The Trump Riot Aftermath (Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy. Proud Boys join the club)

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

10 hours ago, China said:

Trump says he's 'financially supporting' January 6 defendants and will look 'very favorably' about full pardons if he wins the 2024 election

 

Former President Donald Trump said on Thursday he recently met with defendants in trials related to the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot and that he is financially supporting some of them. 

 

When asked during a call-in with the conservative Wendy Bell Radio show how he can help the defendants, Trump said he's "financially supporting people that are incredible," adding that he hosted some defendants in his office just two days ago.

 

"It's a disgrace what they've done to them," Trump said, referring to sweeping Justice Department and FBI investigations of the deadly insurrection.

 

"They're firemen, they're policemen, they're people in the military," Trump said of the defendants, adding that his legal team has been "working on it very hard."

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

Trump's legal team is on it?  Poor ****s.  No wonder the NYC cop got 10 years.

Mother****er. Just yesterday he said it was antifa. These people are stupid as ****. Jesus.

[Riggo-toni]

15 hours ago, 88Comrade2000 said:

Are his kids that dumb? Time to raid the entire Trump family 

 

[Ball Security]

 

Uh, Judge, what I was recorded saying is really bad.  Can we not have this count in my trial?

[The Evil Genius]

 

[China]

2 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Almost 90 empty folders with classified markings? Wtf?

 

Bears repeating:

 

[FootballZombie]

46 minutes ago, Ball Security said:

 

Uh, Judge, what I was recorded saying is really bad.  Can we not have this count in my trial?

 

Nothin better than a judge dunking on a guy. There is no defense against it.

Just open season to tee off.

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

1 hour ago, gbear said:

That maybe true.  However having document folders with said markings can just be left overs of documents sent his way, a place to store them when they come to him.  He may have legitimately destroyed whatever he got in the folders.  The question is whether it was documented correctly or just disposed of to keep there from being any record of the information.  The difference is between destroying government records (possible crime) and disposition of papers or copies of papers which is usually a requirement for printing such records (at least in my experience). 

 

1 hour ago, purbeast said:

I agree.  Having empty folders like that doesn't really mean anything.  People are trying to make it a much bigger deal than it is.  It tells no tale at all just having empty folders.

 

But considering how much foreign unpaid debt he has, it's hard not to suspect the worse. 

 

I doubt Trump could have gained any classified clearance had he not been POTUS. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by The Evil Genius

[China]

Trump White House counsel Cipollone appears before Jan. 6 grand jury

[Dan T.]

Bill Barr... BILL BARR!! giving Fox viewers a cold dose of reality.

 

 

[tshile]

Well that’s what I always viewed as the flaw in the way he does things. 
 

his whole life he’s gotten away with throwing people around him under the bus. And in private sector when you have access to tons of money, you get away with that. 
 

but he always throws everyone under the bus. And now those people are the types capable of turning on him, and it actually hurting him. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

1 hour ago, gbear said:

Is that 90 in the box.  There are more throughout the listings.  What surprised me is 33 boxes not 15.  Granted, many of those boxes do not have documents labeled classified.  However, that isn't a distinction which would matter in an espionage case. 

 

I do wonder what happened to the documents in the empty folders.  I know at my work, I had empty folders where I had taken the documents out but still had folders with the labels for the next time I was dealing with documents on that subject.  A common case for that would be folders I had with "training" marked on them.   I saved the folders because I knew I would need them again, and why make another folder when i could just reuse the old ones.  However, we had to keep a written record of the disposition of all sensitive materials.  If he still has that, then there is no issue with empty folders.  The folders isn't an issue to me.  The lack of documents he should have in them may be.

 Can you or someone else explain to me the Espionage Act and how that applies here?

[bcl05]

If the documents are unclassified (which they clearly are not, but this is the argument from the MAGA idiots), then they are publicly available via FOIA, right?  

[Captain Wiggles]

[purbeast]

1 hour ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

 

But considering how much foreign unpaid debt he has, it's hard not to suspect the worse. 

 

I doubt Trump could have gained any classified clearance had he not been POTUS. 

I'm not disagreeing with you, but many people are acting like it is a smoking gun or something.  It's nowhere close.

[China]

15 minutes ago, Captain Wiggles said:

 

Always funny because that kid is literally my neighbor 3 houses down the street and he mows my lawn.  BTW, he's homeschooled.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

35 minutes ago, purbeast said:

I'm not disagreeing with you, but many people are acting like it is a smoking gun or something.  It's nowhere close.

No one’s acting like it’s a smoking gun…people, though, are acting like it’s possibly another nail in his coffin…

[FootballZombie]

2 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 Can you or someone else explain to me the Espionage Act and how that applies here?

 

The E Act is pretty broad but it has sections that cover a lot of things surrounding the protection of national secrets or areas of national interest. This can spread a massive scope from things like defense information, or sensitive topics (like anything nuclear). Information also does not have to be classified to bring a case under the E Act, it just has to serve a purpose towards a national interest/security. Unclassified data that would be of great use to an advisory, for example.

