Florida is for Felons
Everything he touches turns to Sh*t. Just checked my bathroom to make sure none of "his" documents were stored there. Relieved my paper roll was clean before use.
Florida man insists he didn't violate the law by keeping Top Secret docs
A Florida man and his valet appeared in a Miami federal courtroom on Tuesday to respond to criminal charges of document hoarding and related claims. The celebrated entertainer, who had a walk-on part in Home Alone 2 and spent four years in the role of US president, pleaded not guilty, and offered no justification for storing …
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:13 GMT F. Frederick Skitty
Re: Florida is for Felons
Tango man[*] also had a habit of ripping up official documents and attempting to flush them down the toilet during his tenure as president. The janitorial staff were often unblocking the pipework, and aides took pictures that eventually reached the press.
[*] https://youtu.be/iqVFnxHWnlc
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:42 GMT Phil Koenig
Re: I can finally admit something
Pretty sure it was not "class" on Dick's part that led to him resigning, but a US Congress which still had enough decency in those days that the political party of a besmirched POTUS was still able to acknowledge the fact that what he did was so unacceptable and illegal that they made it clear they would vote along with his political opponents to impeach him if he did not resign himself. Nixon was in no position to refuse.
Of course after Ford took office he pardoned a bunch of the co-conspirators so that decency only went so far.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:04 GMT ThomH
Re: I can finally admit something
In part the calculus was different though; turning against Nixon caused another Republican President to be installed without an election — indeed, famously he's the only President never to have won a national election, having ascended in two steps from Speaker of the House — and gifted him a couple of years to try to establish himself in time hopefully to retain the White House in 1976. The whole thing had the side effect of giving that party the incumbency benefit for a second election in a row.
Unfortunately his approval ratings dropped thirty points overnight upon the decision to pardon Nixon, and the electorate did what they did.
So I'm sure there was at least one Republican for whom decency was not the motivator in 1974. Sadly there seem to be few today even motivated by smart electoral politics; 62% of the American electorate thinks that Trump is guilty and the non-Trump Republican candidates are lining up to promise him pardons or parrot his nonsense conspiracy theories about selective justice which are, in essence, "if no other Presidents have been prosecuted then obviously that means this is a sham because, clearly, I'm perfect".
That said, in a two-party system it doesn't really matter how far off the rails one goes, it still has a decent chance of winning.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 23:07 GMT rcxb
Re: I can finally admit something
That said, in a two-party system it doesn't really matter how far off the rails one goes, it still has a decent chance of winning.
Not at all. Trump's party is so out of touch and losing on demographics (their voters are dying off) it took embracing every extremist group out there, promoting a bunch of crazy conspiracy theories, an absolutely terrible opponent who didn't bother campaigning in many important areas, and a poorly timed FBI announcement, to let him just squeeze into a win. Trump's celebrity and the insanity he spewed managed to buy the crazy party 4 more years of relevance on the national stage.
But that's over now. Too many Trump supporters aged out and died off. It's going to be extraordinarily rare for a right-wing presidential candidate to get elected in the US going forward.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 16:06 GMT ThomH
Re: I can finally admit something
> But that's over now. Too many Trump supporters aged out and died off. It's going to be extraordinarily rare for a right-wing presidential candidate to get elected in the US going forward.
Having recently acquired American citizenship, and therefore despite actually having some input into the next election, I wish I were as confident as you.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:50 GMT Stuart Castle
Re: I can finally admit something
RE: Unfortunately his approval ratings dropped thirty points overnight upon the decision to pardon Nixon, and the electorate did what they did
Sadly, I suspect if the same happened to Nixon today, a large chunk of the populace, lead on by several high profile politicians who really should know better, would start protesting about fake news and a witch hunt, and Nixon would talk about the corrupt FBI and Justice Department.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 16:24 GMT Someone Else
Re: I can finally admit something
[...] indeed, famously he's the only President never to have won a national election [...]
I suppose it depends on how you define winning a national election. In 2016, Hillary Clinton received more popular votes than did tRump, but tRump was (legally) installed as the President by dint of having more electoral college votes. One could make the argument that tRump "lost" the nation election, but won the Presidency.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 02:31 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: I can finally admit something
Read the indictment.
A document both fascinating and horrifying at the same time, like watching cancer surgery.
He didn't just retain documents with horrendous lack of security, but disclosed them to unauthorised people, kept them in the face of a subpoena, then acted, lied and conspired to subvert the effect of the subpoena.
His own former AG has effectively said, "if it's true, he's toast."
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 03:50 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I can finally admit something
Because Trump & Pence co-operated and returned documents as soon as they knew they existed. There was an investigation into Pence, which ended with no charge as there was no criminal intent. Biden is still being investigated by a Special Counsel, but will likely end with the same result.
Trump has also not been charged over any of the documents he returned. He is being charged over the ones he kept. The ones he lied about. The ones he arranged to be moved when his OWN lawyers were responding to a subpoena. The ones he is discussing (and possibly showing) in recordings that he admitted were still classified.
All this shows intent to keep documents that belong to the state and his disdain for proper treatment of classified material.
That is the difference. That is what will put Trump in jail.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:10 GMT codejunky
Re: I can finally admit something
@rcxb
That is very interesting considering how excited people are here about the 'classification' of the documents-
But the classification issue will likely end up being irrelevant. Prosecutors charged Trump under the Espionage Act, a World War One-era law that predates classification and criminalizes only the unauthorized retention of “national defense information.”
So they made a huge deal about classified documents, which is argued against as documents with classified markings (not the same thing). They claim to have audio proving the case yet dont pursue it. A smoking gun they should be able to finally have him bang to right on. And they dont. Sounds almost like every other attempt with claims of Trump doing wrong, only to find they had nothing.
Instead they are going with an amusing law where anything can be magically deemed sensitive information by security services regardless of actual contents. Imagine they actually had him for the classification of the documents why would they be chasing him for this-
“Let’s say all of the documents were declassified. The Espionage Act does not care,” said Georgetown University law professor Todd Huntley.
Aka they probably have the damp squib in their hands and are now grasping at straws again. These sensitive documents are so secret that even a special master cannot be appointed to review what the files actually are, we just have to take their word for it that its important. As I mentioned elsewhere, a cheerios box can be magically deemed sensitive and its just assumed to be based on security services say so. Yet reach a high enough court and the services wont be able to say 'Trump broke the law but we cant show you how'.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:37 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: I can finally admit something
It's not as if there's another post-classification era piece of national security legislation they might have charged him under, but declined to; the Espionage Act is all there is. And as you rightly say, it is blind to a piece of information's Top Secret/Secret/Confidential status.
Classification is a process internal to the executive which specifies what degree of protection government officials including Presidents are obliged to afford the information they are entrusted with. Declassification isn't just a rubber stamp, but a formalised assessment that release of a piece of information is no longer harmful to the national interest. Ordinary citizens who cease to be government officials, even high ranking ones, lose their clearances when they lose their jobs.
In his own words, he could have declassified some of the documents, but he didn't. A verbatim transcript of a recording of his own voice saying that is part of the indictment. Even if he had declassified them inside his own head, if release of the information was damaging to the national security interest, the law says he's guilty.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:42 GMT codejunky
Re: I can finally admit something
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"It's not as if there's another post-classification era piece of national security legislation they might have charged him under, but declined to; the Espionage Act is all there is."
Erm, this isnt a classification issue. Thats the problem. If they have him so slam dunk on the documents classification then why are they not charging over that? Instead they are charging over something that makes classification (or not) entirely irrelevant. They are charging him because the security services say its sensitive information, but wont prove its sensitive information. So we have to take the word of a state that has been caught lying, fabricating and relentlessly attacking Trump for anything and nothing instead of a so called slam dunk about classification. Why?
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 13:14 GMT codejunky
Re: I can finally admit something
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"There isn't a law distinguishing classified from unclassified. That's an executive branch thing."
Interesting back peddling and entire burning of a good portion of the comments here. So you are now saying it isnt a classification thing and classified vs classified markings doesnt matter. He isnt facing this issue due to a recording about classification and the classified markings on the documents?
“Let’s say all of the documents were declassified. The Espionage Act does not care,” said Georgetown University law professor Todd Huntley.
And so we are back to the security services claiming something is sensitive, but wont prove it, and say Trump should be jailed on their say so. And this is where we will see if there really is any case after the so far posturing, leaked staged photos and persistent assault from the dishonest agencies that have been after him since before 2016.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 23:47 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: I can finally admit something
No, read what I wrote.
The law is blind to what the government says is classified. If a prosecutor can prove that someone retained documents prejudicial to the national security, the Espionage Act applies to them: classified, unclassified, declassified, whatever.
Classification is the way government departments formalise the structure under which documents should be guarded with an appropriate level of protection: what can be kept in an open office, what should be kept in a safe, and what must be kept in the back room where someone has to check your ID and have the second key to the lock. If you don't follow those rules, you're technically not breaking a law per se, but you are in a shitload of trouble with the people responsible for document security, and very likely to have your clearance revoked. And be charged under the Espionage Act, because a document bearing Top Secret markings that doesn't have a national security exposure is so rare as to be non-existent.
-
Friday 16th June 2023 08:49 GMT codejunky
Re: I can finally admit something
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"The law is blind to what the government says is classified. If a prosecutor can prove that someone retained documents prejudicial to the national security, the Espionage Act applies to them: classified, unclassified, declassified, whatever."
And this is why I expect they probably have nothing... again... as with the continued attempts to make anything stick. Even after fabricating evidence, lying, spying, leaking and exaggerating they now want us to believe them because they say so.
"And be charged under the Espionage Act, because a document bearing Top Secret markings that doesn't have a national security exposure is so rare as to be non-existent."
Everything is classified even if its boring nothings. And to have markings but be declassified is how it works. The markings dont get removed because it is declassified.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:58 GMT Lil Endian
Re: I can finally admit something
@codejunky
"...but wont prove its sensitive information."
According to LegalEagle (thanks -maniax-) documents cannot be used in evidence here if they cannot be at least in-part revealed. If that is correct the "cheerios box" reductio ad absurdum misses the mark somewhat - unless the prosecution can convince the jury that a piccy of oats is a matter of Nation Security. (I'm not suggesting that's not possible either!!)
The relevant bit: https://youtu.be/7KRceywz-rU?t=919
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 13:20 GMT codejunky
Re: I can finally admit something
@Lil Endian
"According to LegalEagle (thanks -maniax-) documents cannot be used in evidence here if they cannot be at least in-part revealed. If that is correct the "cheerios box" reductio ad absurdum misses the mark somewhat - unless the prosecution can convince the jury that a piccy of oats is a matter of Nation Security. (I'm not suggesting that's not possible either!!)"
I wont be surprised if this undoes the prosecution. So far the state has fabricated evidence, spied on, lied about and attacked Trump consistently since his run for president. But we should trust them now? And as I have said, lets imagine he has done wrong and gets prosecuted for breaking the law, what honest person will believe it was honest and not just another lie/fabrication lobbed at Trump?
I said the same when he was president and people were attacking him for his looks and promoting lies against him. Criticize him on his actions and policies, not superficial and fictional things. This just looks like the usual continued vindictive campaign... even if it was an honest 'gotcha' moment.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 23:53 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: I can finally admit something
We share large chunks of histone genes with bananas. DNA folding proteins are pretty important (if they don't work, neither does life), so are highly conserved across eukaryotes - so if it's multicellular, it's a relative.
If it's monocellular, it's a more distant relative by about 2 billion years.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 16th June 2023 00:05 GMT S2K
Re: Not a flight risk?
While Texiera sits in a jail cell until his arraignment, Donald gets to keep his passport and owns an airplane that could easily whisk him off to another country to live in exile.
Donald is also a much higher risk to society than Texiera, and therefore should also sit in jail until his arraignment .
This is such a lopsided justice system. The rich and well-connected get preferential treatment...ridiculous.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:19 GMT Sanguma
"Trump Has Vowed To Fill Guantanamo With 'Some Bad Dudes' — But Who?"
https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/11/14/502007304/trump-has-vowed-to-fill-guantanamo-with-some-bad-dudes-but-who
"Trump Wisely Keeping ‘Really Bad Dudes’ in Guantanamo Bay"
https://www.heritage.org/terrorism/commentary/trump-wisely-keeping-really-bad-dudes-guantanamo-bay
"This morning, I watched President Obama talking about Gitmo, right, Guantanamo Bay, which by the way, which by the way, we are keeping open. Which we are keeping open ... and we're gonna load it up with some bad dudes, believe me, we're gonna load it up."
If it were up to Trump, those suspects might actually come from the United States. Asked last summer by the Miami Herald if Americans accused of terrorism should be tried by military commissions in Guantanamo, Trump endorsed such a policy.
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for - you just might get it. Under a Trump administration, Trump would be eligible for trial and "re-settlement" in Guantanamo Bay, where all he would need to do would be to answer some questions - repeatedly ...
"Q&A: Guantanamo Bay, US Detentions, and the Trump Administration"
https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/06/27/qa-guantanamo-bay-us-detentions-and-trump-administration
Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld labeled Guantanamo’s first detainees “unlawful combatants” who “do not have any rights under the Geneva Convention.”
