aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 18, 2024 18:07:52 GMT
That link details his other crimes outside of the New York one (which by the way was still a crime, even though I concede it is a distracting witch hunt). Are you really this out of the loop, or are you playing dumb? Trump admitted to receiving millions from foreign entities during one of those Fox town halls, it’s not something he denies. And you never answered my question about Trump. You are the one who indicated that Trump crimes also include receive money from foreign governments. I don’t think I said Trumps crimes also include receiving money from foreign governments. I simply said that he did, and using it to differentiate the candidates seems like a wash. The Trump crimes are well documented, I shared the link. While yes I conceded the New York hush money case was a witch hunt and distraction from Trumps other crimes, it was still a crime. And the other cases I feel have more relevance and I wish we could get resolution to them sooner. I know you don’t think that Trump did anything wrong, so of course any action taken against him is politically motivated.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 18, 2024 18:42:03 GMT
This differentiation, even if true, is irrelevant upon reading of the constitution. It reads no Emolument… of any kind whatever. It does not give exception if the goods or services were “discernible”, as if you cannot influence someone through use of their “discernible” goods or services? Also, it also only limits those holding office. I could be wrong, but those implicated in the “Biden Crime Family” moniker do not and have not held office. Again, I don’t like that either of them seem susceptible to foreign influence, but to be concerned about one and not the other, well that’s typical MAGA-trash hypocrisy. SCOTUS rejected both lawsuits against Trump, 9-0, as there were no dissenters. Trump had placed all of his illquid assets (hotels, golf courses, etc.) into a Trust. He removed himself from leadership positions at his companies. All of this was apparently not enough for the lawfare crowd, who, as usual, are just looking to smear Trump in public. Like the "well-regulated" phrase in 2A, the word emolument is not in common usage currently. His companies are free to engage in transactions at the same market rates as other citizens. Washington, Jefferson and Monroe all sold products from their plantations while in office. Like all of the other lawfare against Trump, this one backfired. His assets being in a trust, run by his sons, that he can get money from at any time, does nothing to abide by the Emoluments clause. Trump received millions from foreign governments and countries while president. Why is that acceptable for Trump but not Biden? And the SCOTUS said that the cases were not because Trump was voted out. Not really a resounding ruling. So basically we have a constitutional clause with no teeth or enforcement mechanism. I wouldn’t mind if that changed.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 21, 2024 18:13:46 GMT
The forum cheerleader chimes in! A tear Can you cheerlead for me? We are 11 pages in and not a single conservative can answer my question: How does anyone justify Trump lying that the election was stolen through fraudulent votes? The closest we got was Bevo saying that it “might have been irresponsible”. Do you have an answer for my question? Though I suppose cheerleaders only cheer for one side, even when they are losing.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 21, 2024 20:03:33 GMT
I can already tell you what your response will be. You will through some statement or line that does nothing to prove your point. Then you will do you best effort to belittle me call uninformed, MAGA trash, dumb... You will then try to deflect maybe find one small tidbit of information in my response and use that to change the direction or the focus.
You were wrong... he just ignored the facts. Six days before Trump announced his candidacy for 2024, Joe is on video talking about “making sure he, uh… under a, uh, legitimate efforts under our constitution does not become President again”. Nothing about defeating him in an election again. No, making SURE, with ‘other efforts’, that he never becomes President again. There was a plan to stop Trump before he even announced. Joe knew about it and approved it. Three days after Trump announced, they put it all into action.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 21, 2024 20:20:04 GMT
I can already tell you what your response will be. You will through some statement or line that does nothing to prove your point. Then you will do you best effort to belittle me call uninformed, MAGA trash, dumb... You will then try to deflect maybe find one small tidbit of information in my response and use that to change the direction or the focus.
You were wrong... he just ignored the facts. Six days before Trump announced his candidacy for 2024, Joe is on video talking about “making sure he, uh… under a, uh, legitimate efforts under our constitution does not become President again”. Nothing about defeating him in an election again. No, making SURE, with ‘other efforts’, that he never becomes President again. There was a plan to stop Trump before he even announced. Joe knew about it and approved it. Three days after Trump announced, they put it all into action. I didn’t ignore these facts, I already answered them. It is not some “gotcha moment” that we should go after a person that is not eligible for presidency based on the words in our constitution. As a reminder, much of the Republican Party, including Trump, went after Obama based on our constitution. The only problem was that it wasn’t legitimate. Are conservatives really complaining about using “legitimate efforts under our constitution”? Please explain to me what is wrong with using “legitimate efforts under our constitution?” In reality, Trump is not fit to serve based on an honest, objective reading of our constitution. But MAGA-trash blames democrats for this fact
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 21, 2024 22:17:02 GMT
The hilarity of this thread is that I keep getting accused of not answering questions or ignoring points. I do my best to answer them all.
