Trump's Federal Indictment Presents New Evidence of Deliberate Deceit and Obstruction
The former president's retention of classified documents looks willful and arguably endangered national security.

Donald Trump's federal indictment sheds light on two crucial questions about the presidential records he took with him when he left office in January 2021: How sensitive was this material, and what was Trump's intent in retaining it? Both points are relevant to the criminal charges that were announced last week.
Trump faces 31 counts of willfully retaining national defense information, each of which corresponds to a specific document described in the indictment. The relevant statute, 18 USC 793, covers "information relating to the national defense" that "the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation."
According to the indictment, all of the listed documents fell into that category. All but one of them were marked as "secret" or "top secret," and many of them bore additional labels, such as "SI" (special intelligence), "SPECIAL HANDLING," and "NOFORN" (not releasable to foreign nationals). But classification markings are neither necessary nor sufficient to establish that a document qualifies as national defense information under 18 USC 793.
Notably, one of the 31 records mentioned in the indictment, described as an "undated document concerning military contingency planning of the United States," bore "no marking." The Justice Department nevertheless alleges that it "could be used to the injury of the United States" or the advantage of a foreign country. Conversely, given the widely recognized problem of overclassification, a document marked as "secret" or "top secret" might not be covered by 18 USC 793, either because it never should have been classified or because the justification for that decision no longer applies.
The soundness of classification decisions is hard to assess without details that we are not allowed to know. But the indictment's general descriptions at least make it plausible that some of the documents Trump retained were deemed secret for good reason. They included, for example, a "document dated June 2020 concerning nuclear capabilities of a foreign country"; a "document dated October 4, 2019, concerning military capabilities of a foreign country"; an "undated document concerning military attacks by a foreign country"; an "undated document concerning military capabilities of a foreign country and the United States"; a "document dated January 2020 concerning military options of a foreign country and potential effects on United States interests"; and a "document dated November 7, 2019, concerning military activity of foreign countries and the United States."
More generally, the indictment says the documents that Trump kept "included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack." It adds that "the unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States, foreign relations, the safety of the United States military [and] human sources, and the continued viability of sensitive intelligence collection methods."
On the face of it, it seems plausible that careless handling of such documents might expose information, including information about intelligence sources, that could undermine national security. And we know that Trump was, at the very least, careless. That much is reflected in the indictment's photographs of document boxes that were kept in unauthorized and unsecured locations at Mar-a-Lago, including a storage room, a bathroom, an office, a bedroom, and the stage of a ballroom where "events and gatherings took place."
But did Trump "willfully" retain national defense information? "We have seen absolutely no indication that President Trump knowingly possessed any of the marked documents or willfully broke any laws," Trump's lawyers said in an April 26 letter to the House Intelligence Committee. "Rather, all indications are that the presence of marked documents at Mar-a-Lago was the result of haphazard records keeping and packing by White House staff and [the General Services Administration]."
Such sloppiness could explain the presence of secret material in the boxes shipped to Mar-a-Lago. But the indictment presents substantial evidence that Trump knew he had classified documents and deliberately resisted the government's efforts to recover them.
In July 2021, Trump was interviewed at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, as part of the research for former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows' memoir. Trump was irked by press reports that Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley had restrained him from taking military action against Iran toward the end of his presidency. To rebut that narrative, Trump presented what he described as Milley's "plan of attack" for Iran.
"He said that I wanted to attack Iran," Trump said, according to the indictment, which quotes an audio recording of the Bedminster interview. "Isn't it amazing? I
have a big pile of papers, [and] this thing just came up. Look. This was him. They presented me this—this is off the record, but—they presented me this. This
was him. This was the Defense Department and him."
Trump described the document as "highly confidential" and "secret information." As president, he added, "I could have declassified it," but "now I can't," so "this is still a secret."
A month or two later, the indictment says, Trump met with a representative of his political action committee at the Bedminster club. Trump "commented that an ongoing military operation in Country B was not going well." Then he allegedly "showed the PAC Representative a classified map of Country B and told the PAC Representative that he should not be showing the map to the PAC Representative and to not get too close." The indictment notes that "the PAC Representative did not have a security clearance or any need-to-know classified information about the military operation."
The indictment contrasts Trump's sloppy handling and gratuitous use of classified records with his prior statements about the importance of guarding state secrets. During his 2016 campaign, for example, Trump repeatedly slammed Hillary Clinton for her careless handling of emails containing classified information when she was secretary of state. He promised that he would be much more careful.
"In my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information," Trump said in August 2016. "No one will be above the law." The next month, he warned that "we can't have someone in the Oval Office who doesn't understand the meaning of the word confidential or classified." He promised to "enforce all classification rules" and "enforce all laws relating to the handling of classified information." He said he would provide "the best protection of classified information."
In February 2017, then-President Trump decried the "illegal process" by which reporters gain access to classified information. "The press should be ashamed of themselves," he said. "But more importantly, the people that gave out the information to the press should be ashamed of themselves. Really ashamed."
Although Trump was well aware of the restrictions on access to classified documents, in other words, he flouted the rules he said were essential to protecting national security. According to the indictment, Trump also impeded the Justice Department's attempts to recover those documents.
After the National Archives and Records Administration discovered classified material in 15 boxes that Trump surrendered a year after leaving office, the Justice Department launched an investigation. That led to a May 11, 2022, grand jury subpoena demanding the return of all documents with classification markings that remained at Mar-a-Lago.
Twelve days later, Trump met with two of his lawyers to discuss the subpoena. According to the indictment, notes taken by one of those lawyers, Evan Corcoran, indicate that Trump was inclined to defy the subpoena. In "sum and substance," the indictment says, he made comments like these:
"I don't want anybody looking through my boxes. I really don't. I don't want you looking through my boxes."
"What happens if we just don't respond at all or don't play ball with them?"
"Wouldn't it be better if we just told them we don't have anything here?"
"Isn't it better if there are no documents?"
Trump nevertheless agreed to let Corcoran look through the boxes in the Mar-a-Lago storage room on June 2. In the meantime, according to the indictment, Trump aide Walt Nauta, under his boss's direction, moved "approximately 64 boxes" from the storage room to Trump's residence at Mar-a-Lago. As of June 2, Nauta (who also was charged in last week's indictment) had returned "only approximately 30 boxes" to the storage room.
Corcoran's search of those boxes turned up 38 classified records, which he placed in a Redweld folder that he sealed with clear duct tape. While discussing where to store the folder until it could be delivered to the Justice Department, according to Corcoran, Trump "made a funny motion as though [he were saying,] 'Well, OK, why don't you take them with you to your hotel room, and if there's anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out.' And that was the motion that he made. He didn't say that."
The next day, Corcoran asked another Trump lawyer, Christina Bobb, to sign a sworn certification saying that "a diligent search was conducted of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Florida"; that the search was aimed at finding "any and all documents that are responsive to the subpoena"; and that "any and all responsive documents accompany this certification." Bobb said those statements were "based upon the information that has been provided to me." She signed the statement as the "custodian of records" for Trump's office even though she had not reviewed the subpoena, had not participated in the box search, and had not examined the contents of the folder.
Corcoran gave that statement to the Justice Department when he surrendered the folder on June 3, 2022. But the FBI suspected, based partly on surveillance video that showed Nauta moving boxes around, that Trump had not delivered all of the documents covered by the subpoena. The FBI's August 8 search of Mar-a-Lago confirmed that suspicion, discovering 102 additional classified documents in the storage room and in Trump's office.
When the Justice Department revealed what had happened after it served the subpoena, it looked like Corcoran and Bobb had misled the government. Based on the evidence described in the indictment, however, it looks like Corcoran made a good-faith effort to comply with the subpoena but was frustrated by the movement of boxes, which Trump and Nauta did without notifying Corcoran.