As it happens, Donald J. Trump, as an insurrectionist and "mastermind" (very loosely defined) of an act of domestic terrorism against the US equivalent of the UK Parliament, the US Congress, does not have any rights under the Geneva Conventions, and indeed, under most state jurisdictions, they would have no rights either.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 05:04 GMT Neil Barnes
as did his aide Walt Nauta
The BBC this morning had it that Nauta didn't enter a plea as is attorney wasn't certified to operate in that district of Florida. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65898304
Seems an odd way to run a legal system and an even odder way to have yourself represented in court.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 06:47 GMT Phil Koenig
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
If I'm not mistaken Mr. Smith's decision to move the jurisdiction from DC to FL was either not known well in advance or the Cheeto's team assumed he would not be indicted so did not prepare for this.
There's a longstanding assumption and narrative by Cheeto & Co. that the only people that can ever rule against him are somehow all biased partisans from birth, so they didn't suspect that he would do the indictment in his backyard where Cheeto support remains high. (And as it turns out, with a presiding judge who is a notorious Cheeto appointee who has already embarrassed herself with her earlier pro-Cheeto rulings which resulted in a reversal and rebuke from the Federal Appeals Court over her head.)
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:01 GMT jake
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
"I guess they didn't have enough time to read through the details of the case."
You can read the indictment for yourself here.
It's only 49 pages of sparsely populated PDF. Didn't take me more than a couple cups of coffee to parse.
jake-ish synopsis: Trump's fucked six ways from Sunday. He wasn't so much indicted by the GJ, as he pretty much indicted himself.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 08:46 GMT Richard 12
Re: "He wasn't so much indicted by the GJ, as he pretty much indicted himself."
The judge should recuse themselves because of their previous judgement in this same set of cases that was reversed by the next judge up because it had no basis in law.
It's harder to come up with a more obvious appearance of bias, short of appointing Stormy Daniels (as she's not a judge).
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 21:17 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
"If I'm not mistaken Mr. Smith's decision to move the jurisdiction from DC to FL was either not known well in advance or the Cheeto's team assumed he would not be indicted so did not prepare for this."
I don't understand why this matters. They were both going to plead not guilty anyway. They don't even need a lawyer for that bit.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 10:51 GMT Antron Argaiv
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
TFG is having problems finding a lawyer to represent him. This could be because:
1. He's a "difficult" client
2. His brand, while recognisable, is somewhat toxic
3. He has a history of "forgetting" to pay invoices
4. There's not much of a chance he's innocent
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:33 GMT jake
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
"Seems an odd way to run a legal system"
Each State has it's own Bar. Trump's brain-trust made sure he had a flunky who had passed the Bar in Florida and was a licensed lawyer in that State. It would seem that they forgot to find another lawyer for Nauta.
Dumb-asses, or throwing poor ol' Walt under the bus? Both? You decide.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:28 GMT GBE
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
"Seems an odd way to run a legal system"
Each State has it's own Bar. Trump's brain-trust made sure he had a flunky who had passed the Bar in Florida and was a licensed lawyer in that State.
True, but this isn't a state court, it's a federal court. Not only does the federal court have its own bar, each _district_ of federal court has its own bar. As does each appeals circuit, etc. It is a bit of a mess, but that's what happens when you try to merge together a dozen-plus completely separate sovereign governments of previously independent peoples that don't like or trust each other.
But hey, at least we have a constitution that got put down on paper. :)
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 22:44 GMT georgezilla
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
" ... even if they didn't really specify ... "
The Second Amendment to the US Constitution ....
" ... A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State ... "
Seems pretty specific to me. I don't see in there anywhere it says anything about having a fuck ton of weapons and randomly killing your neighbors because your fee fees were hurt.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 16:55 GMT Michael Wojcik
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
even if they didn't really specify what they meant
Yes, and they failed to give everyone magical unicorns, too.
The science of creating an unambiguous text in natural language has yet to be perfected. Honestly, some of you people live in a fucking dreamworld.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:48 GMT Robert Moore
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
You just need to realize that the USofA is not really a country. (The hint is in the name.) United States. It is much more like the European Union than a singular country.
Once you think of them like this, they make a lot more sense. ("a lot more" relatively.)
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:36 GMT Ideasource
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
I have long observed the USA as an empire the hides it's nature through shifty language tricks.
Democracy gets casually overridden by the dominant Republic aspects of government.
Creating a class of super citizens that exploit and drag the alienated population kicking and screaming along with its schemes.
The majority can direct vote all day but the Republic aspect will steal the decision and betray the people .it's happened over and over at Federal level, state and even local city level.
As far as I can tell from living here, if you had to pick a singular primary motive of the United States culture, it would be to sacrifice all health and psychological prosperity in life for GDP and trinkets
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 22:39 GMT Not Yb
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
It has been a country for quite some time. Much like the United Kingdom (which isn't particularly United, though it is at least a Kingdom again now).
As much as some idiots in Texas would like, there is no legal method to "secede" from the United States aside from a full constitutional convention.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:47 GMT J. Cook
Re: Incredibly dangerous/stupid.
From what I understand, Walt's lawyer was talking to the FBI about turning, and the lawyer refused to talk about it, probably against his client's best wishes, so the FBI did exactly what they told them they would do.
The FBI has more than enough evidence to bury them both.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 22:50 GMT georgezilla
Re: Incredibly dangerous/stupid.
Because Trump doesn't give one fuck about anyone else. And I suspect that he would even throw his children under the bus if he thought that it would help him.
That and he very often doesn't pay his own debts. You think that he'll be paying his own lawyers with his OWN money? Lol. That's what the rubes are for, he'll spend the money that he coned them out of.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 01:33 GMT Paul Uszak
Re: Incredibly dangerous/stupid.
But that's my point. Walt will have so much dirt on Trump. There's probably other 'stuff' that hasn't attracted the FBI's attention yet. If Walt starts thinking that there is no love for him from Trump (or at least his team), he might think that he has to look after himself too. It is so in Trump's interest to keep Walt sweet as he can burn him. The FBI would drop charges against Walt in a second if they could get a President.
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 02:45 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
It's probably strategic.
His Orangeness' lifelong legal strategy has rested on it, knowing lawyers and courts are expensive, go in with the intent to wear his opponents down through procedural delays and, where necessary, appeals. Firing your own lawyer earns an instant delay to find and advise new counsel. Having a joint indictment allows these delays to be tag-teamed. It hasn't occurred to him though that his opponent in this case is the US government.
Every delay in legal process puts him one day closer to the day when he might be able to (invalidity) pardon himself.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 14:14 GMT CrazyOldCatMan
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
when he might be able to (invalidity) pardon himself
This is the one thing I don't get - in most jurisdictions, spending time in jail automatically excludes you from the executive branch of government (so, in the UK, possession of an uncleared [1] criminal record bars you from Parliament and/or the Lords).
In the US, it seems that even criminals currently serving their sentence can be president!
[1] IE - after a certain while, the criminal conviction is cleared from the record. The time taken is dependent on the category and seriousness of the criminal conviction.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 17:01 GMT Michael Wojcik
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
You ask that as though you think it's a bad thing.
Sometimes good people go to prison. Sometimes they're innocent. Sometimes the laws they're convicted of violating are stupid or outrageous – the US has certainly had no shortage of those. Sometimes someone spent a term in prison and then reformed.
Conversely, many very bad people have never been to prison.
Using a prison sentence as an excuse to remove civil rights or as a proxy for mendaciousness is naive, foolish, irrational, and unethical.
There are many, many reasons why Trump should not be in a position of power. A future prison sentence, should that come to pass, does not change that; and making it do so by law (which would require a Constitutional amendment and Ain't Gonna Happen) would be an injustice.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 21:40 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: as did his aide Walt Nauta
"Using a prison sentence as an excuse to remove civil rights or as a proxy for mendaciousness is naive, foolish, irrational, and unethical."
And yet, there are a list of "rights" a US citizen loses on being in prison, some of which may remain restricted for life even after completion of the sentence.
See, for example: https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/felon-voting-rights
I see the irony in referring to something as a "civil right" which can be rescinded and potentially never returned. That sounds more like a privilege than a right. Likewise, the prisoner who stood for the Presidential election last time around. I guess he couldn't vote for himself even though he had the right to stand.
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 06:25 GMT alain williams
What I cannot understand ...
is why he kept all of these files ? What advantage to him was there ?
Given the huge number of boxes it does not seem like an error, a few forgotten bits of paper. Was it systematic, what did he do with them, did he show them to people, did he brag about it ?
I cannot see the point.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:21 GMT jmch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Absolutely ego. The man in question (by the way, love the way the article identified the perp through a long long list of misdeeds rather then by name) is a narcissist egomaniac who believes that rules are for other people. Simply being told that he couldn't keep the documents is enough of a trigger for him to want to keep them.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:27 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Seems that he is on a mission to prove that government and law enforcement don't work. His whole administration was about destroying the capabilities of enforcement of laws and/or estabilishing sympathetic judges and supreme court, etc. Anything that would move the country closer to authoritarianism and reduce democracy. So this flauting of scerecy laws is right in line with expected behaviour of challenging law enforcement. A normal citizen would have been in in jail years ago - but it shows clearly that having lawyers/resources works well for those who have access to them. Also there is the advantage that with these kinds of provocations he can remain in the headlines - I am quite convinced the biggest punishement for Trump would be that he is simply ignored - but our press system seems to be unable to resist the ever-more outrageous acts that are only designed to keep him in the headlines. I, for one, had enough of this clown about 7 years ago - but there he is still, basking in the attention he so craves at our expense.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 11:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What I cannot understand ...
On their own initiative, Biden's team thought it was possible, requested a search, and turned in what was found. When this other guy was explicitly asked about documents known to be missing, he turned in some and moved a bunch of others to a new hiding place. When asked about the ones that he had moved, he denied they existed. These charges have completely ignored the documents that were turned in; they are only about the documents that were denied and then found during a police raid.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 23:01 GMT georgezilla
Re: What I cannot understand ...
The "true Joe Biden"?
You have something that "shows" the "true Joe Biden"? You know something like evidence? Maybe even creditable evidence?
No. You don't even have any bullshit evidence that you can actually show.
I'm sorry. You seem to have misplaced your whistleblower? Just when they were going to show up?
Come on. You don't have shit! Just supposition, empty accusations and flat out unfounded conspiracy theories. And your ass must be getting sore. Having to reach so far up it to pull things out of it so often.
Show us what you have of STFU!
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:54 GMT imanidiot
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"Seems that he is on a mission to prove that government and law enforcement don't work. His whole administration was about destroying the capabilities of enforcement of laws and/or estabilishing sympathetic judges and supreme court, etc."
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately ascribed to incompetence. And the particular Cheeto-in-chief has incompetence in spades. I really don't think he had any plan beyond "I don't like these particular political issues so I will assign someone who is against them". Nor do I think he had any particular plans with the secret documents he squirreled away. He was just too incompetent to realize he shouldn't have them beyond his term as serving POTUS.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 21:52 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"but there he is still, basking in the attention he so craves at our expense."
The press can't afford to ignore stuff like that because if they don't carry the story, someone else will and they lose readers/viewers/listeners. The UK Govt tried to restrict the press on interviews with the IRA and their ilk, and that failed spectacularly. Even the BBC, often accused of being government lackeys, simply got voice actors in to "speak" the words, often with the skill of an impressionist. IIRC, that escalated to "not showing images of IRA people", so the news, including the BBC, just filmed the interview backlit as a silhouette, neatly skirting the restrictions and staying within the law, making the Government look stupid.
There's nothing like deflating an ego, but the press will not be party to it unless it's them doing the deflating.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 03:49 GMT Mark 85
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Absolutely ego. The man in question (by the way, love the way the article identified the perp through a long long list of misdeeds rather then by name) is a narcissist egomaniac who believes that rules are for other people. Simply being told that he couldn't keep the documents is enough of a trigger for him to want to keep them.
Ever notice that when he's not getting his way he crosses his arms and scowls like a two-year old? Did even when meeting with NATO. Those who suck up to him get praise, like Putiin and "Little Fat Man".
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 17:05 GMT Michael Wojcik
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Not even sucking up to him in those two cases, I think. Just the gladhanding that bullies do to useful-idiot flunkies: "Yes, we're both tough guys, aren't we?". Putin and Kim are both far more on the ball and certainly capable of manipulating someone like Trump by showing him mock respect.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 21:43 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"(by the way, love the way the article identified the perp through a long long list of misdeeds rather then by name)"
Yeah, very funny. I'm guessing El Reg is no longer expecting to be granted any direct interviews or even PR comments from his team any more and so, as with Apple, are just having fun with it :-)
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 10:31 GMT NXM
Re: What I cannot understand ...
It would seem some people think he still believes he's the president, so wants to keep the papers to prove it and show off to everyone. That's why he reckons he can still declassify them (just by thinking about it), which is something he could only do while still in office.