However, I have asked one question over and over again that keeps getting ignored: how do you justify Trump lying that the election was stolen through fraudulent votes?
Hero is of course too cowardly to give an actual opinion, he is just a cheerleader. Tigercpa is too cowardly to give his opinion, unless he can copy and paste it from Twitter. ajbuckeye has cowardly ignored this question each time. At least Bevo gives a cowardly answer that Trump “might have been irresponsible”.
And while being too cowardly to actually answer the question, your biggest beef with Biden is that he will use “legitimate efforts under our constitution”?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 22, 2024 1:08:38 GMT
There is NO hilarity in this thread... it's nothing but the sad tale of the destruction of our country. You're the ONLY one who thinks it's funny.
Biden said his statement on Nov 9, 2022... 6 days before Trump announced his 2024 campaign. On Nov 18, three days AFTER Trump announced, three things happened:
1) Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as a Special Prosecutor to look at both the document case and the "insurrection" charge, 2) Matthew Colangelo resigns his cushy high-level DOJ job to go work under low-life, Alvin Bragg, to bring the ridiculous 'false billing" charge in New York, and 3) Nathan Wade, the lead prosecutor/lover hired by Fanni Willis met with White House lawyers for 8 hours.
There was never ANY "legitimate" charge to make against Trump. The plan was, for the FIRST TIME in American history, to use the power of prosecution to eliminate a Presidential candidate... with two bogus federal charges, and "just in case", two bogus state level charges in New York and Atlanta. It's a blatant assault on our Democracy. And, just for the ultimate irony, they do it while blaming Trump for the "end of Democracy".
With any luck, it will fail. A LOT of people can see how corrupt this whole plan is, and don't like it. The debate next week will tell us a great deal about the plan. If Biden, after a full week of quiet preparation, can manage 40 minutes of talking without freezing up, he'll be the nominee. If not, the Dems will pull a switch at the convention. They have MORE THAN ENOUGH dirt on Joe now to force him to resign, if needed. I think the odds are 50/50. But, we'll see.
Without question, the Dems are playing with REAL FIRE now, and it might well blow up on all of us. But keep on laughing. It's all a big joke to people with no real interest in the outcome.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 22, 2024 11:38:37 GMT
There is NO hilarity in this thread... it's nothing but the sad tale of the destruction of our country. You're the ONLY one who thinks it's funny. Biden said his statement on Nov 9, 2022... 6 days before Trump announced his 2024 campaign. On Nov 18, three days AFTER Trump announced, three things happened: 1) Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as a Special Prosecutor to look at both the document case and the "insurrection" charge, 2) Matthew Colangelo resigns his cushy high-level DOJ job to go work under low-life, Alvin Bragg, to bring the ridiculous 'false billing" charge in New York, and 3) Nathan Wade, the lead prosecutor/lover hired by Fanni Willis met with White House lawyers for 8 hours. There was never ANY "legitimate" charge to make against Trump. The plan was, for the FIRST TIME in American history, to use the power of prosecution to eliminate a Presidential candidate... with two bogus federal charges, and "just in case", two bogus state level charges in New York and Atlanta. It's a blatant assault on our Democracy. And, just for the ultimate irony, they do it while blaming Trump for the "end of Democracy". With any luck, it will fail. A LOT of people can see how corrupt this whole plan is, and don't like it. The debate next week will tell us a great deal about the plan. If Biden, after a full week of quiet preparation, can manage 40 minutes of talking without freezing up, he'll be the nominee. If not, the Dems will pull a switch at the convention. They have MORE THAN ENOUGH dirt on Joe now to force him to resign, if needed. I think the odds are 50/50. But, we'll see. Without question, the Dems are playing with REAL FIRE now, and it might well blow up on all of us. But keep on laughing. It's all a big joke to people with no real interest in the outcome. We saw the documents haphazardly stored in his club. We heard him say he didn’t declassify them. He is alleged to have stored documents that the president legally cannot declassify. How is this bogus? We heard the conversation Trump had with the Georgia Secretary of State to find exactly enough votes to give him the win. How is this bogus? We saw the false elector documents, that claimed to be duly elected and qualified electors. They were not. How is this bogus? I have zero problem with our politicians being held accountable through the court system. Do you? Republicans had zero problem with politicians being held accountable through lawsuits, excuse me “lawfare”, like we saw in 2012 when dozens of lawsuits were filed to prevent Obama from being a candidate. Did you have a problem with this? If you don’t answer my questions, I will summon the forum cheerleader to be mad and ask why you didn’t answer these questions.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 22, 2024 22:00:05 GMT