Trump's response to the subpoena not only supports the charges related to willful retention of national defense information. It also supports the charge that he and Nauta conspired to obstruct justice. More specifically, they are accused of conspiring to "corruptly conceal a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding." The alleged conspiracy also involved "engag[ing] in misleading conduct toward another person and corruptly persuad[ing] another person to withhold a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding." Other charges against Trump and Nauta involve specific acts related to the conspiracy, including false statements to the FBI and obstructing a federal investigation by concealing documents.
Although we know more about the classified records than we did before, it remains unclear exactly how sensitive they were. But all of the charges against Trump involve conduct that goes beyond carelessness or negligence. Even if Trump initially removed classified documents from the White House by accident (as his lawyers have suggested), it is clear he eventually realized that purported error. But far from trying to correct it, he seems to have intentionally impeded the Justice Department's attempts to recover the records, which by his own account he viewed as his personal property.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I was told if he gave back the papers “without a hassle “, no law would have been broken.
That may or may not be true, but he didn't, so as you lot would put it, this point is moot.
He is making fun if M4E from the roundup and idiots like you buying this differentiation not present in the actuL law shrike.
I get paid more than $90 to $100 per hour for working online. I heard about this job 3 months ago and after joining this I have earned easily $10k from this without having online working skills . Simply give it a shot on.the accompanying site…
.
.
Following this information:-:-:-:-:-:-:- https://Www.Coins71.Com
Still not shrike. Indeed, I know it's not the law - but I also know, as do you, that if Trump had handed back the docs without a fuss or attempt to retain them, there would have been no prosecution even if technically the law had been broken.
Trump's issues here stem from the fact that he resisted returning docs and even lied about it. Which at one level you know, but at another level cannot concede.
"Still not shrike..."
You should take that as a compliment. you pathetic piece of shit.
So lack of obedience is the issue?
A government that would charge you simply because you didn't obey is something that should scare everyone in a free society.
Do you know who else didn't obey?
Do you feel the same way about stop signs and speed limits. What if your neighbor doesn't follow the zoning laws and rents out his house to 10 people.
I think what you are talking about is civil disobedience and that is legitimate. But remember that part of civil disobedience is accepting the consequences.
"So lack of obedience is the issue? "
Unless your argument is that breaking the law should not be a crime, kinda, yeah.
He didn't have to give them back, that's the issue, there are his to do with as he pleases
Lock! Him! Up! I can hear the maniacal cackling of the Hildebeast from here! Our political system is a tragic comedy.
I don't know what the truth is, but I can tell you that I flat out no longer believe anything anyone in the media says that's negative about Trump. They have shot their wad. My instinct is disbelief. After the fucking FBI participates in a conspiracy against a presidential candidate and then the actual elected President of the United States, my gullibility is at capacity when anyone else wants to make a claim.
See also: The Boy Who Cried Wolf
"No no, he's really guilty this time, we promise!"
Pretty much the same here. The shoe is on the other foot; their reputation precedes them.
Yeah, same here.
My eyes have been opened the last 7 years.
Yep same here
no reason to believe anything they say and also no reason to not believe that they themselves didn't plant the evidence in the first place considering does anyone believe that Trump stood watch while all these boxes were being taken to his property, hell no he had people do that and since the FBI has used false evidence before and even sent spies to entrap why should we believe anything they claim now.
Well put.
I get sleepy just thinking about ZZZZZZzz
The DOJ is such a joke - you have to be a mouth-breather libtard to take this indictment seriously.
It is rather amazing that in every case involving LEO's, both local and federal, Reason writers can find reasons to discount every allegation or point made by those officers. Except in the case of former President Trump. If the charges are against Trump or his associates, then the DOJ/FBI attorneys and agents' allegations must be treated as God's honest truth and evidence showing otherwise can be discounted as just the guilty trying to cover up for their crimes. In regards to Trump, even his saying he is not guilty is considered obvious evidence of obstruction and lying to the FBI.
Even when allegations against Trump are later to be proven false, Reason writers ignore that fact as they immediately jump to the next charge against him and swear that this time, this time for sure, Trump is guilty as charged.
Sullum especially should be embarrassed that he repeatedly falls for the left's schemes. Does he ever stop to consider that the current charges may be based upon the same sketchy evidence as was the previous ones.
Also, where is Reason's article regarding the evidence that is piling up regarding the Biden family's bribery of Ukrainian Burisma officials? Does charges that the former VP, and current President and family members, received large sums of money for actions taken (or not taken) not warrant at least a couple of paragraphs in a stand-alone article?
Also, does media ignore the Biden charges due to their own political leanings or do they do so at the instruction and threats by someone(s) else?
That is one way to avoid having to defend the indefensible. Not sure "Reason" is the right place to make this argument. Reason can't justify it. That's why he was indicted.
And, TBH, it's also why it is likely that rather than moving back in to the White House he will just die in prison.
Now do Obama, Biden, Pence, Hillary, and every former President.
Trump is guilty of obstructing injustice.
Exactly.
you cannot obstruct a non crime
That's a myth. Interfering or refusing to comply with an investigation is still obstruction, even if no crime was committed, just like resisting or evading arrest is still a crime even if charges are dropped or the defendant is found not guilty.
Democrats know they can always get Trump for obstruction of justice as long as they keep launching investigations, even when allegations are BS, because he's such a noncompliant pain in the ass. His lawyers can't get him to cooperate or shut up.
Deceit and Obstruction is what Libertarianism is all about.
Laws may have been broken, but there is no evidence that NARA wanted to proceed any further than getting the documents back to the archivists. The fact is that all the negotiations for the papers were well below the public's radar, until frustrated NARA turn the matter over to the DOJ. Everything suggests this indictment is purely of Donald Trump own making.
More likely a DOJ making since they probably planted in there what they wanted just for this purpose. I doubt Trump knew what was in 95% of those documents
Remember: The name of the site is "Reason", not "Well, I'm Going to Pretend Anyway".
He didn't have to give them back, that's the issue
See, that's the kind of thinking that caused this in the first place. The laws he broke are not terribly complex or vague or nuanced or filled with loopholes.
Absolute horseshit.
Can't disagree. When the hell did the U.S. become a banana republic? This is ridiculous! All we had to do was follow the Constitution, but NO!, the arrogance, narcissism, and the lust for power, Constitution be damned, is killing this country. I'm ashamed to say, as a black man, that this was escalated under Obama. He could have help bring the country together, but instead, he focused on immutable characteristics, lgbtq, and weaponizing the FBI.
Biden seems to be the Maduro to Obama's Chávez.
> When the hell did the U.S. become a banana republic?
2016? 2008?
1932?
America became a banana Republic the moment Ronald Reagan was elected and he embraced the perpetually failed "Neo-Liberal policies" of Libertarians.
America started it's decline into oblivion the moment Libertarian crazy brought corruption into the Republican administration.
Yes, libertarians had such a stranglehold over the government. Clearly your blame is well placed. Everybody knows Reagan's ballooning federal debt, ramping up the drug war and military spending was just cover for his secret libertarian policies.
Reagan's policies were not secret. They were overt.
Reagan's huge deficits were caused by the Libertarian economic policy known as supply sided economics, which was heavily promoted by all Libertarian organizations at the time.
Similarly increased military spending was heavily promoted promoted by CATO, the American Enterprise Institute, the Competitive Enterprise institute and other Libertarians organizations.
All of those organizations exist to produce pro-corporate propaganda, and you Libertarian and Repubclican suckers were sold down the river.
That makes me laugh.
What you are saying is that Reagan’s policies were supported by libertarian institutions, not that Reagan’s policies were libertarian.
You haven’t provided any sources to back up your claims, but even if true, deficit and military spending is not libertarian even if supported by libertarian groups
Reagan lowered taxes which would be favored by libertarians, but he increased spending–not libertarian.