Apparently some papers he's mentioned in recordings and transcripts are still missing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/10/us/politics/trump-documents-charges-motive.html
[and before the True Believers start gibbering to refute this the story is available from several sources, not just the NYT]
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 10:54 GMT Antron Argaiv
Re: What I cannot understand ...
He's got some serious personality defects, to put it mildly. It must have distressed him to have to sit in court and have someone else tell him what he had to do. He's used to being the top dog, and having things his way. I think that's about to end rather suddenly, and I don't think he will handle it well.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 17:28 GMT veti
Re: What I cannot understand ...
He's no stranger to courts, though. I'm told that his conduct in a witness box, under oath, is unrecognisable from what we see in any other forum. Very reserved, very cautious, very "I have no recollection".
Don't underestimate him. He's far from stupid. What he is, is evil.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:08 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@alain williams
"is why he kept all of these files ? What advantage to him was there ?"
From my understanding there was some relation to him going after the crooks who tried to stitch him up in 2016. Since his opposition is so desperate to stitch him up on something, just anything they keep running into problems such as actually having to have a crime to prosecute him on. Yet for all the crying over the documents, suddenly it wasnt such an issue when they were found in Bidens garage!
Interestingly it seems these documents are ones the whitehouse dumped outside for Trump to take with him and the secret service who checked out his storage had no issues, they just requested an additional lock.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 12:00 GMT FIA
Re: What I cannot understand ...
suddenly it wasnt such an issue when they were found in Bidens garage!
Not an expert on your country, but isn't Biden currently president?
Isn't the issue that Trump is no longer president, and therefore shouldn't have access to 'top secret' stuff that the president has access to?
edit: also, as pointed out by others, he could've just returned them when asked, it would've been a minor news item.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:31 GMT Cav
Re: What I cannot understand ...
But it was a few files that could easily have been inadvertently kept with others, Biden handed over everything once discovered, didn't share them with people he shouldn't and cooperated with the authorities. Rump deliberately kept boxes of papers, didn't hand them over and had to be raided, and there is, alledgedly, recording of him discussing\showing them to others.
Anyone who supports Trump in this case has no integrity or honour.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:35 GMT teknopaul
Re: What I cannot understand ...
And tried to hide them from the raid.
And on tape discussing how to do that.
And was caught on his own security cameras doing so.
And lied about it repeatedly on camera.
And defended himself only with deflection and incorrect statements about the law, further incriminating himself.
Most of the evidence is from Trump himself.
Bang to rights.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 12:17 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@FIA
"Not an expert on your country, but isn't Biden currently president?"
Not my country. I live in the UK. And so its ok to leave them in the garage if you are president but not ok to store them in a space deemed acceptable by the secret service who actually went to check on the storage?
"Isn't the issue that Trump is no longer president, and therefore shouldn't have access to 'top secret' stuff that the president has access to?"
Not sure of the top secret classification or if its particular to classified (they do seem to have a lot of 'levels' of secret). Except the issue doesnt seem to be about the classification as he declassified them. Interestingly classified documents and documents with classified markings are apparently two different things which is why they struggle to 'get him' on that. What I hear he has 31 counts against him, most of which are of individual documents which the security services claim are so sensitive they wont allow anyone to even look and see if they are sensitive at all. An amusing example I read was if the security services decided a cheerios box was sensitive then it would immediately be assumed so regardless of contents.
I expect this will be another damp squib like all the rest.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:18 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Well actually I think you will find he didn't 'declassify them' because that would take process. Declassifying nuclear secrets isn't something that works by mumbling under your breath 'declassify' three times while spinning anticlockwise. And anyway isn't the proper narrative you are meant to sock-puppet that they were planted by Hilary who snuck in to to Mar el Fatso with Biden's laptop and printed the secret ones out?
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:30 GMT Sherrie Ludwig
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Not my country. I live in the UK. And so its ok to leave them in the garage if you are president but not ok to store them in a space deemed acceptable by the secret service who actually went to check on the storage?
OK, let's try to explain this for the slow ones: I an retiring from an institution, say, a bank. I gather up the stuff from my desk as I leave the office. Later, the bank says some loan documents are missing, which would be a violation of privacy for the bank's customers, and are needed for normal operations. I go through the stuff I boxed up and find those documents, and maybe some more that the bank might need. I also tell them to send over a current loan officer to look through the stuff, give him/her the key to my home office and garage in case there's anything else that got mixed in. Inconvenient, mildly embarrassing, but OK
OR, I tell the bank I don't have anything, but show the loan documents to everyone to prove what an important person I am, maybe sell some of the information contained in them (ya know, retirement is expensive) or hold the info back just in case I need a few "favors" later. When the bank shows up having contacted law enforcement for a subpoena, I whine about a witch hunt. They find some of the documents, are still looking for more, and are horrified and angry that I was stupid enough to show some of the information to outsiders, compromising their customer relations.
There you have it, Biden and Pence are OK, the orange fart is OR. And, I hope, gone.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 17:26 GMT Roland6
Re: What I cannot understand ...
>” the bank says some loan documents are missing, which would be a violation of privacy for the bank's customers, and are needed for normal operations. I go through the stuff I boxed up and find those documents, and maybe some more that the bank might need”
This is sufficient (UK, US or other) for the bank to sue you, as you shouldn’t of taken those documents in the first place.
If that is what Trump has done he deserves to be shot!
None of the classified documents, if they are needed by subsequent administrations, that are in Trumps possession should be originals or the only copy.
Obviously, those who gave and allowed Trump to retain such documents, also deserve to be shot for gross incompetence…
Now (hopefully) we are talking about copies and hence it is the information contained within them which if disclosed could adversely impact US interests…
Once again this case shows how different rules apply; I remember with some (UK) clients it being made very clear which projects, IT equipment, documents and notes could or could not leave the room within a building within a government campus and which documents I could carry in my bag in public between sites. When the project ended, documents, memory sticks etc. we’re returned and declarations signed saying I had not retained documents, written notes etc.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:15 GMT Roo
Re: What I cannot understand ...
I recommend reading the indictment document, it lays out the charges against the Mango Mussolini pretty well.
All of those charges could have been avoided if he simply handed the documents back when asked for them. Instead we have to go through this ridiculous clown show because Donald is a dickhead and his cult followers are muddle headed democracy hating copium abusers.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 22:17 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"All of those charges could have been avoided if he simply handed the documents back when asked for them. Instead we have to go through this ridiculous clown show because Donald is a dickhead and his cult followers are muddle headed democracy hating copium abusers."
Apparently, his fund raising efforts sky-rocketed on the day of the court appearance. And he's probably already crowd-funding his "defence" fund too. There will delay after delay after delay in this case too, all instigated by him and his legal team right up to and even beyond the next Presidential election which, in his head, he will win and do whatever it takers to make this all go away. Of course, if/when he loses that election, assuming he's the actual Rep candidate (he might not be, it's still a while away), he'll be totally fucked.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:21 GMT anonanonanonanonanon
Re: What I cannot understand ...
He's on tape admitting he didn't declassify them, while showing them to someone else, who wasn't authorised to view them
The reason his valet is there, is because he and trump coordinated to hide boxes from the Feds
The reason Biden isn't the same situation is that when he was asked to return the papers, he did, all of them
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 23:29 GMT georgezilla
Re: What I cannot understand ...
" ... issue doesnt seem to be about the classification as he declassified them. ... "
< heavy sigh >
That's not how it fucking works. The President can direct that things be declassified. But he CAN NOT just say that they are, and they then are. There is procedure that must be fallowed before they actually are.
Then there is the fact that just because a "document" is "declassified" does not mean that what is IN the document is. Many, many declassified documents are in fact redacted. Some of what is in a declassified document may still classified.
Your ignorance of the subject is showing. And it's not a good look.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 23:38 GMT georgezilla
Re: What I cannot understand ...
" ... if the security services decided a cheerios box was sensitive then it would immediately be assumed so regardless of contents. ... "
Yep, that's exactly how it works. Like it or not. If it makes sense or not.
" ... which the security services claim are so sensitive they wont allow anyone to even look and see if they are sensitive at all ... "
Nope. There are people who actually can and have looked at them. It just requires two things. 1) that you have a clearance that allows you to see them. And .... 2) that you need to see them. The NEED to know. It's simple. And you sign a paper that says that you understand that if you tell anyone about what's in them that you are fucked.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:24 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@georgezilla
"Yep, that's exactly how it works. Like it or not. If it makes sense or not."
Of course. So what we have is the security services claiming sensitive information, yet not willing to prove the information is sensitive. Actually refusing to allow a specially appointed master to review the documents. So we have unsubstantiated say so as the reason to prosecute a former president, currently running to become president. And it gets worse. The state has been caught already using fabricated evidence to illegally spy on Trump previously as well as staging photo's and leaking them etc. A guy subjected to an obvious campaign abusing the powers of the state against him.
I do expect this to be another damp squib like all the rest. Like all the other 'got him' moments that turned out not to be.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:01 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Actually the federal prosecutor is claiming the documents are sensitive, and they work with someone allowed to read them to make an evaluation on that. Besides, the documents themselves say they are sensitive.
The special master was appointed against legal precedent, an error duly overturned by the appellate court. One more stalling tactic.
He knew this was coming before he ran again; they raided his kitsch palace before he announced he was running. All part of the persecution complex you seem to share
-
Friday 16th June 2023 08:57 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"Actually the federal prosecutor is claiming the documents are sensitive, and they work with someone allowed to read them to make an evaluation on that."
And we will have to wait and see if they actually are sensitive.
"Besides, the documents themselves say they are sensitive."
Nope. They have classified markings, which does not mean they are classified. Even declassified documents have classified markings on them. And everything gets classified, even benign irrelevance gets classified.
"All part of the persecution complex you seem to share"
Seriously? Even from over the pond the constant attacks since 2016 including the very publicly known fabricated evidence and illegal spying against him isnt a secret. Did you sleep through that or something? Where have you been? On what planet?
-
Thursday 22nd June 2023 00:45 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
I don't live over the pond, I live on the other side of the world. Even from this distance, I can see the DoJ have given him the kid glove treatment by comparison with ordinary functionaries who get caught doing the kind of things he's been accused of, albeit at a lower level and scale.
For all the defendant's "the rules don't apply to me, I'm special" bravado, simply being who he is will be a liability when sentencing comes around.
-
Thursday 22nd June 2023 08:27 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"Even from this distance, I can see the DoJ have given him the kid glove treatment by comparison with ordinary functionaries who get caught doing the kind of things he's been accused of, albeit at a lower level and scale."
Ok now you must be trolling? Your news cannot be so lacking (wherever you are) to have missed the illegal spying on a fabricated dossier, leaking of active investigation materials, raiding his property and constantly trying to arrest/indict/impeach the guy for the crime of not being one of them.
Very quick comparison, we all heard plenty about the Steele dossier which was a fabricated document paid for by the Dems and used by security services to spy on Trump even though they knew it was fake. How is the big guy investigation going with all that evidence on Hunters laptop?
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 22:22 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"currently running to become president."
For someone trying so hard to prove their "facts" are correct, it's worth pointing out that the race for President hasn't even started yet. He's currently running to be the approved Republican candidate for President. This is just the qualifying round he's in.
-
Friday 16th June 2023 08:53 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@John Brown (no body)
"For someone trying so hard to prove their "facts" are correct"
More trying to strip away the exaggerations and misunderstandings.
"it's worth pointing out that the race for President hasn't even started yet. He's currently running to be the approved Republican candidate for President. This is just the qualifying round he's in."
Very true. And in the lead by a huge margin and most likely candidate to take on Biden.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 11:45 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
the issue doesnt seem to be about the classification as he declassified them.
What exactly is your evidence for that statement? Because the indictment has the defendant saying , to and ordinary citizen, about classified documents, words to the effect of "I could have declassified them, but now I can't."
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:13 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"What exactly is your evidence for that statement?"
Helpfully someone else (rcxb) has already posted the link about this on here-
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-faces-difficult-odds-classified-documents-case-2023-06-13/
But the classification issue will likely end up being irrelevant. Prosecutors charged Trump under the Espionage Act, a World War One-era law that predates classification and criminalizes only the unauthorized retention of “national defense information.”
Emphasis mine. They have him so bang to rights with such strong evidence that they are not pursuing him over classification. Does that make any sense? Sound almost like they dont have such a strong case? Instead going after him because the security services say something is sensitive but dont want to prove it is sensitive.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 22:30 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
You're missing the point. The classification system is a guide to whether something is likely to be something of “national defense information.”. If something is secret, top secret or higher, then it's very likely to be of “national defense information.”. So, the classification of the documents may or may not be relevant in terms of the law as written, but the fact they are classified makes it highly probable they are subject to the law as written. The prosecution says they are. The evidence in the charge sheet say Trump knew that. Now it's up to the courts to agree or disagree with the veracity of the evidence. I'm sure Trumps legal team will want bring AI and "deep fake" into the argument to try to discredit the evidence.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 10:15 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
The charge is retaining national security information. Biden as soon as the fact was pointed out to him returned the documents and opened his storage to independent scrutiny to ensure compliance. The defendant actively obstructed compliance and paid a lawyer to certify he had complied when he knew that he hadn't. So there are the conspiracy and obstruction charges.