There is NO hilarity in this thread... it's nothing but the sad tale of the destruction of our country. You're the ONLY one who thinks it's funny. Biden said his statement on Nov 9, 2022... 6 days before Trump announced his 2024 campaign. On Nov 18, three days AFTER Trump announced, three things happened: 1) Merrick Garland appointed Jack Smith as a Special Prosecutor to look at both the document case and the "insurrection" charge, 2) Matthew Colangelo resigns his cushy high-level DOJ job to go work under low-life, Alvin Bragg, to bring the ridiculous 'false billing" charge in New York, and 3) Nathan Wade, the lead prosecutor/lover hired by Fanni Willis met with White House lawyers for 8 hours. There was never ANY "legitimate" charge to make against Trump. The plan was, for the FIRST TIME in American history, to use the power of prosecution to eliminate a Presidential candidate... with two bogus federal charges, and "just in case", two bogus state level charges in New York and Atlanta. It's a blatant assault on our Democracy. And, just for the ultimate irony, they do it while blaming Trump for the "end of Democracy". With any luck, it will fail. A LOT of people can see how corrupt this whole plan is, and don't like it. The debate next week will tell us a great deal about the plan. If Biden, after a full week of quiet preparation, can manage 40 minutes of talking without freezing up, he'll be the nominee. If not, the Dems will pull a switch at the convention. They have MORE THAN ENOUGH dirt on Joe now to force him to resign, if needed. I think the odds are 50/50. But, we'll see. Without question, the Dems are playing with REAL FIRE now, and it might well blow up on all of us. But keep on laughing. It's all a big joke to people with no real interest in the outcome. We saw the documents haphazardly stored in his club. We heard him say he didn’t declassify them. He is alleged to have stored documents that the president legally cannot declassify. How is this bogus? We heard the conversation Trump had with the Georgia Secretary of State to find exactly enough votes to give him the win. How is this bogus? We saw the false elector documents, that claimed to be duly elected and qualified electors. They were not. How is this bogus? I have zero problem with our politicians being held accountable through the court system. Do you? Republicans had zero problem with politicians being held accountable through lawsuits, excuse me “lawfare”, like we saw in 2012 when dozens of lawsuits were filed to prevent Obama from being a candidate. Did you have a problem with this? If you don’t answer my questions, I will summon the forum cheerleader to be mad and ask why you didn’t answer these questions. You know, it's really hard to respond to a post like that last one. Can you REALLY be that stupid? Are you just so blinded by partisanship that you can't see the obvious? Or, are you just consumed by hatred for Trump? There was a time when I thought you were a bright young man, just with a liberal bent on politics. Now, I think you're either just one of the above, or the classic definition of an internet troll. It's hard to know which? But, whatever... I'll address your silly questions: Mar-a-Lago is a private club that is guarded by the Secret Service. Trump didn't have documents strown around, they were in locked rooms. Some of the rooms had additional locks installed just weeks before the FBI raid, after National Archive officials recommended this during on-site (cooperative) meetings. Meanwhile, Biden had them stashed in his garage, next to his Corvette. Biden was on tape telling his ghostwriter that he "just found the classified stuff, I'll bring them right down". That proves knowledge AND intent. But Joe hasn't been charged with anything. THAT's what's "bogus".. ...when one party is charged while another is not for an identical offense. To make it even worse, Biden was merely a Senator when he took home documents. He never had ANY right to de-classify anything. Trump was President. Presidents can de-classify ANYTHING, ANYTIME, for ANY reason. Presidents can "instantly declassify" information just by speaking about it. Congressional limits to Presidential declassification have never been tested in the courts. That alone was ample reason to justify continuation of discussions with Trump about documents IN THE COURT system. There was never any justification for an armed raid, with "authorization for use of deadly force" on a former President's home. Trump's call to Georgia was a lengthy call where he discussed MANY issues they had with the security of the election count in Georgia. It wasn't a call done in