It makes me sad. The world is a gray place, and so many people are incapable of seeing more than either black or white. And often they confuse the two in the name of tribalism.
Federal Tax revenue went from $600B to $900B during Reagans two terms. the problem was spending. Now you can make the argument DoD spending was higher than it should have been but seems that cutting taxes (and the argument in DC is basically going from 33 to 39% marginal rates by both parties no one is pushing for 90% marginal rates and haven't been since Kennedy's admin). Supply side as an economical idea tied to marginal rates and marginal analysis is sound...more sound than Keynisan astrology and this shit about "aggregate demand" BUT supply like demand side economics when translated to politicans turns into increase spending and run deficits because well they pay for themselves (not really as govt isn't an investment..or you wouldn't have deficits).
Deficits and money printing to fund them by the Fed is the real problem..driving inequity, bubbles, wars, and destroying the middle class. But it is easier to blame one "idea" or another. You can't print your way to prosperity..every Empire has done this and it all ends the same. No deficits should be the objective, reached through higher taxes and less spending..ending the neocon wars would be a good start.
It’s astounding that even a moron like you is capable of believing such bullshit.
What Trump did was horseshit. Mostly it was just stupid.
Such as?
Trump was indicted because of Biden’s Burisma bribes.
But you knew that.
But President Biden hasn't received any money from Burisma.
Why do you feel a need to lie about it?
Huh? Have you been intentionally ignoring the Hunter Biden laptop story for the last 2 1/2 years?
I guess we will see. Funny how the left defends a guy they all hated in the 1980s..the guy most responsible for turning up the war on drugs and its impact on cities and blacks. Then you have the wars he supported and on and on. But TDS is strong with the left. Or should I say the authoritarians..as the left stopped being anti-war and anti corporatism in lieu of power. But all hail President Trotsky..opps Zelinsky...the left's hero.
Reason, Mr Madman. Reason. No blind faith and wishful thinking.
Lawyer explains, in excruciating detail why this entire prosecution is unadulterated horseshit.
Hint for libertarians: There's a reason why the Deep State as an entity is not allowed to be the sole arbiter of "classified".
That is an absolutely embarrassing analysis. But I guess he's telling you what you want to hear.
The Steele Dossier was more solid than this case. Masking and lockdowns were more truthful than this case. 100% Safe and Effective has more factual basis than this case.
Sorry that your safe space is being invaded by facts 🙁 Maybe if you cry more that will help things.
Which facts?
The facts alleged in the indictment?
Which are what. You claim to be knowledgeable but can't seem to recite them.
You may be shocked to learn that not every indictment is fact filled leading to guilty verdicts.
That he violated 18 USC 793(b) which makes it a crime for anyone who "copies, takes, makes, or obtains" information pertaining to national defense. And he's absolutely innocent until proven guilty. but considering there's a recording of him showing a potential military operation, I'd say it appears likely that he violated this law.
Sorry that the facts of Article II of the constitution are invading your safe space. Maybe if you cry a little more Trump will no longer exist!
How does Article II apply here? In the video he compares it to a boss making rules and then not following them. Just an embarrassing analysis. Is the president above the law?
@ Joe
Because the president can classify/declassify pretty much what he wants? It’s part of their executive powers that congress can’t legally limit?
The other option is unelected and unaccountable three letter agencies can hide things from the president and everyone else?
Also the prosecutors in this case have a massive track record of pulling this kind of stuff?
The President has the power to declassify documents, but to make that happen he has to actually tell someone they have been declassified. Even Trump has said this is the way it works:
As president, he added, "I could have declassified it," but "now I can't," so "this is still a secret."
Egan v Navy says you're wrong white Michael.
So you agree this applies to Hillary, Joe, pence, Obama, and most major politicians. Glad to see you’re consistent.
But you knew the espionage act was also created before the classification system was set up and only has been used against those giving NDI to foreigners, correct? That most libertarians despise that act?
The statute you are citing also makes any derivative classifier of information guilty as there are safes and networks filled with retained and copied NDI information. So what is the differentiator for filtering clearance holders from those committing espionage?
Of course he doesn't. Orange man bad.
The recording is a joke. He talks like that all the time in hypotheticals. All that matters is the law and the constitution! I always refer to the 1988 Supreme Court unanimous decision, Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988), delivered by Justice Blackmun that "...The President, being the Commander & Chief, has the authority, that flows from the constitution, to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant." - Justice Blackmun
So now he shouldn't be taken either seriously or literally?
Also, were you aware that he was not President during the period he tried to prevent the FBI from retaking the Government property back? Again, he was *not* President. He admitted to having not declassified at least some of the documents even if he may have been able to when he was President.
The documents were not his to take in the first place. He stole them. And then he went to great lengths to prevent their return. And by the way, regardless of his nonsensical claim that he willed the classification away, it does not change the fact that some of these documents were among the most sensitive government secrets in existence. Soon you'll realize just how big a deal this really is.
Does this recording even exist? All I’ve heard so far is that ‘anonymous sources’ have heard it. Which usually means it doesn’t exist. Which is beyond even Vindman levels of bullshit.
there’s a recording of him showing a potential military operation
Can you say more? When did he do this?
On the other hand the Burisma executive who bribed the Biden’s did make recordings.
Just 17 of them.
Have you read the indictment? It lists so many facts, so many accidental confessions, and so many obvious contradictions (some intentional, some inadvertent) by Trump and Nauta you can't possibly have read any of it. It's okay though. It's all going to be explained in great detail in court.
...Probably way more detail than the jury needs, but prosecutors will explain it regardless. You know, for the simple folk.
What facts? Say what they are.
That he violated 18 USC 793(b). Good enough for you?
When are Joe and Hillary going to be indicted?
They can't be indicted, because of Article II of the constitution.
Irrelevant to the allegations against Trump. "But he did it!" is an argument a child makes.
Laws not applied consistently and fairly are indeed important you leftist shit.
“But he did it!” is an argument a child makes.
Oh wow, talk about no self-awareness. What did you just do two posts up?
What are the facts he violated that statute?
Come on, man! This publication is called "Reason". Use some of your own.
... If you haven't willed it all away like a TOP SECRET/ SCI classification of a document in Trump's imagination.
"he violated 18 USC 793(b). Good enough for you?"
No.
How did he violate it?
I can say you violated 18 U.S. Code § 2261A, Shrike, but people would expect me to explain how.
There's a note in that code that stipulates a requirement to consult a superior. In his case, as President, he is the superior.
that does not apply to presidents
Jacob, is that you?
"facts" "alleged"
Oh? Do tell. We would love to see what is so embarrassing about it.
Arguing that the Presidential Records Act doesn't apply to the president, for one. That's absurd on its face.
PRA is a civil not criminal statute dumdum. And for current interpretation see Clinton sock drawer case.
You seem to be very ignorant.
Did I say it was? Your reading comprehension needs work.
You said he was guilty of crimes then brought up the PRA dumdum.
When the NARA referred the situation to the DoJ it became criminal.
Biden created a false premise to have NARA reauest the documents. The Clinton sock drawer case gives deference to the president to choose what is covered by PRA, not NARA.
All you leftist are so fucking ignorant.
If NARA is in disagreement of a document they file a civil suit, just like with the Clinton case dumdum.
Wow, this is a fuck-ton of fifty-centing socks come out today. Both Slick Jonas and Joe Rick.
It wasn’t Biden, per se. What his WH did was order NARA to cooperate fully with the FBI. That meant the Counterintelligence Division (remember Peter Strzok, Crossfire Hurricane, 4 fraudulently acquired FISA warrants on Carter Page, with reports from two special counsels and the DOJ IG outlining their misfeasance and malfeasance) determining what NARA requested Trump to produce. And by necessity, they work closely with the DOJ’s Counterintelligence and Export Branch (similarly incriminated in Crossfire Hurricane, etc), headed by Jay Bratt. Bratt turns out to be the official who ran the MAL raid from DOJ HQ (instead of by the local field office, which protocol requires), refused to negotiate with Trump’s attorneys, or allow them time to adequately respond (and utilize rolling document production), and then, as Assistant Special Counsel to Jack Smith, signed the Indictment.