"(The defendant) removed their top secret status" and the information therein was still prejudicial to the military and political security of the country. If President, there's dereliction of duty. If ordinary citizen, there's guilty as charged.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 23:13 GMT georgezilla
Re: What I cannot understand ...
So you have no actual clue as to what he's being charged with. Why am I not surprised.
If you were to actually to read, and be able to comprehend, what Trump is charged with, you would be able to see that he hasn't been charged with "having" them. It's about the lying about having them. It's about not returning them when asked. It's about the obstruction. And 37 counts of doing those types of things.
And the difference is that Biden said .... Maybe we should take a look and see. OMG we have some too. Hello FBI, hello DOJ, I have some. You want to come get them? Okay, we'll be waiting and have them all ready for you when you get here. What? You want to have a look around while you're here? Sure. Have a look.
See the difference? Well I doubt that you do. But I had to try.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 08:55 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@georgezilla
"So you have no actual clue as to what he's being charged with. Why am I not surprised."
To be honest its kinda hard to keep up with what he is accused of. The ongoing assault against this one person, then presidential candidate, then president now former president who is also a presidential candidate again. After continued accusations and desperation to find anything, just anything to try and accuse him of, even to the point of serious fabrication and staged images there is still nothing.
Lets imagine they ever manage to find anything to actually charge him with and successfully find him guilty. Lets imagine he actually is guilty of something and the 'justice' system convicts him. Who in the right mind is going to believe it is true and on the level? After the exposure of severe fabrication, abuse of the state and security services, absolute desperation to keep throwing things at him... what honest person could believe he was convicted fairly or that the accusations are truthful?
I know I am gonna attract nutters who just hate Trump because thinking is hard, but even for people who dislike him it will be hard to believe the 'state' isnt again lying, exaggerating or fabricating. The treatment of this one guy vs the treatment of a whole bunch of shifty people who very much look like criminals and deserve investigation is vastly different and disproportionate. And this is why I am not a fan of the anti-Trump cult who seem to be the excess they shout against as MAGA. Its all noise but no substance.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 18:48 GMT Someone Else
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Yeah, but that would require putting down the clicker set (welded?) to Fox Noise, putting down the Super-Slurpee full of Kool-Aid, and straining every synapse to try to comprehend what is there...all the while desperately trying to filter out the cognitive dissonance that would result. Sheesh! Too much work! Much easier to sit back and watch Hannity bullshit himself silly.
I mean, it never was about the facts, now was it?
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 22:36 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"To be honest its kinda hard to keep up with what he is accused of."
At the time you posted that, 14 hours prior to this post from me, all the charges were public and you could read them yourself.
Oh and just to reiterate a previous post of mine, Trump IS NOT a Presidential candidate. He's just one of the people trying to woo the Republican party into making him their Presidential candidate.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 22:41 GMT John Brown (no body)
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"it will be hard to believe the 'state' isnt again lying, exaggerating or fabricating."
Seriously? You're going with that line? Pot, kettle, black?
This is the same guy who had his supporters shouting "Lock her up" at EVERY rally he organised.. Now he's trying to use the EXACT same defence that he didn't think she deserved, ie innocent unless proven guilty.
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:41 GMT Wayland
Re: What I cannot understand ...
No, I'm sorry, Reg readers disagree that there could be a logical tactical reason for holding on to these documents. It's obviously simply because Orange Man has a big ego and any other failing they can include.
Personally I believe he is using the secret nuke plans to build a bomb in his garage. It could not be anything more mundane like holding dirt on his enemies.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 10:03 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"the whitehouse" at the time the defendant ordered still classified documents to be put into the boxes reads as "people who worked for soon-to-be-the-ex-president". Took every document he could find, said "That's mine, put it in my shower recess," and left the building.
The Secret Service's role is personal protection and nothing more. He has a strict personal liability to obey national security laws, president or not. If he doesn't, it's the FBI's territory. So the FBI did something about it. By the book. Which was their job. Good job done well, on the face of it.
The subjects of the documents the defendant has been inducted over were nothing to do with collusion with Russian influence over the 2016 election (the reason why "the crooks" tried to "stitch him up" - remember that? That's perfectly normal behaviour, no possible security concerns there), but inter alia, battle plans relating to hostile countries, assessments of military threats and weaknesses, and information which, if released, could jeopardise friendly security relationships with the five eyes countries and assets in the field.
Then he lied and conspired to keep the documents in his shower when he was asked, and then was told by a court, to put his house in order.
Does that sound criminal enough?
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 10:13 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"Does that sound criminal enough?"
No. Because its the usual waffle that has been used before. Remember the absolute certainty about his tax returns? Huge show put on but damp squib. Remember the slam dunk Trump/Russia dossier? Damp squib of fabricated lies. The protesters forcefully moved so Trump could cross a road to some religious building? Nope again lies. The raid with leaked photos of 'classified' documents? Staged photos of documents with classified markings, damp squib. At every level being attacked in the prayer that something sticks no matter how false.
Let me guess, this time they are being completely honest and truthful and we should trust them now? Noting that they are not going after him for classified documents (thought this was slam dunk?) but instead claiming something is sensitive information (regardless of classification) but not willing to prove it is sensitive. Jail him based on their say so just because? See why I am sceptical?
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 10:41 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
You are arguing that we shouldn't have the rule of law.
The reality is we'll never know about Russian collusion because the defendant and his legislator allies shut the investigation down. Every other president released their tax returns; the defendant chose not to because it doesn't just look bad when billionaires pay no tax, it is tremendously bad that billionaires pay no tax. Above all else the defendant doesn't want to have people talking about billionaires' tax rates. The defendant did actually have a street cleared of legal protesters for a hypocritical photo-op.
Ultimately the court will decide if what he kept was sensitive or not. That's what the court is for, in this case. A grand jury, ordinary citizens, were convinced enough to indict him for it. This is called due process and it applies to everybody. (See rule of law).
The bloke at the top has to obey the law. If it looks like they didn't, it's really important to either make sure that they did, or show everyone if they didn't. What people in power don't want you to know can harm and kill you. Wars had to be fought to establish that. The main people who don't want people to believe that, aside from the defendant, are named Xi, Putin, and Kim.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 11:06 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"You are arguing that we shouldn't have the rule of law."
Where did I say that? We should have impartial rule of law. The law and the state should not be a weapon and certainly shouldnt be for corrupting democratic elections. Using the law and state as it is against Trump isnt much different than dodgy countries we used to point at for jailing opponents.
"The reality is we'll never know about Russian collusion because the defendant and his legislator allies shut the investigation down."
Steele dossier, total fabrication. They couldnt produce any evidence. The services also believed it to be a fabrication when they used it as though it was top quality intelligence to attack Trump and hold open an investigation long after it was concluded.
"Every other president released their tax returns; the defendant chose not to because it doesn't just look bad when billionaires pay no tax, it is tremendously bad that billionaires pay no tax."
Not a legal requirement to run for president but was hyped up as a huge event. Then someone (probably Trump) leaked a tax return and he was above board.
"The defendant did actually have a street cleared of legal protesters for a hypocritical photo-op."
To cross to the (church?)? Nope. Wasnt his doing at all even though the media quickly claimed it was. The lie was around the world before the truth left the gate.
"Ultimately the court will decide if what he kept was sensitive or not"
Eventually it will reach a high enough court to have someone look at the documents and decide if it actually is sensitive information. (See rule of law).
"The bloke at the top has to obey the law. If it looks like they didn't, it's really important to either make sure that they did, or show everyone if they didn't."
And so when the FBI brushes an actual crook investigation under the carpet when they have hard evidence in their possession in order to protect 'The Big Guy' it makes you wander why the bloke at the top and even when he was 2nd to the top isnt under severe public investigation.
"The main people who don't want people to believe that, aside from the defendant, are named Xi, Putin, and Kim."
And the Big Guy. And Hillary. And the various agents illegally investigating Trump in 2016.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:45 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Casca
"For saying your not maga you sure do sound like one..."
Of course I do. Thats because instead of orange man bad, on my knees screaming to the sky 'Nooooooooo' and instead weighing him up on his actions and reality I dont conform with the anti-Trump hate filled mob. Anyone not in the mad cult of anti-Trumper probably looks like a MAGA cultist from over there. I am sure to a MAGA nutter I might look like an anti-Trumper.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:19 GMT Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Free pass because you used to be president is the opposite of the rule of law. You want power, expect scrutiny.
The rest is pure MAGA conspiracy theories. Try as hard as you like to make this about who's in charge now, what's happening to the defendant now is because of what the defendant did.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:47 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"Free pass because you used to be president is the opposite of the rule of law."
Congrats for agreeing with me??? The difference seems to be I expect there to be a crime for the law to target an individual, something which has so far over years of numerous attempts not been the case. That is why I am doubtful this is any better than the many previous efforts.
"The rest is pure MAGA conspiracy theories. Try as hard as you like to make this about who's in charge now, what's happening to the defendant now is because of what the defendant did."
It is interesting you seem to have reached a guilty verdict already. Something the court has yet to consider.
-
-
Friday 16th June 2023 09:10 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"No, I'm saying he has a case to answer"
Sorry it sounded like you had reached a conclusion- https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2023/06/14/florida_man_data/#c_4680340
But your other comments do suggest it should be a court process so sorry if I misunderstood.
"so indictment is not, as you say, persecution, but the rule of law applying to all equally."
And it would be nice to see the law applied equally. Yet instead just another anti-Trump show. As I said before, imagine they actually have him for criminal behaviour and actually convict him for it. No honest person looking at the situation would believe he was convicted above board. The boy who cried wolf has done so so many times now out of desperation to stop Trump being a presidential candidate, president and to try and stop him running again. How anyone could try and suggest the rule of law is being applied equally has some serious blinkers on.
-
-
Thursday 22nd June 2023 08:19 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Benegesserict Cumbersomberbatch
"Annoying else faced with what is in the indictment would have been behind bars 6 months ago."
Why? Guilty without need to prove it? So far Trump has been constantly attacked even with fabricated evidence and leaks of active investigations yet still not shown guilty. Which is why I expect this one to follow the path of the previous ones and fail as well.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 12:49 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Lars
"Would you vote for him again?"
I didnt vote for him. I am not American. As an outsider I was a little disappointed when Trump ran and knocked my preferred candidate out of the race. But between Hillary and Trump, Biden and Trump or Obama and Trump I can see the appeal of Trump. That does not mean I am setting a high bar only a preference for who I believe does a better job.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 15:19 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Lars
"Trump is not a sane person, just listen to that "little kid's" voice of his."
Again it falls to childish personal attacks on him, now his voice. Before its his hair and skin colour etc. Who cares? And the idea his sanity is judged by his voice?
You could attack him on policy. You could attack him on actions. There were legitimate reasons to complain about him. Like it or not he was chosen to follow the outcome of Obama era, selected over Hillary even after a fabricated evidence attack on him (plus more) and looks a hell of a lot better than Biden. My preferred candidate for 2016? no. But mine was knocked out of the race by Trump and I wish I could say fair and square but Trump had it harder than any other candidate of the republicans.
-
-
Friday 16th June 2023 09:12 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Mooseman
"Did you watch him mock a disabled reporter live on TV?"
I saw. That would be his action. I guess you could say Lars was doing a Trump.
"And you're whining about people saying nasty things about your hero?"
Ahhh, so because I am not a raging anti-Trumper he must be my hero? When you are older you might discover there isnt just black and white but other opinions too.
-
Monday 19th June 2023 08:22 GMT Mooseman
Re: What I cannot understand ...
"Ahhh, so because I am not a raging anti-Trumper he must be my hero?"
Let's see. Every single time Trump comes up, you leap to his defence and claim there is a conspiracy to stop him running for office/being president/whatever. you twist and torture semantics (as usual) in an attempt to prove his innocence, or to try to prove that he was and is being unfairly persecuted. You excuse his actions. You equate the president of the US openly mocking a disabled reporter to a comment on here, and for once you are unable to twist the evidence of your own eyes so as to make it either not happen at all, or be merely misinterpreted.
You attempt to equate Biden holding what, a dozen document which he immediately contaced the FBI etc about with Trump holding countless boxes of documents which he claimed to have "declassified" with his mind and lied repeatedly about having.
Oh and your usual sign off with a sad little insult (I'm probably older than you) is classic Trump.
So yes, you're a Trump fan, and as such logic and reality pass you by - you probably think Johnson has been unfairly treated too.
-
Monday 19th June 2023 09:34 GMT codejunky
Re: What I cannot understand ...
@Mooseman
"Let's see. Every single time Trump comes up, you leap to his defence and claim there is a conspiracy to stop him running for office/being president/whatever."
That you call it a conspiracy to stop him from running for president suggests you might be a bit rabid anti-Trumper. You will find, if you bothered to read, that I am against the state being used as a weapon and against fabricating a document to have someone investigated as some sort of traitor or the serious misreporting (aka lying) to claim he did x,y,z. I also comment against the usual orange man bad because it adds to all the noise with no substance.