 

Some of problems under the E Act applicable to this case would be

 

-Refusal to return national security documents upon request: There were multiple efforts to retrieve the documents. Some were eventually returned alongside a sworn testimony that everything was given back to the government. After the FBI search, clearly that was a lie.

-Movement of defense information to an unsecured location: Sensitive information has specific ways that it must be stored and transported, and where that can happen. Obviously not following protocol if your keeping stuff in a back storage room. 

 

 

The act of improperly housing, unlawful possession, refusing to return, lying about possession and probable illegal transportation of what we now know are some of the most sensitive secrets this country possess as they had the highest levels of classification, breaks multiple E Act statutes already. And that before you even get into the possession of the thousands of other government docs, many of which likely held a national interest as well. 

 

 

There are many other areas of the E Act that COULD be very applicable, but we would need more info about what was done with the documents before getting into that. So even if we completely ignore the further idea of unqualified people seeing this information, possible destruction/alteration of material, attempts to sell or give away the info there are numerous charges already existing under the E Act.

Edited September 2, 2022 by FootballZombie

[FootballZombie]

2 hours ago, bcl05 said:

If the documents are unclassified (which they clearly are not, but this is the argument from the MAGA idiots), then they are publicly available via FOIA, right?  

 

https://www.dhs.gov/foia-exemptions

 

There is a metric crapton of info that is exempted from FOIA. Some of it is obvious like financial info or personal information.

 

There is also exclusions made during criminal investigations as that can jeopardize the investigation. (see first section under exclusions)

[Dan T.]

3 hours ago, China said:

 

Always funny because that kid is literally my neighbor 3 houses down the street and he mows my lawn.  BTW, he's homeschooled.

 

That pic's been used in countless memes but I just noticed the kid is missing a couple-inch-wide swath of grass to his right; a mowing faux pas for the youngster.

 

. . . Probably because he's steering clear of Trump and his godawful bad breath.

[Cooked Crack]

 

[China]

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

22 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

 

The E Act is pretty broad but it has sections that cover a lot of things surrounding the protection of national secrets or areas of national interest. This can spread a massive scope from things like defense information, or sensitive topics (like anything nuclear). Information also does not have to be classified to bring a case under the E Act, it just has to serve a purpose towards a national interest/security. Unclassified data that would be of great use to an advisory, for example.

 

Some of problems under the E Act applicable to this case would be

 

-Refusal to return national security documents upon request: There were multiple efforts to retrieve the documents. Some were eventually returned alongside a sworn testimony that everything was given back to the government. After the FBI search, clearly that was a lie.

-Movement of defense information to an unsecured location: Sensitive information has specific ways that it must be stored and transported, and where that can happen. Obviously not following protocol if your keeping stuff in a back storage room. 

 

 

The act of improperly housing, unlawful possession, refusing to return, lying about possession and probable illegal transportation of what we now know are some of the most sensitive secrets this country possess as they had the highest levels of classification, breaks multiple E Act statutes already. And that before you even get into the possession of the thousands of other government docs, many of which likely held a national interest as well. 

 

 

There are many other areas of the E Act that COULD be very applicable, but we would need more info about what was done with the documents before getting into that. So even if we completely ignore the further idea of unqualified people seeing this information, possible destruction/alteration of material, attempts to sell or give away the info there are numerous charges already existing under the E Act.

 

Thank you.

 

I checked an odds makers still have Trump Not Indicted as the betting favorite.  Can someone explain this to me?  The DOJ head said very clearly nobody is above the law.

[China]

11 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Thank you.

 

I checked an odds makers still have Trump Not Indicted as the betting favorite.  Can someone explain this to me?  The DOJ head said very clearly nobody is above the law.

 

Because it's Teflon Don, who always seems to evade accountability.  Plus the DOJ has never in our country's history indicted a former president.   But it seems worthwhile to me to place the bet that he'll be indicted if you're getting good odds.

[FootballZombie]

54 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

I checked an odds makers still have Trump Not Indicted as the betting favorite.  Can someone explain this to me?  The DOJ head said very clearly nobody is above the law.

 

It would be unprecedented for a former prez, and unprecedented events should be met with long odds.

 

 

That being said just the fact that people in so many related orbits have acknowledged the possibility is pretty telling. Either pointing out ways where you can directly link Trump himself to the issues at hand or others working to get ahead of the story by explaining bad things will happen if he is in fact indicted, which lends itself to the idea that these people see it as an actual possibility.

 

The other thing to consider is I am sure the FBI does not want to repeat the Hillary situation where they drastically effect an election, so the idea that I have been seeing that an indictment would not take place until after the midterms makes a lot of sense to me.

[88Comrade2000]

Even if Don was rotting in a jail cell; this country is dumb enough to elect him again.