secret. There were 10 lawyers on the call. Trump NEVER asked for anything illegal. He never threatened anyone. He never asked for any illegal action. The entire case is BOGUS because, there was no crime committed. The National Archive secretary testified before Congress that they receive "false elector" certifications for EVERY election. They ignore them because it's very simple to determine who the real electors are. It only takes a phone call or two. The electors were only there in the event that the true electors were turned down by Congress. They never had any real authority behind them. It's just another case of BOGUS... prosecuting for something that NO ONE else ever was prosecuted for. I have no problem with having elected officials held accountable for wrongdoing in our court systems. But we've had a 250-year precedent of NOT prosecuting Presidential candidates for non-violent, 'process' crimes. Hillary skated prosecution for obvious crimes that would have sent any normal person to prison. ONLY Trump gets the full regimen of prosecution from our DOJ and state officials. That's totally BOGUS! Republican lawsuits against Obama were brought by individuals challenging his eligibility for office. None were brought by the DOJ or any State AG. You would think there would be some kind of official, non-partisan agency that could confirm ANY candidate's constitutional eligiblity... there is none. The only approval required is the Chair of the Party that nominates the candidate. For Obama, in 2008, that was Nancy Pelosi. Someone EVERYONE trusts... for sure. I have no problem with people filing such suits. They ALL wasted their money, as ALL were dismissed due to lack of standing. It would have been nice if just ONE court could have heard some evidence and made a ruling, one way or the other. People should have full confidence that their President is legally qualified to hold the office. It was really a stupid thing to challenge in 2012... being mute.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Jun 23, 2024 1:39:49 GMT
The hilarity of this thread is that I keep getting accused of not answering questions or ignoring points. I do my best to answer them all. However, I have asked one question over and over again that keeps getting ignored: how do you justify Trump lying that the election was stolen through fraudulent votes? Hero is of course too cowardly to give an actual opinion, he is just a cheerleader. Tigercpa is too cowardly to give his opinion, unless he can copy and paste it from Twitter. ajbuckeye has cowardly ignored this question each time. At least Bevo gives a cowardly answer that Trump “might have been irresponsible”. And while being too cowardly to actually answer the question, your biggest beef with Biden is that he will use “legitimate efforts under our constitution”? Regarding election interference there has been so much presented that you refuse to accept. In Atlanta they stopped counting at 10:30 because a fake pipe burst. They remove everyone then the democrats come right back in and start counting again with no republican observers. Only reason why we know about this one is that it was caught on video. There is so much evidence but you clearly don't have an open mind to process it. I could go on an on but with you what is the point,
Then you said both Trump and Biden committed crimes so that one is a wash. The difference is that I present 4 different crimes where Biden received funds from foreign adversaries in the excess of 20M. These funds were sent to over 20 Biden shell companies tied to many Biden family members with payments coming back to Joe.
I ask you for the crimes Trump committed. You pointed to 4 crimes that all originated immediately after Trump announced his candidacy. Within 3 days the White house was directly involved in each one of those indictments. The fact that you can't see what is wrong with is perplexing.
Bottom line is people on this board are not Trump lovers but simply look at the policies that are put in place to better our lives. Please let me know what policies that Biden has put that has made our country a better place. Was it removing the return to Mexico policy when processing Illegal Immigrants? Was stopping the border wall from continuing to be built? Was it the disastrous exit of Afghanistan that led to the death of 13 soldiers and leaving a boat load of our equipment behind that our enemies now posses.
Was it the debit forgiveness policies for student loans? Was it the attack on energy that took us from energy independence to reliance on other countries?
Keep in mind this resulted in him begging OPEC to produce more OIL. Also he has continued to tap into our strategic energy reserve simply to keep gas prices down.
Was it his inflation reduction act? Now we have inflation that has far exceeded wage increases under his watch. Was it his foreign policy where we now have Ukraine-Russia Israel-Iran and Israel-Palenstine in conflict with China-Taiwan on the verge. Under Trump none of this happened.