"you twist and torture semantics (as usual) in an attempt to prove his innocence"
He has consistently been proven innocent to the point where it is farcical. The scary part is the conspiracy theories that turned true! The Steele dossier. The FBI embedded in Twitter and influencing facebook. The clearly disproportionate treatment of this one guy which is clearly a politically motivated attack.
"You equate the president of the US openly mocking a disabled reporter to a comment on here"
Again this was another one of those lies that got disproved but I couldnt be bothered getting into it. Trump had made the same actions before when speaking to crowds. If you fail to see any parallel in the comment that is your failing not mine.
"You attempt to equate Biden holding what, a dozen document which he immediately contaced the FBI etc about with Trump holding countless boxes of documents which he claimed to have "declassified" with his mind and lied repeatedly about having."
Biden is the one who claims it is a bad thing for such mishandling and blew it up. Then of course he was found storing them in the garage. Its not as damning as a laptop of evidence but again that is being played very quietly.
"Oh and your usual sign off with a sad little insult (I'm probably older than you) is classic Trump."
You poor thing, want a wambulance? If you cant take it dont dish it.
"So yes, you're a Trump fan, and as such logic and reality pass you by - you probably think Johnson has been unfairly treated too."
Again you make things up to suit your imagination. Go off into a corner and argue with yourself
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 14:54 GMT CrazyOldCatMan
Re: What I cannot understand ...
He has a strict personal liability to obey national security laws, president or not
Y'see, this is the flaw in all this. In Trump's tiny little mind (of inverse proportion to his ego) the *only* law is "Do I want it?". This is why he can joke about committing sexual assault, this is why he can incite people to commit treason (or whatever the term is for the Capitol rioters), this is why he can hang on to classified documents, lie about it *and* show them to people with no security clearance.
Because he wants to. And, in his mind, that over-rides anything else.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:18 GMT Gala
Re: What I cannot understand ...
I assumed at first it was just basic incompetence - chaotic disorganised Whitehouse staff stuffing things into boxes before moving out.
Then I thought it was the orange one's rampant toddlerism - I WANT them, they're MINE, look what I've got! I declassified them WITH MY MIND etc etc.
Seeing the scale and reading about the scope of the documents makes me think it's worse.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 03:43 GMT Mark 85
Re: What I cannot understand ...
is why he kept all of these files ? What advantage to him was there ?
a) it fed his ego
and
b) his presidential library which is also an ego thing.
For him to have a library he has to have all his papers from his time n office, minus anything classified.
what did he do with them, did he show them to people, did he brag about it.
Indeed he did show them to people and most of them didn't have a security clearance. Plus, there's telling how many papers he gave to his "buddy" Putin. There's a reason that Putin called him a "useful idiot".
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 18:28 GMT Someone Else
Re: What I cannot understand ...
Mary Trump (remember her?) posited recently that he's keeping them for leverage in a potential future business deal overseas. If these docs contain some embarrassing/compromising details on a head of state that tRump wants to do business in, they could be used to get The Orangutan a better deal.
Ego? Sure, but tRump is purely transactional, and these could help him in a transaction.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 06:29 GMT ShortStuff
What About The Current Resident?
Yet you failed to state that the current resident of the WH did the same thing when he was a VP and a Senator. What's more, as a VP / Senator he had no right to classified docs, whereas a P has every right and cant declassify anything he wants to at any time.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 06:50 GMT Phil Koenig
Re: What About The Current Resident?
The way that was handled by #46 when he was asked to return them was he just returned them.
This case revolves around an egregious effort by Cheeto & Co. not only to NOT return them, but to extensively lie about what they were doing right in the faces of the DoJ attorneys and judges.
At this point fraud and lying has become so integral to Cheeto's psyche I doubt he's even capable of knowing when he is or is not doing it. (Though exceptions of the latter sort seem quite rare anyway)
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:43 GMT Filippo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Several things come to mind in response to this.
First, as at least one other poster noted, the two situations are not quite the same thing. Trump has gone many steps beyond anything anyone else did, taking large amounts of documents, actively showing them to unauthorized people, lying about it, and all of this for egregiously moronic reasons.
Secondly, it is however true that, in recent times, the USA seems to need some tightening up of its secret-keeping. Some other posters are wondering why Trump was allowed to take those documents home in the first place, and maybe some other people need to be investigated for their laxness too, and they are right. The whole Texeira case also comes to mind. Frankly, this is looking more and more like a systemic problem with too many people having too much access to too many documents. Of course, nothing of this exonerates Trump, because:
Thirdly, two wrongs do not make a right. The "the other guy did it too" defense needs to be exposed as the low rhetorical trick it is, every time it is deployed.
As a tangent, I'd note that while it is true that a President can read secret documents and declassify them, Trump is not currently President and those documents were not declassified. So that point is wholly irrelevant.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:02 GMT 42656e4d203239
Re: What About The Current Resident?
>>You still need a need to know, in addition to being allowed to know.
Dunno why some smooth brain down voted you. Have an upvote and a pint.
People need to understand the difference beween a need and a want.
The cheeto wanted(wants? I don't know anythng about his current state of mind) everything and, as POTUS, could grab (almost) everything.
Did he have a need (I mean other than to sell views of the stuff to his chums in Saudi Arabia and the Kremlin amongst, no doubt, others) to physically posess those documents.in, of all places, a holiday resort in Florida? I doubt it very much.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:23 GMT Lil Endian
Re: What About The Current Resident?
I need to know *everything*. How else can I judge whether or not I need to know it?
So that means you need to know things even when you don't need to know them. You need to know them not because you need to know them but because you need to know whether or not you need to know. If you don't need to know, you still need to know so that you know that there is no need to know.
Yes!
Good. That's very clear!
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:53 GMT Munchausen's proxy
Re: What About The Current Resident?
So that means you need to know things even when you don't need to know them. You need to know them not because you need to know them but because you need to know whether or not you need to know. If you don't need to know, you still need to know so that you know that there is no need to know.
You are Kurt Gödel, and I claim my five pounds.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:54 GMT Phil Koenig
Re: What About The Current Resident?
One of the key takeaways for me when it comes to POTUS #45 is the fact that the US founders and framers of the US Constitution never seemed to imagine that someone as incredibly sociopathic as this person would ever manage to ascend to the presidency. And with the help of various Congressional allies and enablers, set about to systematically disassemble the foundations of democracy in the country.
For example I think it will take decades to fully undo the damage that that administration did to various federal agencies by systematically purging long-term more or less apolitical experts in high positions and then replace them with legions of inexperienced political hacks that mostly have no commitment to good government and are simply looking for ways to politicize the federal government in favor of the currently unhinged Republican Party that gifted them these plum positions.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:10 GMT phuzz
Re: What About The Current Resident?
The idea that it might be worth updating laws every few centuries doesn't seem to have reached the US yet. They're legal system was indeed very shiny two hundred years ago, but it could do with a bit of a freshen up by now. Maybe drag it kicking and screaming into the 20th century?
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:34 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
The idea that it might be worth updating laws every few centuries doesn't seem to have reached the US yet. They're legal system was indeed very shiny two hundred years ago, but it could do with a bit of a freshen up by now. Maybe drag it kicking and screaming into the 20th century?
If you are posting from the UK, that might be amusing. If not, I apologize for making an unwarranted assumption.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 08:54 GMT Mooseman
Re: What About The Current Resident?
"If you are posting from the UK, that might be amusing"
Most of our laws are relatively modern - no doubt you'll quote the laws allowing you to cut off a Scotsman's head if you see him south of the border, etc. All those "laws" are long since gone, and kept alive by myth. Unlike the US, we don't have a book of laws 250 years old that we have to adhere to. Some of our laws like habeas corpus are still in use, even in the US.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:41 GMT Cav
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Garbage. Trump is a sociopath with the mental capacity of a toddler. No one has been so evil, so cavalier with the power he obtained and the secrets that came with it.
Anyone who supports Trump is a cult member completely lacking in morality and integrity.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:23 GMT Jellied Eel
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Anyone who supports Trump is a cult member completely lacking in morality and integrity.
Yep. And probably a mega-MAGA Republican racist/terrorist/extremist.
Vote for the Big Guy! And don't forget your 10%!
Vote for the guy that campaigned on American and Family Values, and promised to heal the divide in the US political system. Vote for the guy that during his long senate career, worked tirelessly to lock up drug abusers. Don't vote for any extreme-MAGA Republicans because they're just un-American and should not be allowed to vote.
But as an outsider looking in, it's all very strange. Ex-President announces he's running again, triggering yet another concerted campaign to prevent them, and jail them. But thanks to the wonders of the Constitution, being in jail doesn't actually seem to prevent you from taking office, should you win. Which could actually be a good thing, as a Whitehouse-in-the-Bighouse may actually be more secure than the traditional version given the strict(ish) rules around what's allowed in or out, including visitors.
But America is the shining beacon of democracy, projecting morality and integrity across the globe. Or else. It's not some tin-pot dictatorship that locks up political dissidents. It's all very strange. We used to mock the old Soviet Politburo and joke about it being populated by elite old farts with one foot in the grave, who'd send their rivals off to the Gulags. America isn't like that at all..
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 21:35 GMT Squid with a waterproof laptop
Re: What About The Current Resident?
> Ex-President announces he's running again, triggering yet another concerted campaign to prevent them, and jail them.
> But as an outsider looking in, it's all very strange.
Yeah, you don't have the context it seems. NARA requested their documents back from tfg, he returned some of them. NARA goes through the DOJ to get back the remainder of the missing documents. TFG returns more documents, says he had his attorneys sweep through and check that he had no more documents. NARA says they're still missing documents, and evidence points to tfg still having them. After compiling evidence to get a search warrant, the FBI searches MAL and finds said documents. It's shortly after this that tfg declares he's running for president in 2024.
Now, having classified documents isn't _technically_ illegal, but _knowing_ you have them and 'willfully retaining' them is. These charges are over him knowingly and willfully retaining the documents. You might suggest that he didn't know he had them or that he didn't know he wasn't supposed to have them, but being the stable genius that he is, tfg in a *recorded interview* showed classified documents to the interviewer, told them the documents were still classified, and told them to keep it a secret.
tfg: "I just found, isn't that amazing? ... Except it is like, highly confidential. ... Secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this. ... See as president I could have declassified it. Now I can't, you know, but this is a secret." p.15-16
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 00:19 GMT georgezilla
Re: What About The Current Resident?
" ... it's all very strange. Ex-President announces he's running again, triggering yet another concerted campaign to prevent them, and jail them. ... "
< heavy sigh >
FFS!
It would be very strange, if that was actually the way it happened. But is wasn't.
This has been going on for aprox. TWO FUCKING YEARS!
Someone didn't wake up the day before he announced, sand said OH FUCK, he's going to run again. Let's indict him!
Evidence was gathered, witnesses were interviewed, a Special Counsel was placed, a Grand Jury was seated, evidence was presented, witnesses heard, and the Grand Jury indicted him on all of that. And he was arrested, booked and charge in a Court.
And you would know that if you were paying attention. Which is seems that you weren't and still aren't.
-
Monday 19th June 2023 08:33 GMT Mooseman
Re: What About The Current Resident?
" the guy that during his long senate career, worked tirelessly to lock up drug abusers"
Actually he was on record as saying that the whole war on drugs was useless and they should legalise the lot. By the time he was running for president he had switched 180 degrees and was trying to get long prison sentences for users (not dealers, note).
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:40 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
>>"For example I think it will take decades to fully undo the damage that that administration did to various federal agencies by systematically purging long-term more or less apolitical experts in high positions and then replace them with legions of inexperienced political hacks that mostly have no commitment to good government and are simply looking for ways to politicize the federal government"
I think you mean #44
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:02 GMT yetanotheraoc
Re: What About The Current Resident?
"the US founders and framers of the US Constitution never seemed to imagine that someone as incredibly sociopathic as this person would ever manage to ascend to the presidency"
You're not giving them enough credit. Checks and balances were all about that.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:44 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
both major U.S. parties have been attempting to chip away at those checks and balances for decades... they each have their own agendas... I am not certain either represents the majority of the populace... the majority of us are registered as Independent and do not belong to either party... if only we could see past them... and... ___move forward_ ...
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:12 GMT abend0c4
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Trump has not been charged with any offence prior to his being specifically requested to return documents - he had the opportunity to correct his "mistake".
It is his subsequent actions for which he has been indicted- which apparently may include deliberately concealing documents not just from the FBI, but also from his own lawyers resulting in their making a false declaration. It's hardly surprising he's struggling to get legal representation.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:54 GMT Eclectic Man
Re: What About The Current Resident?
AC: "he declassified and kept documents"
Unfortunately for him, he did not declassify the documents when President. In any case where documents relate to security of other countries, their classification is usually the responsibility of that sovereign power, not the USA or its president. Had he actually declassified the documents, they would not be in folders marked "SECRET" or "TOP SECRET".
Regulations on storing "SECRET" and "TOP SECRET" are very stringent, at least in the UK, requiring a safe to a particular standard, provided by the government, secure rooms without external walls or windows, controlled entry and a log of who has held the document, and when (as far as I recall). Destruction has to be witnessed and recorded. You do not keep them on the stage of a ballroom in cardboard boxes.