So to summarize:
1. Biden WH orders NARA to do the FBI’s bidding with Trump.
2. Jay Bratt, through, or with, the FBI CD, orders NARA to request from Trump all documents marked classified (including those declassified Trump’s last full day in office that incriminated both Brett’s branch at the DOJ and the FBI CD in the above misfeasance and malfeasance, that were still marked as declassified, despite having been formally ordered declassified by POTUS).
3. Bratt refuses to give Trump’s attorneys time to fully review the hundreds of boxes of documents (including denying them the rolling document production standard in this sort of situation).
4. Bratt runs the MAL raid, and denies Trump’s attorneys the right to view the search of the premises.
5. Then, with the leisure denied Trump’s attorneys, the FBI finds documents still marked classified, chronologically filed in those boxes along with other related materials, from conversations that Trump h ad while in office.
6. Bratt then signs and files the Indictment, now as Assistant Special Counsel.
The other missing piece is that exiting Presidents traditionally have NARA help during their exit. They box everything, remove it to a secure location, and have DNI persons review the retained records for classified information, before releasing it. They did this for at least Obama, GW Bush, and Clinton. They refused for Trump. Trump did not have a secure NARA site to send his hundreds of boxes of personal and Presidential documents, so he sent them to his home at MAL, locked them up, with S.S. protection. And mostly let them sit for over two years.
Try this:
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2010cv1834-13
It’s a federal court ruling from a decade ago regarding Bill Clinton’s retention of classified material that says he effectively declassified it just by retention and removal while still president.
Obama's lawyer cited this case regarding his post-presidency retention of classified materials in his Chicago warehouse.
You forgot the ‘but Trump’ legal precedent that makes Trump guilty of all crimes.
Boom.
That case wasn't about whether or not the material was classified.
Immaterial. It still encompassed classified and national security information.
Some of the dialog in the recordings were regarding classified information, some were related to national security. Although Clinton retained those tapes because of personal discussions on them, those personal discussions were only a small fraction of the dialog they contained. Most was presidential business.
The Espionage Act prosecution isn't about classified documents either.
I think you're right. Wasn’t there no such thing as the modern system of classification during WWI ? The espionage act is a WWI era law.
Please correct me if I’m wrong there.
You are correct.
Department of the Navy v. Egan, 484 U.S. 518 (1988)
"The President, after all, is the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." U.S.Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant." - Justice Blackmun
IOTW, I don't agree, so he's wrong.
And, of course, it’s a video. A 50-minute video.
IOTW, I don’t agree, so he’s wrong.
Mike is just lazy.
And brain damaged.
QUIT EATING THE FUCKING PAINT CHIPS, MIKE!
Nope. It means Diane/Paul regularly throws up a moat to determining whether she/he is right or wrong by her/his regular habit of citing lengthy videos.
There is a common pattern of people with conspiratorial and fringe pointing people to long videos that supposedly contain mind-blowing insights. It’s a tactic to avoid scrutiny of their beliefs.
This is a common pattern of Mike Laursen. When people assert something, he demands citations. When people provide citations, Mike finds some reason to say the citation isn't valid.
Getting Mike to actually settle on the substance of an argument is near impossible, because he is only pretending to be interested in a conversation.
Just look at this last post. He never once addresses anything in the video. He never even asks for a summary of the video. All he does is declare videos as an unacceptable form of evidence. And then, rather than explain WHY videos are unacceptable, he doubles down with an ad hominem. You see, we don't need a reason why videos are bad (I guess 70 years of video journalism are no bueno). No, Mike wants us to know that videos are only watched by CONSPIRACY NUTS.
And this is Mike's sole purpose on this comment section- to parachute late into comments and throw up fallacious, ridiculous digressions and diversions to derail any possible conversation.
I’ve never seen that shitweasel advance a discussion, ever. It’s either democrat narrative, or obstructive rhetoric. He’s just a slightly different species of sea lion than Groomer Jeffy.
When someone uses the term "deep state" they expose themselves as deeply ignorant and probably insane.
You saying that means nothing. You’re a deranged Marxist democrat thrall.
While discussing where to store the folder until it could be delivered to the Justice Department, according to Corcoran, Trump "made a funny motion as though [he were saying,], 'Well, OK, why don't you take them with you to your hotel room, and if there's anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out.' And that was the motion that he made. He didn't say that."
That's some pretty goddamn impressive pantomime! Marcel Marceau, eat your heart out! Could Trump make a motion at a McDonalds to clearly express the idea he'd like a Big Mac, a small fry, an apple pie and a Diet Dr Pepper with no ice without saying a word?
Right up there with "We heard a noise that sounded like classified documents".
I wonder if Trump sold the secret documents that they can't find, to the Saudi's in exchange for that 2 billion payout to his daughter.
You wonder about a lot of stupid things that never happened. While the ignoring reality, like Biden being on the take for decades. You’re the poster child for how Marxist regimes gain power.
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Tom Cleary touches children.
I haven't clicked on the link but I figured it was either a time share pitch or a how to get rid of your time share pitch. With an all inclusive eight course surf and turf dinner. But it turns out the dude's a pedophile you say. I like shrimp as much as the next guy but I'm not clicking on that.
Your first guess was right. I just called him a pedo to see if I could elicit a response from the spammer.
It's just a bot.
So, how much of a weekend bender did you go on, Sullum?
I'd love to see a scenario where Hunter Biden and Trump share a prison cell; Joe Biden comes to visit
I doubt if Joe Biden even remembers who Hunter is anymore.
Even though Hunter is the smartest man he ever met?
All he had to do was return the shit and nothing else would have happened.
Thats not what the law is retard. I know you have to ignore the law to protect your democrat betters, but that is not the law as written.
Bank robber returns the money, all is well!
Sarcasmic's been brushing up on the PRA through the university of CNN, I see.
Bless your heart.
Prior to the NARA referring the situation to the DoJ that would probably be totally true. But I also believe that if Trump had complied with the subpoena completely instead of hiding stuff, he would have been off the hook.
Do you shits do anything but gaslight?
PRA is civil not criminal retard.
"But I also believe that if Trump had complied with the subpoena completely instead of hiding stuff, he would have been off the hook."
Then you're an idiot. The records show Trump Lawyers cooperating at every step. This is a political prosecution period.
No matter what Trump did, they were going to charge him.
No one cares what you think or believe. You’re here solely to advance the democrat narrative. Everyone knows that.
But if he returned the stolen state secrets he never could have sold them for profit.
You are presupposing two things. First, that NARA was entitled to the records, and second that Trump’s attorneys were given sufficient time to go through them. His attorneys deny that, on the basis of (now) Assistant Special Counsel Jay Bratt denying them sufficient time to go through hundreds of boxes of documents.
They also claim that NARA failed in their obligations under the PRA to secure Trump’s Presidential records, and instead, Trump was forced, by necessity to have all of his records removed to MAL, effectively becoming personal records. And court precedent is that the distinction between personal and Presidential records is completely at the President’s discretion. NARA does not have the authority to override that decision. You can thank Bill Clinton and his tapes for that.
Of course you will never hear the MSM being any of that up, ever.
I would expect nothing less from Jacob “Feed the Propaganda Machine” Sullum. And I say that as someone who dislikes Trump. However, I dislike illogical, propaganda bullshit infinitely more than I dislike Trump. He is being persecuted for political reasons just as he has always been since running for President. That’s obvious to any impartial eye. Watch a Jimmy Dore or RFK or Glenn Greenwald video - all leftist-leaning people - for what an impartial, truth-serving analysis looks like. The kind of analysis that often seems extinct on so-called "Reason."