I did answer your question. What policies that Biden has proposed that you truly support? TDS sometimes makes people blind to reality.
|
|
|
Post by ajbuckeye on Jun 23, 2024 15:39:22 GMT
The hilarity of this thread is that I keep getting accused of not answering questions or ignoring points. I do my best to answer them all. However, I have asked one question over and over again that keeps getting ignored: how do you justify Trump lying that the election was stolen through fraudulent votes? Hero is of course too cowardly to give an actual opinion, he is just a cheerleader. Tigercpa is too cowardly to give his opinion, unless he can copy and paste it from Twitter. ajbuckeye has cowardly ignored this question each time. At least Bevo gives a cowardly answer that Trump “might have been irresponsible”. And while being too cowardly to actually answer the question, your biggest beef with Biden is that he will use “legitimate efforts under our constitution”? Regarding election interference there has been so much presented that you refuse to accept. In Atlanta they stopped counting at 10:30 because a fake pipe burst. They remove everyone then the democrats come right back in and start counting again with no republican observers. Only reason why we know about this one is that it was caught on video. There is so much evidence but you clearly don't have an open mind to process it. I could go on an on but with you what is the point,
Then you said both Trump and Biden committed crimes so that one is a wash. The difference is that I present 4 different crimes where Biden received funds from foreign adversaries in the excess of 20M. These funds were sent to over 20 Biden shell companies tied to many Biden family members with payments coming back to Joe.
I ask you for the crimes Trump committed. You pointed to 4 crimes that all originated immediately after Trump announced his candidacy. Within 3 days the White house was directly involved in each one of those indictments. The fact that you can't see what is wrong with is perplexing.
Bottom line is people on this board are not Trump lovers but simply look at the policies that are put in place to better our lives. Please let me know what policies that Biden has put that has made our country a better place. Was it removing the return to Mexico policy when processing Illegal Immigrants? Was stopping the border wall from continuing to be built? Was it the disastrous exit of Afghanistan that led to the death of 13 soldiers and leaving a boat load of our equipment behind that our enemies now posses.
Was it the debit forgiveness policies for student loans? Was it the attack on energy that took us from energy independence to reliance on other countries?
Keep in mind this resulted in him begging OPEC to produce more OIL. Also he has continued to tap into our strategic energy reserve simply to keep gas prices down.
Was it his inflation reduction act? Now we have inflation that has far exceeded wage increases under his watch. Was it his foreign policy where we now have Ukraine-Russia Israel-Iran and Israel-Palenstine in conflict with China-Taiwan on the verge. Under Trump none of this happened.
Was it covid vaccine madates which have lead to thousands of our troops to be discharged?
I did answer your question. What policies that Biden has proposed that you truly support? TDS sometimes makes people blind to reality.
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 23, 2024 18:47:39 GMT
We saw the documents haphazardly stored in his club. We heard him say he didn’t declassify them. He is alleged to have stored documents that the president legally cannot declassify. How is this bogus? We heard the conversation Trump had with the Georgia Secretary of State to find exactly enough votes to give him the win. How is this bogus? We saw the false elector documents, that claimed to be duly elected and qualified electors. They were not. How is this bogus? I have zero problem with our politicians being held accountable through the court system. Do you? Republicans had zero problem with politicians being held accountable through lawsuits, excuse me “lawfare”, like we saw in 2012 when dozens of lawsuits were filed to prevent Obama from being a candidate. Did you have a problem with this? If you don’t answer my questions, I will summon the forum cheerleader to be mad and ask why you didn’t answer these questions. You know, it's really hard to respond to a post like that last one. Can you REALLY be that stupid? Are you just so blinded by partisanship that you can't see the obvious? Or, are you just consumed by hatred for Trump? There was a time when I thought you were a bright young man, just with a liberal bent on politics. Now, I think you're either just one of the above, or the classic definition of an internet troll. It's hard to know which? But, whatever... I'll address your silly questions: Mar-a-Lago is a private club that is guarded by the Secret Service. Trump didn't have documents strown around, they were in locked rooms. Some of the rooms had additional locks installed just weeks before the FBI raid, after National Archive officials recommended this during on-site (cooperative) meetings. Meanwhile, Biden had them stashed in his garage, next to his Corvette. Biden was on tape telling his ghostwriter that he "just found the classified stuff, I'll bring them right down". That proves knowledge AND intent. But Joe hasn't been charged with anything. THAT's what's "bogus".. ...when one party is charged while another is not for an identical offense. To make it even worse, Biden was merely a Senator when he took home documents. He never had ANY right to de-classify anything. Trump was President. Presidents can de-classify ANYTHING, ANYTIME, for ANY reason. Presidents can "instantly declassify" information just by speaking about it. Congressional limits to Presidential