I cannot think of any valid reason for him to have kept documents relating to the USA's nuclear capabilities.
-
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 00:26 GMT georgezilla
Re: What About The Current Resident?
" ... We do not know if those folders even had anything in ... "
The problem is that you don't understand that the "folders" themselves" are actually classified. They have it written on them in BIG FUCKING RED LETTERS! It's not just that what is in them that is classified. And illegal to have them.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 09:16 GMT codejunky
Re: What About The Current Resident?
@georgezilla
"The problem is that you don't understand that the "folders" themselves" are actually classified. They have it written on them in BIG FUCKING RED LETTERS! It's not just that what is in them that is classified. And illegal to have them."
Not entirely correct. This is the obfuscated problem, the folders have classified markings, that does not make them classified. When I read about the claims against Trump a lot of them talk about documents with classified markings, but that is very different from a classified document. Just because a document is declassified it doesnt have the markings removed. The staged photo of folders marked classified look good for the public but only because the public doesnt necessarily know it means nothing but a staged photo of some folders. Its a damp squib.
-
-
Monday 19th June 2023 09:46 GMT codejunky
Re: What About The Current Resident?
@Mooseman
"Staged? And you know this how O Trump worshipper? (Oh yes you are before you try to deny it)"
Did you not see the picture of the classified marked documents from the raid? That being a leak from an active investigation to the public which, as far as I am aware, is a crime or at least seriously affect the case if it went to trial.
Or does that not matter in your little world? Does that not register when you look at reality? Instead thinking hard must be Trump lover? We need a cave troll icon.
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:59 GMT Filippo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
First of all, you can't keep documents without telling anyone, and then, when found out later, claim that you had declassified them. Declassifying is not retroactive, and even if it was, you cannot do it when you're no longer President. You also can't say you did it back then, but nobody knew because you did it in your head, but it still counts - or whatever other nonsense is going on behind this line of defense. Bottom line, he's not President now, the "declassify" line doesn't apply, period.
Secondly, if he intended to expose anything about anything, why didn't he do it while still in power? If you don't have a good answer to that question, the entire "deep state" thesis crumbles, because there is no reason to wait until after the election before exposing, and on the contrary plenty of reasons (both selfish and patriotic) to do it as soon as possible. The only other possible explanation is that there was nothing to expose.
Also, remember that other people did see those documents (that's a big part of the entire problem). Trump's friends, not opponents. And yet, still no exposure.
At this point, either there is no deep state, or literally everyone is in the deep state, in which case it would be quite the misnomer.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
The declassification is correctly filed
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01717/declassification-of-certain-materials-related-to-the-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation
And we do not know that he actually showed these supposedly top secret docs to other people, there is just an iffy audio recording discussing that he could show them.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:05 GMT Filippo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
According to the allegations, the documents cover far more than crossfire hurricane. Apparently, among many other things, there are nuclear-related documents in there; I see no possible reason, deep state or otherwise, for Trump to have those at home.
Of course, these are all allegations until a verdict is given. I do trust in the rule of law, and I hope Trump's supporters do as well.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:45 GMT Filippo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Uh, yeah, reiterating allegations that have been investigated by the authorities and disproven is exactly the opposite of respecting the rule of law.
Pick one or the other. Either the institutions are more trustworthy than social media, or they aren't.
If they are, then you can rightfully claim that we don't know whether Trump did anything wrong, but you can't at the same time coherently claim that Obama spied on him.
If they aren't, then you can claim that, and anything else you want, but everyone else can claim, with just as much authority, that Trump committed treason and if he were anyone else he'd be in supermax by now.
Honestly, I don't think the institutions are 100% trustworthy, or that social media are 100% bullshit, but I do know which of those two scenarios results in a society I can survive in.
If you want to claim that the institutions are okay when they say that Trump is innocent until proven guilty, but not okay when they say that Obama didn't spy on Trump... eh, then you are no longer talking about the rule of law at all; you're just talking about how much you like Trump. Which is fine, and even on topic, but it doesn't sound like a useful discussion, or even an interesting one.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:52 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Disproven that the FISA warrant justification was complete BS?
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/20/documents-show-trump-right-about-fbi-fisa-warrants/
TD;DR Hillary paid for someone to write a fictional dossier on her political rival, funnelled it through a law firm to the feds so she wouldn't be connected and then Obama used it as the reason to spy on the rival's campaign. Nothing even remotely iffy there.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:43 GMT Roo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
When you get down to it Trump asked for Russia's aid in doxing his rival's campaign in a stump speech, and promptly received what he asked for - from Russia. Later investigations resulted in multiple Trump campaign operators being convicted (and some later pardoned - by Trump) for seeking Russia's help. If you think Trump has it rough being given due process for mishandling nuclear secrets and seeking out Russia's help to get elected, it's pretty tame stuff compared to the treatment meted out to Michael Cohen by Bill Barr on the grounds that he lied to congress about the number of times he spoke to Russia regarding a Trump real estate deal (he said 3, real number 10).
I suggest you read the Steele Dossier if you can find it, it's pretty tame compared to the unsubstantiated stuff Fox keeps spewing about the Bidens & Clintons. The evidence doesn't lie, the folks weaponizing government are Trump and his shrill shills.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
Pretty much all they could convict on was 'lying to the FBI'. Heck if the FBI could get away with it they'd have convicted people for not giving their weight and height correct to 3 decimal places.
Indeed, the evidence doesn't lie. Joe bragged about withholding money from Ukraine and Hunter's pay from Burisma halved when his daddy left office.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:46 GMT jake
Re: What About The Current Resident?
"What About The <whatever>"
Ah, yes. Whataboutitis. We're going to hear an awful lot of that for the next several months.
Before going that route, try to remember that it is perfectly possible to have multiple cases going on at one time. It's also possible for multiple parties to be found guilty of different crimes (the jails are full of examples). It's also possible for one party to be found guilty, and another party to be found innocent.
And before some dunderhead says "BUT WHAT ABOUT HILLARY‽‽‽‽" ... Trump's appointed people had four whole years to "lock her up", and yet they couldn't even find enough to charge her with anything. Stop bellowing about her already, that shit is last decade's news and it only makes you look silly.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:23 GMT Filippo
Re: What About The Current Resident?
>"but what about X" remains a legitimate argument in principle.
It's a legitimate argument if used for accusing someone and X is unethical, or if used to defend someone and X is ethical.
Using it do defend someone and X is unethical - no, not legitimate, otherwise X was not unethical to begin with.
Using it to accuse Biden is a legitimate argument. Kinda weak, given the large differences, but legitimate; if we've decided that something is unethical, then it's unethical for everyone.
Using it to defend Trump... not so much. The argument would be, what, that since Biden is not facing charges, then keeping state secrets at home is fine? That doesn't work. It's not fine. If people do it and don't get punished, that's a separate problem, and the original problem is not diminished in the least.
It's important to note, though, that this is the comment page of an article that discusses Trump. Not Biden. And it's not like Biden's thing is not discussed elsewhere. So, using that argument here to defend Trump is invalid, and using it to attack Biden is off-topic. Either way, it's not a valuable contribution.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:00 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: What About The Current Resident?
US Senators and Congress are allowed to keep their own records. There is no direct equivalent to the US Presidential Records Act for members of Congress.
POTUS and VPOTUS lose their right to their records when they leave office. Those records are the property of the US government, typically under safekeeping of the Presidential Archives.
You are making (repeating) false equivalencies.
POTUS can *not* declassify anything at any time. There is a process and a procedure which must be followed. Likewise for VPOTUS.
And again, even if documents were legitimately declassified at some point, a former (V)POTUS gives up their right to those records when then leave office. There is no legitimate reason for Trump to have those records in his possession.
Simply put: the (Vice) Presidential records never should have been removed from the White House. This is true of Pence, Biden, and Trump, and every (V)POTUS before them. The difference is in the magnitude of what Trump did, how he conspired to cover up what he did, lying to Federal officers, and failing to return the documents when contacted by the DoJ.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 22:14 GMT DJSpuddyLizard
Re: What About The Current Resident?
"What's more, as a VP / Senator he had no right to classified docs"
Oh boy, you really don't understand ANYTHING about document classifications, do you?
For example - a United States Air Force general will routinely deal with Classified, Secret, and Top Secret documents as part of their job. A Master Sergeant might also may a Top Secret clearance.
Even an airman might happen to have a Secret clearance.
As the Vice President, you're next in line to be the Commander In Chief, so you'd better damn well know some military secrets.
"whereas a P has every right and cant declassify anything he wants to at any time."
First, you mean CAN not cant, and THERE IS A PROCESS, not a spell.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 00:01 GMT georgezilla
Re: What About The Current Resident?
No. No one is doing that. It's just not relevant to the case at all.
This is about The United States of America vs. Donald J. Trump. What does what Biden did or didn't do have with that fact? So Biden took a shit this morning so Trump didn't do anything wrong? And what Biden did isn't anything like Trump did. When Biden found out that he had some, he called the FBI and DOJ and said, hey come get them. Trump lied, denied, hid them, etc. That is why he's in trouble and Biden isn't.
It's a simple concept. But apparently even simple concepts are beyond your ability to understand.
And you might read the indictments to see exactly what Trump is charged with.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 06:59 GMT Sanguma
Numpty Breeders Association regrets to announce
that it missed the boat in 2018 and did not show both World-Class Numpties and award them with the Blue Ribbons they both deserved, when they were both in London (or at least that's the Press Release that crossed by desk this morning.)
It is not proposed to award Boris Johnson his Numpty Breeders Association Blue Ribbon posthumously; nor is it proposed to award Donald J Trump his Blue Ribbon posthumously. Is there anyone in Florida who would be able to present Donald J. Trump with his Numpty Breeders Association Blue Ribbon, and take the time to display his fetlocks, show his teeth, etc, everything that a Show Judge would be expected to do? (I regret to inform you that Numpty Breeders Association Show rules do not include expecting Numpties on show to round up sheep: there have been too many cases of Numpties worrying sheep. as testified to in the song "Dirty Deeds - Done with Sheep". That is the role of the Numpty Breeders Numpty Trials, and with any luck, both Boris Johnson and Donald J. Trump will be considered eligible for the Numpty Breeders Numpty Trials.)
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 07:47 GMT Binraider
Re: Lock him up
People still remember the name Caligula, for not entirely dissimilar reasons.
The lesson is that our systems that choose our leaders need to continue to evolve and have safeguards to make sure such people do not get there in the first place.
First-past-the-post is the first thing that needs to go. Only dumbly hung onto by three countries, all of which with serious problems arising from two-party politics.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:30 GMT Bebu
First-past-the-post is the first thing that needs to go.
We can donate Tasmania's Hare-Clark system of preferential voting - that should stress a few brain cells.
What might make a much larger difference is Australia's peculiar practice of compulsory voting and the statutory authority entrusted (Australian Electorial Commission) to stage the elections and enforce voter enrolment and attendance at a polling place.
So AU doesn't really have voter suppression or hanging chads or any other floridan nonsense.
Not that our politician aren't also rubbish its just that we can only blame ourselves for the clowns we elect.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 12:49 GMT Binraider
Re: First-past-the-post is the first thing that needs to go.
When the list of choices is reduced to two because of the calculation method, it's no wonder we get clowns!
Last general in the UK really was a rock-and-a-hard place. Corbyn or the Tories? No wonder there's voter apathy; most of us didn't want either of these choices; and a protest vote for one of the alternatives amounts to just that: a protest.
Nobody should ever have to tactical vote.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:12 GMT DwarfPants
Re: First-past-the-post is the first thing that needs to go.
Indeed. If everyone just voted for who they actually wanted, rather than thinking it would be a wasted / protest vote and voting for Waldorf or Statler, we might actually end up with some significantly different results even in our first past the post system.
For most values of politicians, I am also fairly convinced that anything like hung parliaments that restricts politicians actually doing whatever their current flight of fantasy is, might be a good thing.
-
Wednesday 21st June 2023 08:28 GMT Mooseman
Re: First-past-the-post is the first thing that needs to go.
"Last general in the UK really was a rock-and-a-hard place. Corbyn or the Tories?"
what the 2019 GE showed quite clearly is that people largely vote on headline policy promises and 3-word slogans. Oh, and casual racism. Sunlit uplands, no downside, send em all home
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:33 GMT imanidiot
Re: Lock him up
Not to undermine how stupid FPTP voting is (because it's monumentally stupid) there's a lot more than 3 countries using FPTP voting systems either for (directly) electing the head of state or for state bodies like senate/congress/parliament/whateveritscalled (see Wikipedia because I can't be arsed to find a more reputable source).
-
Wednesday 21st June 2023 08:33 GMT Mooseman
Re: Lock him up
"Not to undermine how stupid FPTP voting is"
Indeed, it is a very daft system. But we have been fed nonsense about how complicated PR or STV is, and how PR will inevitably turn us into Italy, so people on the whole neither trust nor want it. And of course it suits whichever party is in government because under PR they would have to actually talk to MPs of other political hues rather than simply ignore about half the country's choice of government.