Two thumbs-up!
It’s hilarious how Sullum writes these well-researched, factual summaries — and every time commenters here who are, for some strange reason, extremely sensitive to anthing negative being said about Trump, accuse Sullum of being out to get Trump. Just by collating a bunch of facts.
Dear lord you are such an insufferable prick.
Actually, I check it out to see if I missed anything, on the off chance that Sullum actually has a fresh insight as to why Trump may actually deserve this indictment. Disappointed again!
So well researched he leaves off all the cases that provide holding on the execution of the laws.
It’s hilarious how Sullum writes these well-researched, factual summaries — and every time commenters here who are, for some strange reason, extremely sensitive to anthing negative being said about Trump, accuse Sullum of being out to get Trump. Just by collating a bunch of facts.
Oh, I didn't realize you were Sullum's sock. It makes sense now. Fucking Liarshit.
“It’s hilarious how Sullum writes these well-researched, factual summaries…..”
Nope. What he writes is biased, incorrect, one sided nonsense that omits all kinds of fact and is designed to advance a leftist narrative. Which is what you want, as you are a Marxist democrat.
Sullum is thoroughly discredited, and so are you.
Trump is mentally ill. That is what is clear from all of his behavior.
Sullum seems to be on board with the theory bank robbery isn't a crime if you give the money back when caught.
Or that Brian Mitchell would not be guilty of kidnapping Elizabeth Smart if he had just returned her to her family.
Given the way the Biden documents were returned that would apply even if the return was one piece at a time.
And soaked in semen.
Hey, this *is* Joe Biden we're discussing.
Like using BleachBit to wipe hard drives?
Or smashing cellular telephones with hammers?
No, that was the Cunt®™ (legally known as Hillary Rodham Clinton).
Was the Cunt®™ prosecuted?
No reasonable prosecutor would consider charging the Cunt for that, but this is on a level with every other outgoing President and that cannot stand.
Of course they would. It went far beyond mere negligence. Dozens of witnesses could have been called to testify that they had explained the classified document laws and obligations to her, and she had replied that she understood them. I know one of them, who had briefed her quarterly, and gone through it more than a dozen times with her as Secretary of State.
So, strange. It is like, in your brain, there is a quantum entanglement between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
It’s almost like he thinks there is something wrong with having two standards of justice.
Not that a thing like you would care.
Indeed.
Liarson felt it was wrong for Trump to ask Zelenskyy to take a second look into Bursima, becausr it might implicate FJB!
Ah, using the JesseAz tactic of giving an inaccurate recap of what I actually said. I explained why it is not truthful to say Trump “asked”; he didn’t ask, he committed extortion,
Except he didn’t and the fucking transcript showed that.
Do you want people to pull up your past comments? Because you cry on sarcs shoulder how creepy that is as well. So which do you want? It seems like you want to lie about your past stances.
Also nice strawman sea lion. How is citing with links your past comments providing an inaccurate assessment? You never link to your past stances. I do.
No, it’s accurate. As you have shown empirically in these comments hundreds of times now.
"Like using BleachBit to wipe hard drives?"
Clinton isn't a server Admin. She didn't wipe the hard drive.
In fact the hard drive that was wiped was a backup that had been replaced.
So the files that were "deleted" were copies that remained on the primary drive.
Further the Tech that wiped the drive, was told by Clinton to preserve all files, and took it upon himself to wipe the drive - using the approved method - after he realized that he had not done so after the drive's replacement.
But then facts don't matter to Republicans.
They live in a land of deceit and lies.
Yes, of course, how convenient.
On an unrelated note, would you be interested in buying the Eiffel Tower to dismantle for scrap?
You are missing the point. It is the fact that Hilary had the server in the first place and stored classified information on it. That is the crime.
"Or smashing cellular telephones with hammers?"
That is the standard practice. Phone storage is not encrypted so the standard practice is to render the phone inoperable and the internal storage destroyed.
You did know that was standard practice... Didn't you, Retard boy?
"No, that was the Cunt®™ (legally known as Hillary Rodham Clinton)."
I understand that you Republican Retards think that she eats aborted babies in satanic child abuse rituals in the basement of a New York Pizza place that has no basement.
That makes you mentally ill to rational, thinking people.
"Was the Cunt®™ prosecuted?"
No. She was exonerated.
Trumptie Dumptie is however, going to prison.
That makes me laugh.
""No. She was exonerated.""
No she wasn't. They refused to prosecute after FBI agent Strzok changed the language from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless,” scrubbing a key word that could have had legal ramifications for Clinton. An individual who mishandled classified material could be prosecuted under federal law for “gross negligence.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/363194-former-fbi-agent-changed-comeys-language-of-clinton-email-use-to/
You’re almost as stupid as shrike.
Almost.
Any fan of the Cunt®™ is dimwitted.
And Bill Clinton is no fan of the Cunt®™.
Not o only is Hillary a cunt, she is also the Director of CUNT.
Criminally
Underhanded
Neo-Marxist
Traitors
Mike is undoubtedly an agent of CUNT.
In the unanimous decision in Navy v Egan 484 U.S. 518 (1988), Justice Blackmun delivered the opinion of the Court and stated Trump had the authority to do exactly what he did and all Trump has to do is say he declassified them on his last day and he's good to go!!!
"The President, after all, is the "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." U.S.Const., Art. II, § 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security and to determine whether an individual is sufficiently trustworthy to occupy a position in the Executive Branch that will give that person access to such information flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant." - Justice Blackmun
You know what Justice Blackman didn't say: that a President can declassify a document just by thinking about it, not tell anyone he did it, and still have it count as a declassification.
If Trump himself really believes he had that power, then why did he say: "I could have declassified it," [but] "now I can't," [so] "this is still a secret."
Does Biden have the power to turn down bribes?
Power? Yes.
Ability and fortitude? No.
That is exactly what Blackman says and he posited an example such as discussing a classified item with a foreign official in a meeting. No process needed retard.
He probably said "I could have declassified it, but now I can't" because like every other Republican and Libertarian who exists, is a congenital and perpetual liar.
When did he say that? Do you have a cite that isn’t a claim he said that based on anonymous sources?
One pet peeve. Let's not call allegation or contentions "evidence." While legal professionals may carelessly call allegations or contentions "evidence," they generally mean that it is a factual allegation which appears likely to be admitted to "evidence" at trial. The problem with using "evidence" for allegations and contentions is that the public thinks that everything called evidence is truth.
For example, the photo of the boxes in the bathroom may never be admitted into evidence since whoever took the photo cannot authenticate that there are classified documents inside. Suppose the photographer lacked security clearance, and thus, he did not dare open any box and see what was inside. If that is the situation, is there a chain of custody from the moment the photographer took the photo until someone with the proper security clearance verified that the boxes contained classified files?
All the pundits, whom I have seen, have done a terrible job explaining the steps from indictment to entering s a document into evidence at trial. The vague state that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty is too generic and too lame to be worth stating.
There are a number of steps between now and trial It does the public a disservice to pretend that allegations or contentions are evidence. Maybe some day, but today is not the day.
The purpose of the photos isn't for evidence, but to make people think there are all filled with classified materials.
The actual amount of classified material according to the indictment would fit in one or two boxes.
Ahh! The Reason comment section. “Libertarians” who defend Donald Trump. Ripe, so ripe. Kudos for the loose understanding of your ideology LINOs.
They are defending equal application of law retard.
There are still people, non-politicians, defending Donald Trump. Wow.
They are defending equal application of the law retard.
Is that really what you think the prevailing thread is in these comments?
Yes. That is the prevailing. Existing case law and interpretation as applied to this case. Note the references to past ruling dumdum.