declassification have never been tested in the courts. That alone was ample reason to justify continuation of discussions with Trump about documents IN THE COURT system. There was never any justification for an armed raid, with "authorization for use of deadly force" on a former President's home. Trump's call to Georgia was a lengthy call where he discussed MANY issues they had with the security of the election count in Georgia. It wasn't a call done in secret. There were 10 lawyers on the call. Trump NEVER asked for anything illegal. He never threatened anyone. He never asked for any illegal action. The entire case is BOGUS because, there was no crime committed. The National Archive secretary testified before Congress that they receive "false elector" certifications for EVERY election. They ignore them because it's very simple to determine who the real electors are. It only takes a phone call or two. The electors were only there in the event that the true electors were turned down by Congress. They never had any real authority behind them. It's just another case of BOGUS... prosecuting for something that NO ONE else ever was prosecuted for. I have no problem with having elected officials held accountable for wrongdoing in our court systems. But we've had a 250-year precedent of NOT prosecuting Presidential candidates for non-violent, 'process' crimes. Hillary skated prosecution for obvious crimes that would have sent any normal person to prison. ONLY Trump gets the full regimen of prosecution from our DOJ and state officials. That's totally BOGUS! Republican lawsuits against Obama were brought by individuals challenging his eligibility for office. None were brought by the DOJ or any State AG. You would think there would be some kind of official, non-partisan agency that could confirm ANY candidate's constitutional eligiblity... there is none. The only approval required is the Chair of the Party that nominates the candidate. For Obama, in 2008, that was Nancy Pelosi. Someone EVERYONE trusts... for sure. I have no problem with people filing such suits. They ALL wasted their money, as ALL were dismissed due to lack of standing. It would have been nice if just ONE court could have heard some evidence and made a ruling, one way or the other. People should have full confidence that their President is legally qualified to hold the office. It was really a stupid thing to challenge in 2012... being mute. On the documents case, not surprisingly you have basic facts wrong: Wrong. There are documents that the president cannot declassify, such as nuclear secrets. See the Atomic Energy Act. Wrong. There is a procedure to declassify, and simply the president speaking (or tweeting) about it does not declassify. See New York Times v CIA case. Anyways, all this is moot, because it really isn’t about the classification status. It is that Trump refused to return the documents, which is why you equating this to Biden is just being ignorant of the case: Wrong. Please show me where Biden defied a subpoena to return documents. The case is not about having classified documents, in fact the Espionage Act doesn’t even reference classified status. It is for defying the subpoena and by extent the Espionage Act. I didn’t even get through the first point and I’m tired of correcting your false statements. Maybe I’ll address the other ones later. But some advice - if you’re going to call someone stupid or a troll, at least have the basic information correct?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 23, 2024 19:55:38 GMT
Congress has written procedures trying to limit the President's powers. Past President's have written EO trying to limit the powers. But, the current President's powers come from the Constitution. The SCOTUS has not yet ruled on this. CIA vs NYT never went to the SCOTUS. It's clearly 'unsettled law'. Not the kind of thing that justifies going in with guns at the ready to a former President's home. It's OUTRAGEOUS behavior from the CIA. And yet, you defend it. Not surprising. Even the clearly biased Politifact site understood this... www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/
|
|
aufan
Full Member
Posts: 204
|
Post by aufan on Jun 23, 2024 20:27:27 GMT
Congress has written procedures trying to limit the President's powers. Past President's have written EO trying to limit the powers. But, the current President's powers come from the Constitution. The SCOTUS has not yet ruled on this. CIA vs NYT never went to the SCOTUS. It's clearly 'unsettled law'. Not the kind of thing that justifies going in with guns at the ready to a former President's home. It's OUTRAGEOUS behavior from the CIA. And yet, you defend it. Not surprising. Even the clearly biased Politifact site understood this... www.politifact.com/factchecks/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/That link agrees, notice the caveat “almost” anything? And it does not argue that something becomes declassified just by the president speaking about it. I guess we agree? Regardless, this is moot, as the classification status of the documents is not what is on trial. It is that Trump defied a subpoena to return the documents that pertain to national defense. Biden never defied a subpoena. Biden returned all documents when asked. There is no equivalent between Biden and Trump in those case, which was your argument for it being “bogus”.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Jun 24, 2024 1:45:54 GMT
It was a matter for the courts, not armed FBI agents. Presidents have “extraordinary power” in such matters. That’s what the site says.
There was never any national security risk.
Joe possessed classified documents for decades! That alone was a prosecutable offense. Not doing so was prosecutorial discretion. The kind that was NOT given to Trump.
That’s why people see it as partisan. Aka; Bogus
|
|