-
-
-
Monday 19th June 2023 08:51 GMT Mooseman
Re: Lock him up
"Historians will write about it to understand how such a stupidity could have occurred"
It does say quite a lot about the gullibility of the voting public - Drump wasn't the first and I suspect won't be the last either. Somehow Berlusconi was re-elected twice, despite being embroiled in more scandals than you can count, Johnson was elected with a huge majority despite being a proven liar (he was even fired from previous jobs for making stuff up about the EU), Bolsonaro, Erdoğan, Orban, etc etc etc.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:09 GMT Antron Argaiv
The explanation that has been given for that issue, goes like this: the people who actually account for all the documents are essentially librarians. They're lower ranking, in general, than the people who read the documents. When the meeting is over, the documents need to be collected. The problem here is that TFG would insist on retaining the documents, and the lower ranking custodian was loathe to insist too strongly, lest decorum be breached.
You get the idea: when the President says, "Imma hang on to this, OK?" the correct answer is, "Sir, you need to return that document to me." but what happens if the document is not handed back? How strenuously does a lower rank insist, and who backs them up? (and what are the consequences on the lower rank's career...TFG was notoriously vengeful)
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:36 GMT imanidiot
Your example presumes the custodian/peon would even have a chance to ask for the documents back. It's very likely the first to get up and leave the room at the end of any meeting was the president, so it's highly possible he'd be out the room already (documents in hand) before anybody even had a chance to ask for them back. And the lowly peon likely wasn't authorized to chase the president through the White House.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:21 GMT fg_swe
They Have You For A Ride
Compared to what the Clintons did (Emailserver in the bathroom, open for foreign hacking, having sex with the intern, abusing several women, visiting Paedo Island),
Compared to what BIDEN is doing (collecting bribes from foreign sources through his son, covering up drug approval crimes),
this Trumpish behaviour is benign. A clear attempt to take out an inconvenient politician. He is held to the highest standards while his opposition is basically immune to anything.
This is going to backfire very badly. Unequal application of justice is a hallmark of tyrannies. Welcome to the Soviet States of America !
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:46 GMT imanidiot
Re: Substance
I should have added to my previous reply I don't want to detract from the hardships of the Garay family, she "drew the short straw" for sure and it's quite frankly shameful they're not getting any support from those running the trial. I realize my reply comes off rather cold and uncaring.
I just meant to say that their experience doesn't, at this time, give me any reason to suspect a widespread and systematic cover-up that runs to the higher regions of government or even the higher levels of pharma companies. It seems more of a story of medical incompetence and people falling into the cracks of an uncaring and bureaucratized healthcare system. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the lead physician in charge of the trials was never actually aware of the severity of miss Garay's reaction to the vaccine. It's unlikely he was reading all his email himself. The vaccine seems to have triggered a severe auto-immune response in her, which is not entirely unheard of in vaccines (both approved and in trials).
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 07:01 GMT fg_swe
B0ll0cks
Maddie de Garay is a case of severe adverse effects which has been systematically suppressed, in order to achieve a faux "successful trial".
It demonstrates that our (NATO+SK+JP+ANZAC) world is highly corrupt in the highest layers. That does not mean Moscow and Beijing are better. The light seems to shine in Africa, where they already resist the Drug Oligarchs - for good reasons.
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:43 GMT jake
Re: They Have You For A Ride
"Unequal application of justice"
Yeah, that TOTALLY pisses me off!
I mean, if I had had a bathroom, bedroom and ballroom full of Top Secret documents, the DoJ would have busted down my door without so much as a by-your-leave, held me at gunpoint while they ransacked my house, and then hauled my ass off to jail, probably never to see the light of day again.
Trump, on the other hand, was politely asked to return them, and allowed to hem and haw about it for over a year, THEN they came and got the documents, followed by a nice polite note requesting that he show up for a hearing in a week or two.
Really equal justice there, Mr. Entitled. Cry me a fucking river.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:54 GMT fg_swe
President And Classified Information
It is the job of the president to handle classified information in order to make proper decisions. He needs access to secret papers. Surely he should have been more careful and diligent. Is it part of your job to handle as much classified papers ?
Mr Trump must be held to the same standards as other presidents or secretaries, otherwise it stinks like a soviet political prosecution.
It looks like they are grasping for straws to avoid him running for president.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:33 GMT DJO
Re: BIDEN And Garage Papers
Stop grasping for stupid straws.
Biden when informed returned the documents immediately and fully cooperated with the relevant authorities.
Trump when informed lied about having documents, hid documents, lied to his lawyers about documents and obstructed the authorities at every step.
Now if you cannot see the difference between those sets of circumstances, I give up because there is no hope left for you.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 09:55 GMT phuzz
Re: President And Classified Information
No one said he shouldn't have classified information when he was in office. It was the part where he lost the election and wasn't in office any more, and deliberately took boxes and boxes of classified documents. Then when he was asked to return them, he repeated lied and tried to hide them.
That's the part that he's on trial for.
Of course, it is somewhat true that he's still not being held according the the same standards as other people. Trump has been allowed out on bail, if he was held to the same standards as eg Reality Winner he'd be in jail awaiting trial right now.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:12 GMT R Soul
Re: President And Classified Information
FFS! A former president does not need access to secret papers because they're no longer in office. Nobody should store secret, sensitive national security documents in a toilet or stack boxes of them in ballroom. Ever. Or lie about having them and obstruct law enforcement officials from retrieving those documents.
You say you want the lying orange buffoon to be "held to the same standards as other presidents or secretaries". Fine. Name one who has done any of the above. Just one.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:36 GMT Yet Another Anonymous coward
Re: President And Classified Information
> A former president does not need access to secret papers because they're no longer in office.
That's not true, the documents are just as valuable once you are out of office.
>Nobody should store secret, sensitive national security documents in a toilet or stack boxes of them in ballroom
At least not in a world with scanners, digital cameras and online secure storage.
Even Smiley had microfilm, old George didn't have to struggle down the stairs of Cambridge circus with boxes of foolscap.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:21 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: President And Classified Information
"That's not true, the documents are just as valuable once you are out of office."
Well yes, the documents remain valuable. That's why they are covered by the Presidential Records Act.
However, former POTUS (and VPOTUS) give up their rights to those same records when they leave office. The documents are the property of the government, not the individual.
Really, this is not difficult, it's pretty straightforward.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:59 GMT R Soul
Re: President And Classified Information
You're wildly confused. Or trolling.
Secret papers are of course valuable, regardless of who is in office. They have to have appropriate levels of access control, audit, handling protocols, management procedures and so on. That means they don't get kept in a gold club toilet. Or other clearly insecure facilities. Or remain in the hands of former officials who no longer have any reasonable justification to access or store them.
And George Smiley is a fictional character who was never a head of state.
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:42 GMT Roo
Re: They Have You For A Ride
Talking of unequal application of the law, Michael Cohen got 53 days of solitary for lying to congress - if Barr applied the same punishment regime to Trump he'd have been locked up on day 1 of his reign of self-indulgence and he'd be looking forward to being buried in the same room. As for the rest of it, there is precisely zero evidence to back up your Maga talking points. That bronze badge you are toting is tarnishing fast.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 22:08 GMT Squid with a waterproof laptop
Re: They Have You For A Ride
> Emailserver in the bathroom,
Boxes of documents in the bathroom, storage room, ballroom
> open for foreign hacking,
Having major players from foreign opposition over where document are unsecured. [and requesting foreign election interference]
> having sex with the intern, abusing several women,
Lost a court case last month over sexual abuse, long history of paying to keep women silent
> visiting Paedo Island
... visiting paedo island, they're on the exact same list.
> collecting bribes from foreign sources through his son,
Collecting bribes from foreign sources through his real estate. Saudi's rented entire floors of his buildings and left them empty. Not to mention Jared Kushner or the Goya advert.
> covering up drug approval crimes
Jr. is a cokehead through and through.
I in no way intend this as waving away the actions of the Clintons or of Biden, but to say TFG's actions are benign is laughable.
-
Wednesday 21st June 2023 09:02 GMT Mooseman
Re: They Have You For A Ride
" Emailserver in the bathroom"
You'll notice he doesn't include Betsy Davos (personal email use), Ivanaka Trump, Jared Kushner (personal email account used to send official communications, whatsapp) Steve Bannon (personal email), K.T. McFarland (sending nuclear details to Saudis on her personal email), Stephen Miller, Reince Priebus and Gary Cohn (personal email accounts for public business).
Still, that Hillary eh?
Oh and JW Bush's use of private email servers and the roughly 5 million "missing" emails (after the Clinton Automated Records Management System was switched off by the Bush administration) which were later found by the Obama administration thus proving that the GOP had lied about them being missing ?
That Hillary. Lock her up.
-
-
-
Tuesday 20th June 2023 10:31 GMT codejunky
Re: They Have You For A Ride
@CowHorseFrog
"THe law doesnt work like that. One pedo at the police statin doesnt get off because another pedo at another police station also did the crime."
I think the problem is one being accused of many crimes even using fabricated evidence and leaking active investigations while the other has actual evidence covered up and is protected by the law.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:26 GMT Eric Kimminau TREG
Protection of Classified "information" vs. documents OWNED by the President
You seem to be ignoring that the documents of the President, by the President, for the President or OWNED by the President one noone can take that away form him. Until he has been given the opportunity to review and CHOOSE to turn them over to the Archivist, the ONLY person who can claim control of Presidential documents, then they are his and he is the only person with the power to determine their classification, even after he is no longer in office. Read the Constitution and the Law.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 20:06 GMT R Soul
Re: Protection of Classified "information" vs. documents OWNED by the President
You overlook that secret and top secret documents belong to the government. They don't belong to some here today, gone tomorrow politician - even when he/she was in office. This is why the orange fuckwit got arraigned in federal court yesterday. If those documents truly were his, there would be no case to answer. And the orange fuckwit's lawyers-of-the-week would have made that point. They didn't.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 08:41 GMT Eclectic Man
Golden Rassie
"The celebrated entertainer, who had a walk-on part in Home Alone 2 "
He has won several awards for his acting career, including not one, but three golden Raspberries: https://www.newsweek.com/how-many-razzies-has-donald-trump-won-golden-raspberry-awards-1776768
He must be so proud.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:04 GMT FeepingCreature
Re: Pardon?
The point of a democracy is to create buy-in to the state on the part of the voting public. This is the primary mechanism by which civil unrest is kept low in democratic states. To maintain this, it is probably unhealthy to prosecute credible presidential candidates, especially for "gotcha crimes" like lying to the police, or in general crimes without a clearly visible victim, regardless of the actual law.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:25 GMT DJO
Re: Pardon?
...it is probably unhealthy to prosecute credible presidential candidates...
That didn't stop the GOP from persecuting Hillary Clinton for decades even though she was cleared of every charge they invented.
Trump himself said "nobody is above the law" so why all of a sudden should he be let off for crimes that would get anybody else sent to prison for decades?
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 11:29 GMT FeepingCreature
Re: Pardon?
"Lock her up" chants aside, I am not aware of the judicative under Trump issuing a warrant for Hillary's arrest, and I would have the same opinion about that as I have about this. The state, as the system competed over, should not take an active hand in the choice of competitors.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 12:07 GMT DJO
Re: Pardon?
I didn't say that - "persecute" is not the same as "prosecute".
But the GOP did spend millions of tax payers dollars on pointless investigations - now that was really a "witch hunt" unlike what's happening to Trump which is a criminal investigation of things that actually happened.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:20 GMT DJO
Re: Pardon?
Don't talk crap, there was over 20 years of relentless denigration by the GOP and the right wing press, her brand was terminally tarnished which is exactly what the GOP wanted - even then she got more votes than Trump, just the perversion of democracy in the US (and to a degree in the UK too) doesn't care about total votes cast.
The same here with Brexit, 40 years of lies from the right wing and their poodles in the press resulted in a campaign that was low on truth and high on whipped up outrage.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:08 GMT bikernutz
Re: Even a turd
Not quite true, In the UK we technically vote for a named person as candidate for MP. We don't actually even vote for a party, let alone for our PM.
The PM is appointed as being the leader of the party with the most MP's backing them.
If we technically voted for a party and not a named person then when MP's defect to another party someone would have taken them to court by now to force a by-election.
It isn't possible as it is the named person as an MP regardless of what party they are in.
Which makes our system even more screwed up. All the governments claiming a mandate from the people? If you check official websites it is multiples of decades since a party won with over 50 percent of the total of votes cast. As you can only ignore those that didn't vote at all.
Even more worrying is there have been two governments elected with majority of seats that received less votes than their major opposition and that is just since I was born!
At least America has a written constitution something we are well overdue. The irony is that an American former president has called for the immediate ending of their written constitution as one of his goals and requirements of self preservation.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 15:46 GMT EvilDrSmith
Re: Even a turd
yes and no.
As I understand it, the Monarch invites someone to form a government. On the basis of precedent and good sense, the person invited to do so is the leader of the largest party (in terms of elected representatives in the House of Commons). So the PM is not, strictly, appointed. As far as I know, there is no actual requirement for the person invited to form the government to be an elected MP, though I think it's been a couple of hundred years since the last time the PM was a member of the Lords.