They are defending equal application of the law retard.
Quit samefagging your posts, Shrike.
"They are defending equal application of the law retard."
Which is precisely why Trumptie Dumptie is going to jail.
That makes me laugh.
You don’t know what words mean, do you?
There are people who think it’s ok for the current regime to jail the leading opposition just before an election on a “crime” that has demonstrably been committed by the very same regime. Wow. Fuck off back to Gabon or whatever other country thinks that shit can fly.
If only these creeps knew that banana republics don’t always turn out the way they like.
The entire blog post above is an explanation of why it is not the same as what any former President has done.
It is rationalization of why it is different absent any legal a analysis. And it does a terrible job if it. It is a rehash of NYT and CNN white Michael.
"a “crime” that has demonstrably been committed by the very same regime."
Ah. That would be the fantasy crime you dishonestly claim has been committed.
You be a Quackadoodle.
FJB did not even have the legal authority to remove the classified documents in question.
Yeah, how dare libertarians believe in quaint notions like “equal application of the law”. And fuck them for believing in “innocent until proven guilty”.
God you fucktards are tiresome.
The former president's retention of classified documents looks willful and arguably endangered national security.
"Libertarians" who support the prosecution of Julian Assange, and the sanctity of the Security State.
There are the Libertarian propaganda "think tanks" that exist only to produce pro-corporate propaganda, and the milllions of low IQ dupes who fall for the quack Libertarian ideology that the Think Tanks do not represent.
The policies promoted by the Libertarian Think tanks have been a disaster for America.
Which Libertarians are you referring to? The traitors or the low IQ dupes?
For the most part it almost assuredly was at worst careless. The documents marked classified that are mentioned or covered by the Indictment were found in boxes filed chronologically, mixed in with notes and the like from discussions Trump had at his desk. His desk was then cleared, by staff, and boxed, to be next opened this year, years later, during either document review by his attorneys, demanded by NAR, or by the FBI after the raid. He would then go on to his next event or call with documents for that event or call on his otherwise clean desk. Except for the binder of documents about Crossfire Hurricane, etc, that he formally ordered declassified his last full day in office, he very likely never laid eyes on those classified documents after that. And the binder seems to have suspiciously disappeared into the bowels of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, which was implicated in the binder, and was present during the MAL raid to handle classified documents.
Ahh! The faggot leftists who call themselves libertarians.
Eat a bullet.
"Eat a bullet"
Come get some... Coward.
"6ec75265"
Wow, how many sockpuppets can one guy run in a single thread?
And to think you people complain about Tulpa.
Enough that they need to resort to the output of RNGs.
Weak sauce. Don't call us Trump defenders. Call us folks who don't like weaponization of Federal law enforcement. Call us folks who don't like two-tiered systems of justice. You know, libertarian stuff.
Oh come now. Libertarians promote one rule of law for Corporations and the rich and another for the inferior classes.
That is what Libertarianism is all about.
Add Libertarianism to the long list of things Ven knows shit about, except the ridiculous versions spoon fed to him by MSDNC.
Hahahahahaha
What would you mow of libertarianism, Marxist?
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1668389320405979137?t=oL3ZLYMgs0uhsbyuvXaDzA&s=19
People are missing something big in this Senator Grassley bombshell
The reference to the 17 audio recordings was *redacted* when shown to House members
Some people in the FBI are about to be in big trouble w/House Republicans
They just got caught hiding evidence
[Link]
https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1668390892250759169?t=qoFxDbCLd36yOrGAXvVxYA&s=19
Here’s why these 17 recorded calls are so important to prove Joe Biden’s guilt
The Burisma exec told the FBI that he paid the $5 million bribes to the Bidens through “so many different bank accounts” that investigators wouldn’t be able to “unravel this for at least 10 years”
[Link]
What do you think the odds are that Garland is prosecuting Trump so that Biden can pardon him?
Stay with me on this. I heard it earlier today and it makes sense.
It's pretty obvious that Biden and his family were peddling influence and taking bribes when he was VP. So if he loses in 2024 what's one of the last things he'll do?
Pardon himself and his family.
And how will he get away with it?
By pardoning Trump too.
This Trump indictment and subsequent pardon will let Biden get away with pardoning himself, his family, his allies and a lot of the deep state people like Garland, Fauci, Comey, Wray, Pelosi, Brennan, all the guys in the Durham Report, etc.
They'll pardon all those people so that no incoming administration can go after them.
He'll justify it by saying "I'm just doing this for America. See, I'm also pardoning Donald Trump and Flynn, Manafort and Papadopoulos. I'm stopping all this nonsense right now and hopefully we can start to heal."
Of course if Biden wins all bets are off and they'll double down on the political prosecutions instead.
I think that’s way too much dimensional chess.
They’re just evil totalitarians.
They hung their flag of conquest over the white house.
There’s no tricks here- it’s just brute force exercise of corrupt power.
True, also they're never going to let another real election happen ever again. No matter what the results at 2 am are, the mail-in/drop box will suddenly catapult them over the top.
If that happens again, then there is no reason for things not go hot. And they should.
Reason: Meh.
The Burisma exec told the FBI that he paid the $5 million bribes to the Trump Family through “so many different bank accounts” that investigators wouldn’t be able to “unravel this for at least 10 years”
F-
You can do better than just changing the name.
We’re talking about reality here. Not democrat fan fiction you jack it to.
This is deeply saddening to me. Not because of Trump- I'd actually love him to go away. Forever. No, I am saddened because of what this means for the future. I was on a once in a lifetime Scouting trip this week when this news broke, and I couldn't help but look at these young adults and think about the severe challenges they will face in future decades.
I know I have said it before, but here goes again:
When Tiberius Gracchus began his populist changes to the Roman Republic, it was immediately viewed with suspicion and rage by the urbanite Senatorial Romans. His populism was primarily aimed at the rural people of Rome, who largely felt that the capital city was becoming the sole arbiter of law and commerce. When Tiberius stood for re-election, several of the senators took up arms and beat him and several of his supporters to death. They were explicit in their concern of Tiberius's "popular mobilization [of the lower class citizens] leading inexorably to popular tyranny". Those MRGA-heads- er, rural plebeians were getting too uppity, and the elite Senatorial class were not having it.
After Tiberius, came his brother Gaius Gracchus. He extended his coalition to include urban plebeians, in addition to the rural. He also made several reforms that benefited the military, and especially elevated the Equites (second-class landholders, who were subordinate to the senatorial class). Gracchus changed composition of juries to including only Equites, after multiple corruption prosecutions of influential elites ended in acquittal. Gracchus also passed regulations on the Senate and Magistrates, focused on holding them accountable to ruling in the interests of the public, rather than merely themselves. He made it clear that he was "draining the swamps" of corruption and extortion. For his troubles, Gaius was hunted down and killed, his head filled with lead, his children killed, and his family wiped clean. His key supporters were rounded up, tried extralegally, and executed. The leader of that purge was himself tried, and acquitted solely because the Senate (the elites who had tired of Gaius's populist games) had authorized it. That is, Gaius and his followers were obliterated in contravention of all norms, merely because the Senatorial Class- the elites- said it was ok.
I don't like the Brothers Gracchi. They were not libertarian- though many of their key reforms- including privatizing and distributing state-owned land and reducing the double-standard powers of the Senate- would probably be supported by libertarians. But a major critique of them is true: they were attracting the support of lower classes with simple payoffs and by fanning the flames of populist outrage. And they were doing this to their own benefit. They also were not above writing laws that would undermine support, or business interests of their political rivals. That is all to say that they were politicians- self aggrandizing, pompous, power hungry politicians.
The Brothers Gracchi were also not Trump. They differ substantially on policies such as immigration. Trump is one guy, of course, and he is not facing summary execution, so much as a hounding witch-hunt that was started before he was even elected.
