive judge is in order?!

 

But he does have to stand trial. It’s called due process.

BTW, would you mind explaining to @Bluesguy and @popscott that Hunter and Joe don’t have to explain one ****ing thing to Gomer and his gomerettes. They’re all acting like the Bidens have to prove their innocence. Thanks in advance.

 

Awwwahhh SNAP!!!!! And BOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!

Total thread win, the party's over!

 

Have you done that @Wild Bill Kelsoe?

 

The PRA defined what a President can do with records from their administration after it ends. It goes into detail presidential vs personal records. All presidents want to bring some records from their time in office home with them. In theory, they're supposed to only take things that are truly personal in nature. However, there's no real process for the classification and the law gives the president unilateral power to determine what they will deem personal and presidential.

Bill Clinton had an incident where he took recordings home with him from his time as president and a conservative group sought those records from the National Archives only to learn Clinton never submitted them. So they sued. The judge's ruling interpreted the PRA to mean that by virtue of Clinton taking the records home with him they were automatically classified as personal. What he gave to the National Archives were his presidential records and everything else wasn't reviewable by the courts to overrule his presidential power to do what he wanted with records from his administration under the PRA.

Jack Smith is insisting that he doesn't want the judge to use the PRA in determining what a president had the power to do with records from his administration in this instance because it's detrimental to his case. But, it's a strange ask for her to ignore the law and precedent. It's also worth noting that Jack Smith is demanding Cannon not use the law in determining the outcome of this case, but also demanding she use an Executive Order from the Obama administration against Trump. Part of this goes to intent and whether or not Trump knew he couldn't do what he did based on the prior case against Clinton. Jack Smith's only real answer to that is that he should have been aware of an Obama era Executive Order and presumed that had more authority than the PRA and judicial precedent. Thus far, Cannon has been somewhat skeptical of that reasoning and it's under this context that she started asking them for their take on preliminary jury instructions for some elements of the indictment on how they believe the law should be explained to the jury under their legal analysis. This would be a case of first impression and the two sides are light years apart.

 

The Trumpist argument requires that the President has the power to simply declare any presidential record to be personal. You should try reading those distinctions in the PRA that you are claiming to care about. Trump doesn't give a **** about them and says they mean whatever he says they mean, PRA be damned.

 

Let me guess, you said the same thing when Democrats brought in the Trump family and demanded answers during oversight investigations. No? How embarrassing that must be...

 

I have read the PRA in full. Rather than telling someone to read something that seems obvious you've never read yourself, why not actually provide your analysis of the PRA and judicial precedent as applied to this case? Otherwise you're just screeching nonsense. You haven't demonstrated you understand the topic at all let alone presented an intelligent fact to rebut. It's really just a waste of time.

 

You claim to understand the difference between personal and official documents. You claim to know what the PRA says about them. The Trump argument is this doesn't matter. Trump can declare any official document to be personal and then he is above the law. And that is what you are defending.

 

And who did they actually talk to ? And were any of them accused of crimes ?

Go ahead, tell me about how embarrassing that must be ……..

 

I could not care less what that Act says. You have forgotten that Humpty*** had in his personal possession/control, Government documents with security classifications stamped on them, he*** denied having them, but lied. He*** did have them. There was no PRA claim raised, just..."I dont have any. I gave you what I had."

*Rapist
*Swindler
*Bordering on pathological

 

Translation: you weren't aware of the subpoenas. And yes.

 

Did you type that with a straight face?

 

The 2x impeached has no laws to follow

 

Only blacks get lynched. And only southerners do it.

 

TRUMP SUPPORTERS were ready to lynch Pence on Jan 6

That day certainly showed the world a very ugly side of this nation.

 

I assume this will soon disappear as Off Topic.

 

People keep saying these are "government documents" while also saying the PRA isn't applicable. Throughout most of our nation's history, all records from a president's tenure belonged to the president as their personal records. The current statute that remotely makes them attributable as government records is the PRA. As such, the PRA and judicial precedent are relevant. Trump doesn't need approval from a librarian or their personal assessment of what is personal vs presidential. Otherwise, they have more power than the president. The PRA doesn't say that. It says the president makes that determination unilaterally.

Additionally, the courts have already said that just by virtue of taking the documents home with him, they automatically become personal records. That is the precedent they need to overcome. That's why Jack Smith is referring to an Obama-era executive order, rather than the law, to say Trump should have known he wasn't entitled to the documents.

These claims that the PRA isn't relevant to "government documents" needing to be returned is laughable because the concept of presidents turning over documents from their administration is codified by the PRA. I believe presidents prior to the PRA even sold presidential records back to Congress for profit. Most passed then on to family members to preserve their legacy privately. If the PRA and such laws aren't relevant then you're saying the records are Trump's personal property and there's no distinction between presidential and personal anymore.