The British electoral system is one where we elect our representatives to the House of Commons. The elected representatives then support (or not) the individual that was invited and accepted the offer of trying to form a government. It is a form of democratic government (there are others). It works - as evidenced by >200 years of civic stability, widening of the franchise and increased prosperity for the masses (but so do other systems).
Understanding this is critical to understanding why First Past the Post is the basis of the election. In the UK, we vote for the specific individual that we wish to represent us. We do not vote for the composition of the government or parliament more broadly. For those that decry First Past the Post, I would just point out that without FPtP, Michael Portillo would have remained an MP in 1997.
And the UK does have a written constitution - it's just not a single document with 'constitution' written at the top. It's a collection of written constitutional documents (plus some precedents that strictly are not binding but are still recorded in writing). Such documents can be and are changed from time to time with relatively little fuss, as suits the needs of UK society at the time (for example, the formation of the Supreme Court, in 2003, which in the process set down in law/in writing constitutional powers of the Court, which in the process set down certain constitutional rights for the people / limits on government).
I suspect that some of the issues the US have is because of the apparent difficulty in amending their constitution.
-
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 13:26 GMT Eric Kimminau TREG
TheRegister is obviously a liberal hack controlled rag
And performed little to know actual journalism when writing this article.
The Presidential Records Act of 1978, 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201–2209, is an Act of the United States Congress governing the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents created or received after January 20, 1981, and mandating the preservation of all presidential records.(https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title44/chapter22&edition=prelim) It states "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to confirm, limit, or expand any constitutionally-based privilege which may be available to an incumbent or former President."
An ABA Legal Fact Check posted Oct. 17 (https://abalegalfactcheck.com/articles/declassified.html) explains, legal guidelines support his contention that presidents have broad authority to formally declassify most documents that are not statutorily protected, while they are in office.
However, under the U.S. Constitution, the president as commander in chief is given broad powers. Sections 2 and 3 define specific presidential powers and duties. Section 2, Clause 1 describes exclusive presidential powers: namely, the Commander in Chief authority, the power to require written opinions from the heads of executive departments, and the pardon power.
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
The legal basis for the classification system comes from the president’s constitutional authority as commander in chief. Presidents have established and developed it through a series of executive orders dating to the era encompassing World War II and the early Cold War. The current directive, Executive Order 13526, was issued by President Barack Obama in 2009.(https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information)
Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority. (a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:
(1) the President and the Vice President;
(2) agency heads and officials designated by the President; and
(3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.
(b) Officials authorized to classify information at a specified level are also authorized to classify information at a lower level.
(c) Delegation of original classification authority.
(1) Delegations of original classification authority shall be limited to the minimum required to administer this order. Agency heads are responsible for ensuring that designated subordinate officials have a demonstrable and continuing need to exercise this authority.
(2) "Top Secret" original classification authority may be delegated only by the President, the Vice President, or an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(3) "Secret" or "Confidential" original classification authority may be delegated only by the President, the Vice President, an agency head or official designated pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order, provided that official has been delegated "Top Secret" original classification authority by the agency head.
So, to summarize, The President is the Commander in Chief and owns his documents. He owns classification of his documents and the delegation of that power remains with him only if and until he passes the documents to the Archivist of his Presidential records.
Reread the last 2 sentances. This is by the Constitution and the Law.
Unless the President releases his ownership the raid on his residence and the illegal seizure of HIS documents is both illegal and un-Constitutional. Any charges related to HIS documents are therefore baseless and without merit.
The weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ by "President" Biden is the real story here. Where is the equivalent to this travesty of a "story": for the 1000+ boxes of the Top Secret and Confidential documents found in Biden's unsecured garage and in a facility owned by a Chinese National?
Whatever hack was allowed to publish this tripe should be seen for exactly what he is. A brainwashed liberal repeating the Democrat story line and ignoring the rule of Law and the US Constitution.
-
This post has been deleted by its author
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:20 GMT Excused Boots
Re: TheRegister is obviously a liberal hack controlled rag
Yes indeed all actually true…..
Of course the obvious ‘elephant in the room’ here is that Trump, ISN’T actually The President, well OK in some people’s minds he is, however back in the real world, no!
“Nothing in this Act shall be construed to confirm, limit, or expand any constitutionally-based privilege which may be available to an incumbent or former President."
Fair enough, but just what are these ‘constitutionally-based privileges’ available to a former President? I’m fairly sure that there is no clause in your Constitution regarding said former Presidents being able to just ‘make shit up’ about what they imagined they may have done while in office, or indeed to claim that black is actually white and insist that this is true just because they said it, or just thought it!
I believe the Constitution has rules regarding personal possessions and right to a private life, so if a President were to keep a personal diary but was careful not to include in it anything which could be construed as a state secret, and kept it to just personal thoughts, presumably that would be constitutionally protected and he or she couldn’t be forced to hand it over when they left office. Boxes and boxes of documents regarding military postures and capabilities of other countries? Really, pull the other one, it has bells on it!
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:30 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: TheRegister is obviously a liberal hack controlled rag
You should read the "Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978". It is not hard to find and isn't that long nor complicated.
You should also recall that Trump is no longer POTUS.
Your partisan whataboutism is noted. As is your verbosity, though much of it is not relevant here.
-
Thursday 29th June 2023 08:26 GMT Mooseman
Re: TheRegister is obviously a liberal hack controlled rag
"The weaponization of the FBI and the DOJ by "President" Biden is the real story here. Where is the equivalent to this travesty of a "story": for the 1000+ boxes of the Top Secret and Confidential documents found in Biden's unsecured garage and in a facility owned by a Chinese National?"
You see the basic problem with all the Trump simps is that you simply can't tell the difference between reality and stuff you made up.
Total number of documents found at Biden's house? 20. 9 boxes were removed from his attourney's office and have not been classified.
"president" Biden, eh? So you believe the 2020 vote was fraudulent and rigged (despite there being roughly no evidence at all) ?
And you wonder why nobody takes you even remotely seriously...
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:09 GMT TheGriz
De-classifying the Docs prior to leaving office, Cheeto in Charge
I see a lot of "why didn't he simply declassify the documents he wanted to keep", and here it the crux of WHY he took what he took AND the WAY in which he did it and another reason of WHY he didn't want to return them when asked.
In order to "de-classify" TOP SECRET stuff, it has to be HEAVILY "REDACTED", meaning that the documents basically lose their importance, and VALUE, because those things would look like a practically a SOLID PAGE OF BLACK "fused toner" after they were declassified.
So A) Cheeto in Charge, wanted them because he felt they held VALUE to his own narcissistic means. Redacted documents would be practically worthless, except to BRAG about having a copy.
B) The fact that he had is "crony" Nauta moving them around prior to his own lawyers trying to comply with the DOJ's wishes, AND hiding them from the FBI itself, is practically screaming "I'm guilty".
And now he actually KNOWS he's in very deep shite, and his second presidential bid, is now nothing more than the act of a criminal acting to save his own ass, because he is hell bent on winning a re-election so he can just PARDON himself.
Everyone in the USA, get out on election day and vote this sucker into infamy for eternity.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 07:26 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: De-classifying the Docs prior to leaving office, Cheeto in Charge
It wouldn't make any difference if he did declassify documents he wanted to keep. They still wouldn't be his to keep. All presidential documents - classified or not - belong to the people of the USA and need to be given over to custody of the NARA archivist as soon as the presidential term ends.
His nonsense about being allowed to negotiate with the archivist is just that. Pure nonsense. He gets to keep personal documents. Anything government related belongs to the people.
"Upon the conclusion of a President's term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms upon the conclusion of the last term, the Archivist of the United States shall assume responsibility for the custody, control, and preservation of, and access to, the Presidential records of that President. The Archivist shall have an affirmative duty to make such records available to the public as rapidly and completely as possible consistent with the provisions of this chapter.
The Archivist shall deposit all such Presidential records in a Presidential archival depository or another archival facility operated by the United States. The Archivist is authorized to designate, after consultation with the former President, a director at each depository or facility, who shall be responsible for the care and preservation of such records."
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:19 GMT Trotts36
IT angle ??
I’d expect you to at least try and keep your lacklustre reporting focussed on the IT industry and not on global politics.
Also - you should also have an article covering why a certain current president isn’t being prosecuted for also having documents; or not prosecuted when there is apparent evidence held by a certain 3 letter agency that shows bribery, interference from a foreign government and gross overstep of influence.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 16:12 GMT TangoDelta72
Re: IT angle ?? Tying in it for you
I'll offer a Security angle, under the MP Control Family of the NIST Risk Management Framework.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 07:07 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: IT angle ??
The Special Council investigation is still ongoing into the current president. However, it will likely end in the same way as the Pence and Trump investigations. No charges over documents that were returned to NARA.
If you read the indictment, you will see that Trump has NOT been charged over any of the documents he returned, just like Pence & (probably) Biden. He is being charged over the ones he kept. The ones he lied about. The ones he arranged to be moved when his OWN lawyers were responding to a subpoena. The ones he is recorded discussing (and possibly showing) in audio recordings where he also admitted the documents were still classified.
All this shows intent to keep documents that belong to the state and his disdain for proper treatment of classified material.
That is the difference between Trump and Pence/Biden. That is what will put Trump in jail.
-
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 14:31 GMT Anonymous Coward
So the US government has switched the case to Trump's "home" state with a biased judge who gets to manage who is picked for the jury and what is acceptable as evidence. It seems almost certain that Trump will be found not guilty, or that the case will be allowed to drag on past the election date. Is this a ploy to ensure Trump becomes the republican candidate for the next election, or an attempt to increase the democrat vote by showing how maga-justice works ?
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 19:43 GMT Boris the Cockroach
Get your
popcorn here... rats on a stick? those too
While reading about the turd that just won't flush, a few pointers about the man's qualities... aside from the 'lock her up' chants coming back to bite him on the ass
I work for a 'little guy' in terms of the great manufacturing chain, the turd stiffed the little guys working for him by declaring bankrupcy etc etc... not much sympathy there for those he cheated and put out of work... just how great a 'businessman' he is.
Mocked a gold star family......... jesus... how low can you go... except he proved he could go much lower when he bemoaned NATO's contribution to the Afganistan rebuilding attempt. a contribution that was made in the blood of the servicemen of several NATO countries.
Encouraged people to attack congress and get his own vice president to usurp the US constitution.
Finally this load of document related bollocks. If I took home secret or top secret related stuff and the feds found out.... I'd be thrown in the meat grinder and not allowed out for 2 years not treated with kid gloves. and you just know that even if the turd is convicted, he'll launch endless appeals designed not to get to the actual truth but merely to stall and clog up the legal system enabling him to float to the top like every other turd that just wont flush.
Ps will be quite entertaining if he does get elected in 2024 , then has to goto jail for 4 years
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 20:19 GMT Anonymous Coward
If the only antidote for anti-democracy is truth and democracy
then it would be optimal to bring the malfeasance to light BUT ALSO make sure Trump is allowed to run in the election. Conversely, if Trump is banned from running for election, it is an indication that democracy is not to be trusted. The unpleasant ramifications of that will reverberate long after Trump is gone. We are already halfway there with regulatory capture and culture wars ensuring that fixing regulatory capture is a low low priority.
Trump is not the root of the problem. Trump is a symptom. The problem is a lack of faith in the political system. For a time in 2008 40% of eligible voters registered Dem. Now the figure for either party is <30% - a historic low.
-
Wednesday 14th June 2023 20:37 GMT Mitoo Bobsworth
Re: If the only antidote for anti-democracy is truth and democracy
There is another unfortunate factor with the representational democratic system, in that there will always be a significant percentage of stupid people who will believe any old s**t their candidate/rep will say without verification or validation.
-
Thursday 15th June 2023 06:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: If the only antidote for anti-democracy is truth and democracy
There is a lack of faith in the American electoral system due to certain people telling everyone that elections are rigged, despite all the checks & balances that actually make the system work well. This includes the people in the republican party that were willing to turn round and say "No, the election was fair & accurate", risking all the opprobrium that comes with that from the more lunatic fringe.
Its very noticeable that not a single Republican politician who is querying the Presidential result has queried their own result at the SAME ELECTION RUN BY THE SAME PEOPLE!
The other thing that doesn't help electoral confidence is the fact that state governments run elections with many indulging in appalling boundary gerrymandering and passing laws to try to suppress turnout.
In Australia we largely have faith in our electoral system. It is run by a non political body that is responsible for drawing electoral boundaries and counting the votes. Voting is mandatory (well, technically not voting itself but you have to turn up and have your name checked off or risk a fine. Once checked off you can walk out or spoil your ballot). Due to this voting is made as easy as possible. Postal voting and early voting are available. I can vote at any polling place in the country. My wife once voted for her local Darwin MP while she was away in Sydney. Once the local votes are counted at a polling place, the others are sorted and send to the respective polling places for counting. Doesn't normally make a difference unless the count is very close, but at least I know my vote will always count. Of course, if it is close then we may not know the result for a few days once all these remote and overseas votes have come in and been counted.
-
-
-