But they are all similar in one major respect. Both Trump and the Gracchi were elected in a populist groundswell. I don't see populism as a great way to govern society, but that doesn't make the causes of populism immaterial. Populists gain power because the Elites go too far. The unwashed masses grow more and more upset as they see their dreams and simple daily lives increasingly managed by folks who "know better". Those Elites do not bother to hide their disdain for the plebeians. They continue to snidely dismiss their concerns and press their agenda, until someone comes along who tells them what they want to hear. And the people do the only thing they think will work: they elect that populist to power.
And instead of a rebalancing of power, those plebeians see their suspicions turned to reality. Indeed there was a double standard at play, and "their man" gets hammered good and hard. The elites are no longer playing around. If offering the pretense of fairness only leads to populist elections, they will rule by fear. Burn the crush the populist leaders, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of their women. Persecute every ally and associate, as a message to everyone who might lead: this will be you.
This is an inflection point in our Republic- an inflection point that has been seen before in history. The Elite no longer care if they are seen as brutal or duplicitous. They no longer care about norms or the appearance of fair play, because they no longer regard the electorate of the Populist as worthy of consideration. They are no longer worth reasoning with. They are not worthy of equal treatment. These people are dangerous, and the book must be thrown to make an example. And if no book is handy, the elites will write a new one special- just for them.
I was sad when Trump was elected, not because I wanted Hilary to win, but because I saw the populist revolt in play.
I was sad as the government mobilized against Trump, not because I like Trump, but because I saw the beginning of the Elite counter offensive.
And as Trump and his many cronies are debased and prosecuted at the foot of various alphabet agencies, I am not saddened because of my love for Trump, but because I love this American experiment and see it following a predictable path.
I am sad, because the final act in this very obvious trend is the arrival of a new Populist, who knows that there is no use playing by the rules- because their rivals will never play by those same rules. That Populist will come in with a wrecking ball, taking out the Republic along with the elites he is trying to unseat. And our children will be all the worse for it.
The blame lies solely on those in power that strive toward globalism instead of furthering Liberty. The Democratic Party and the Establishment Republican’s are to blame for all this. The grassroots just wants their freedoms back that DC and power hungry radicals in several states have stolen over many decades!! Populism will save the Republic, not take a wrecking ball to it. To give in to the globalists on both sides of the aisle will be to give up ALL Liberty for Serfdom to a world Dictator.
Correct
am sad, because the final act in this very obvious trend is the arrival of a new Populist, ..
The only solution to the problem is to re-elect Trump.
They're not going to let that happen.
There isn't a political solution. I'd entertain the idea of secession, but it's no more realistic than revolt.
Secede… from what? You may live in the land where they’ll ban mask mandates and remove special tax districts from Trillion dollar corporations, but I’ll be stuck in the land of freedom to be mandated into an experimental medical procedure, Hugo Boss-inspired rainbow BLM flags to be saluted to, and public sector union goose-steppers who screech bloody murder about how hard it is to hold a police officer accountable.
"Come out of Babylon, my people, so that you do not participate in her sins and suffer from any of her plagues."
I'm sure we can lend some support to insurgents.
Violent, bloody Revolution is the only way this ends for you American Retards.
You need to form your own Retard state where you can continue to inbreed yourselves to non-existence.
Hali Lula.
It wouldn’t be a revolt. It would be a cleansing. We don’t want to overthrow the republic or the constitution. We just want to eliminate the cancer that are e neo Marxist democrats, we had a chance to cleanse e Marxist scourge 70 years ago and didn’t do it, now we’re paying the price.
It’s time for them to go. No one wants to admit this, but it’s true. And I’ve never heard anyone put forth an alternative. And you’re right, secession is not an option. You can’t give them things. That never works.
Thoughtful and well-said.
Thank you.
It continued to play out, over the next 80 years or so with Gaius Marius, Sulla, and finally Gaius Julius Caesar versus the Optimates. In the end, the Republic was no more, replaced by an Empire. It is not the path I wish to go down. However, the elites need to be shown their limits and that they need to follow the rule of law.
Cleanse them.
The Republic is already done, comrade.
I know, you'll cling to your devotion to the status quo even as it's clearly totalitarian and corrupt, then decry populistmanbad and blame him for ending the republic.
But that status quo you're committed to is the illusion of a republic. It's wholly corrupted, and it's continuation will be far worse than you imagine.
I disagree, there are a finite number of Marxist traitors. Reduce their numbers until they offer their complete and unconditional surrender.
Geez, the troglodytes are out in full force today. The unique mixture of contorted logic, unwarranted arrogance and cognitive dissonance is truly an impressive sight.
It is really bizarre that supposed libertarians cannot seem to graspnthat failing to support one feckless politician does not equate to support for another.
Quit sockpuppeting, and you're not even remotely a libertarian so quit pretending. Libertarians don't support political prosecutions of regime opponents, regardless of what they heard on MSNBC.
Contorted logic like referring to precedent? Try harder shrike.
Then there are those like you and Sullum standing and cheering for the corruption.
Eat a bullet, bitch.
Today on your own, or up against a wall, your choice.
Libertarians are some of the dumbest people I've seen, and all are dishonest to the core.
They always have been.
I have never encountered a Liberian who wasn't a congenital and perpetual liar.
Never.
“I have never encountered a Liberian who wasn’t a congenital and perpetual liar.”
Careful, you’re letting your inner racist slip out, little buddy.
For every classified document Trump took home with him, there is at least one official of the Federal government who was responsible for allowing it to happen. To be fair, there are undoubtedly MILLIONS or hundreds of millions of “classified” documents in government storage somewhere and it would not be surprising if the records custodian was on coffee break when Trump picked the lock on the file cabinets and stole those papers – probably cackling evilly to himself in the process. As far as “national security” goes – if I had a penny for every classified document that posed absolutely no threat whatsoever to America militarily, I’d be a billionaire now. I also think it’s more than just a little disingenuous to spend uncounted billions of dollars spying on everyone else in the world while expressing righteous indignation over everyone else spying on us.
No document POTUS takes home is classified, even if they have "classified markings" because the act of POTUS taking them home automatically declassifies them.
Liar... Liar... Libertarian Pants on fire...
"No document POTUS takes home is classified,"
The chief executive has the right to unilaterally take home classified documents. As was argued in the Clinton case who had classified docs in his sock drawer, by virtue of taking them home, they were declassified.
This may sound like "the president is above the law" but it's not, it's "the deep state is not above scrutiny from elected officials". Without that precedent, the Deep state could literally keep secrets from the president, and then prosecute the president if he tried to tell the American people what was going on.
That's the entire point of having a representative democracy.
I question the entire purpose of the “intelligence community” as it exists today, just as I question the purpose of law enforcement agencies at all levels these days. at least 90% of the Federal government is unconstitutional and should be dismantled or downsized except for the military. If the military needs intel the Defense Department should have a strategic and tactical intel division and no one else.
How is it Trump and Biden are our choices for President? That in itself is completely insane.
blind tribalism and group think.
it does not help that the leading opponents in the primaries are someone who also used the power of his state to punish political rivals and a guy who has spent the last two decades dedicated to junk science and conspiracy theories.
Trump as a decent president compared to any realistic alternative. The bench is expanding, but still limited. He would have been even better if the like of McConnell, Romney, Ryan, McCain, Collins, etc had not sabotaged him.
This country must be cleansed of all the traitors, regardless of party.
"The soundness of classification decisions is hard to assess without details that we are not allowed to know. But the indictment's general descriptions at least make it plausible"
Why the hell should we believe the government's "general descriptions of documents they not only won't let the public see, but wouldn't even let a special master with appropriate clearances see?
It's not like the last few decades inspire confidence in the feds' honesty, but that last, the demand that the court have to take the government's description of the documents on faith, should cause any rational person to distrust those descriptions. The seized documents could be literally anything, and not only would WE not know it, the court itself wouldn't know it.
That's about as banana republic as it gets, trying to convict somebody on secret evidence even the court doesn't get to see.
It's one of the big reasons why the government has been reluctant to prosecute alleged spies - they would have to reveal in court the very secrets they were trying to keep secret in order to prove that the defendant was guilty. I continue to find it farcical that the US seems so serious about defending its secrets while trying to steal the secrets of everyone else in the world. No wonder the deep state is violently paranoid!
But, again, in this case the government couldn't even tolerate the use of a special master with the correct security clearance, who'd just look at the documents and tell the court whether the government was accurately describing them. The security risk is minimal, the only risk there was that the special master would tell the court that the government was feeling the court a line of BS.
We're fortunate that Reason had the issue covered by an impartial writer.
Sullum? Jam it up your ass.
Does anyone think that there are mental health issues here. When I look at the pictures of boxes I am thinking hoarders disorder. We all have records and boxes that we ought to go through and throw out, but this seems different. This is like the times you clean out an older relative house and find that they have saved the daily paper for last fifty years and you can hardly walk in the basement or garage because it is piled high with junk.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hoarding-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20356056
Projection is what you do best.
Remember that the government staged these photos. The boxes weren't dumped on the floor when they found them, they were neatly stacked.
Yeah, if you or I had this much junk piled in a room, it would be pathological, because it would be using up precious space.
If you own a mansion? Why not pile your old papers in a room there, just in case you might want to look through them some day? It's not like it costs you anything relative to your income to do so.
First, it is not a mansion it is a golf club and resort. Certainly, there are rooms available and as a self-proclaimed billionaire I would think that Trump would have set up one of those room for storage. Had storage shelves installed and a locked door. The photos suggest he was squirreling stuff away. Billionaires are not immune to the same mental deterioration with age that affects everyone else. I would point to Howard Hughes as an example.
Well, I'll agree about this much: Trump isn't immune to the consequences of aging, and that's one of the reasons I think he shouldn't run again.
But I still think you need to put this in context. I moved into my first home years ago in a rush, and had piles of stuff in unused rooms for a couple years afterwards, not because I was mentally ill, but because they WERE unused rooms, so they weren't getting in my way, and getting it all sorted out wasn't a priority. When you've got the room, winnowing it down just isn't urgent.
Had a relative who was a hoarder, though, and you had trouble getting around her place, because the piles of unneeded stuff were all over the place, in the way. That's a difference.
Is there any evidence this stuff was actually in Trump's way, rather than just stuffed in unused rooms? Remember, because he was contesting the election way past any reasonable point, he wasn't actually planning on moving. He ended up moving out of the White House in a rush thanks to that.
You forgot the narrative from the pee tape. Trump has always been a germaphobe. Whoops!
I believe it is public knowledge that Trump is germ adverse, I don't think that would keep him from being a hoarder. Also remember that conditions like germ aversion are often selective. It was reported that Trump kicked Mulvaney out of the Oval Office for coughing and yet he himself exposed plenty of people to his Covid infection.
Making Cash more than $15k to $18k consistently just by doing basic online work. I have gotten $18376 a month ago just by working on the web. Its a simple and basic occupation to do from home and its profit are greatly improved than customary office work. Each individual can join this activity now just by pursue this link……..go to this site home media tech tab for more detail
SITE. ——>>> workingbitecoin12.com
Depends on the degree of hoarding. Many hoarders live in squalor. Homes that should be condemned filled with disease and bacteria. Dead animals and spoiled food, mold, etc. There's also some overlap with OCD and neat freaks in general. Not impossible, but not likely either.
New! Evidence!
five million dollar bribes.
Yes, the evidence that Trump knowingly committed crimes with a corrupt mental state is that he blabbed all about to the media, on the record.
*blank stare*
By the way, I'd recommend reading the interview excerpt from the indictment, rather than articles like this with "little snippets" "strung together" into "sentences."
Prosecute Trump. Fine with me.
However, those who committed more or less identical crimes must be prosecuted as well: Hillary, Joe Biden immediately come to mind although neither of these two scoundrels can claim to have the privilege of a president.
Further, Joe "the big guy" Biden sold the US government to America's enemies (China, Russia, Ukraine, probably many more). To me, this is treason. The entire Biden family was in on it. Impeachment of the demented one is the least punishment for Joe; he should be in prison for the short remainder of his life.
Further, recall that much of this treasonous criminality occurred while Joe was VP under "No Drama Obama". I doubt Chocolate Jeezus will be held accountable, but he should be, it happened under his watch.
"must be prosecuted as well: Hillary, Joe Biden"
Trump had his chance while he had president. When it's two scoundrels vs one scoundrel, the one scoundrel always loses. Especially when one of the two scoundrels is president.
Trump may do well in prison. There are many ways to serve the country. Fighting forest fires for a dollar a day is one of them.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
It ain’t up to Trump. In areal presidency, unlike the Marxist authoritarian regime currently installed, the AG is independent and and cannot be ordered which cases to prosecute. Both Sessions and Barr were chickenshit and erred in not going after Hillary or Biden.
I know these ideas are confusing to a drone in the democrat hive mind, such as yourself.
Is sullum or any of the other establishment shills at reason ever going to cover the Xiden family crimes and scandals? I know every single one of them voted for Xiden, but the evidence is even more damning than anything with Donnies documents.
Making Cash more than $15k to $18k consistently just by doing basic online work. I have gotten $18376 a month ago just by working on the web. Its a simple and basic occupation to do from home and its profit are greatly improved than customary office work. Each individual can join this activity now just by pursue this link……..go to this site home media tech tab for more detail
SITE. ——>>> workingbitecoin12.com
"ever going to cover the Xiden family crimes and scandals? "
Get one of them in court and they'll cover it. Everyone loves a good courtroom drama.
Fuck off and die, asshole.
"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," Comey said.
that was where we were after the investigation into Hillary, and the same standard should have been applied here. especially considering the revelation about Pence and Biden demonstrating that there is a culture of reckless handling of these materials in the white house that has existed for some time. i have little doubt that Trump broke the law, but this is one of those cases where prosecuting him for it does more damage than justice.
the only one of these investigations i am really interested in is the one that they have not filed anything yet. the one for potential election interference. poor management of documents (probably by aids, unless you think trump packed every box himself.) is something we can let pass to avoid the blow back of prosecuting a former president. trying to strong arm state officials to overturn an election result is a little more problematic. (not that anyone will notice if anything comes of that case because this case and the one from NY will be easily used to deflect any conversation away from those details.)
Foo_dd
Fuck off and die, shitbag,
SQUAWK!!!!
ok why isn't Clinton charged? Having secure documents offsite in a private server, creating a fake Russia collusion story and selling it to the FBI...how about Bush/Cheney lying about WMD and at least 500K innocent people killed in the middle east. The American Empire led by neocon/neolib trotskites and cultural marxists has destroyed the Republic..so so sad
Had to look around to find the current "Orangemanbad" thread.
The actress impersonating an news reader on CBS characterizes Trump's deeds as "IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERSTATE!!!!!", and then admits the case might well go to the SC.
Now, if Trump's transgressions were such as to be "IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERSTATE!!!!!", you'd think a rock-solid conviction at the lowest level would be a given.
Think perhaps the actress is drama-pushing by any chance?
"Trump's Federal Indictment Presents New Evidence of Deliberate Deceit and Obstruction"
You know, in a genuinely libertarian publication, that headline would have been referring to the prosecution's behavior...
I make $100h while I’m daring to the furthest corners of the planet. Last week I worked by my PC in Rome, Monti Carlo finally Paris… This week I’m back in the USA. All I do are basic tasks from this one cool site. see it,
Copy Here→→→→→ https://Www.Worksprofit.com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM