Trump's Secret Documents. The World awaits.

[BDKJMU]

The 34 felony counts in NY thats 1 charge repeated 34 times that every legal analyst on the right and the left pretty much agrees is a joke.
‘Guilty’ of sexual assault. When was that?
Hint iiable doesn’t = guilty.

[kalm]

The 34 felony counts in NY thats 1 charge repeated 34 times that every legal analyst on the right and the left pretty much agrees is a joke.
‘Guilty’ of sexual assault. When was that?
Hint iiable doesn’t = guilty.

You and Tulsi are asking for a one way ticket to the gulags!

[UNI88]

You’re probably out, where should I send a new roll of aluminum foil?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol at that considering how many conspiracy theories have been shown to be right the last 6-7 years.

Which have been shown to be right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UNI88]

So the difference is that trump “willfully handpicked” the documents? Using a insecure private email server for top secret documents is the digital equivalent of taking and storing paper copes in an insecure location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you read the entire thread? It seems like the differences are what separate Trump’s DOJ from being able to rise to the level of indictment.

No I didn’t. Why should I take the word of some tweeter over what CID, 93 and Ibanez said when it happened? If they did what Hillary did they would be out of a job and likely prosecuted. Hillary wasn’t because of who she was. trump thought that would protect him. Thankfully he was wrong. Unfortunately, Hillary wasn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[houndawg]

You’re probably out, where should I send a new roll of aluminum foil?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol at that considering how many conspiracy theories have been shown to be right the last 6-7 years.

Well lets see them! This should be good....

[houndawg]

Well I would hope they don’t make nat sec docs public.

They seemingly have plenty of other docs to show the jury tho.

Nobody wants NatSec docs revealed, but we all know that line is used more for protection from scrutiny than for actually preventing national security secrets to slip out.

This was proven when forced to show redactions that were spurious at best during Russia collusion.

Red Herring is the name of your fallacy, this time.

The document that Trump's lawyers are unable to produce upon demand was last in Trump's custody in a latrine at Mar a Lago, he is the one unable to account for its location, so please..... and of course that doesn't prove that the Saudis gave his son-in-law $2,000,000,000 for we don't yet know how many top secret documents, but many people are saying...

[SeattleGriz]

Nobody wants NatSec docs revealed, but we all know that line is used more for protection from scrutiny than for actually preventing national security secrets to slip out.

This was proven when forced to show redactions that were spurious at best during Russia collusion.

Red Herring is the name of your fallacy, this time.

The document that Trump's lawyers are unable to produce upon demand was last in Trump's custody in a latrine at Mar a Lago, he is the one unable to account for its location, so please..... and of course that doesn't prove that the Saudis gave his son-in-law $2,000,000,000 for we don't yet know how many top secret documents, but many people are saying...

[BDKJMU]

Lol at that considering how many conspiracy theories have been shown to be right the last 6-7 years.

Well lets see them! This should be good....

Lets see, The left labeled as consiracy theories during the last 6 years that turned out to be likely true. Just the 1st 8 or so off the top of my head:
-Trump campaign was being spied on.
-Trump Russia collusion was a hoax.
-The lab leak theory.
-Epsrein didn’t kill himself.
-Twitter shadow banning and censoring the right
-The covid vax wouldn’t keep you from getting or spreading covid.
-That the left was going to try to try to force everyone to get the vax.
-Masks mandates were mostly useless in stopping the spread.

[kalm]

Did you read the entire thread? It seems like the differences are what separate Trump’s DOJ from being able to rise to the level of indictment.

No I didn’t. Why should I take the word of some tweeter over what CID, 93 and Ibanez said when it happened? If they did what Hillary did they would be out of a job and likely prosecuted. Hillary wasn’t because of who she was. trump thought that would protect him. Thankfully he was wrong. Unfortunately, Hillary wasn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

[kalm]

I’m about a 1/4 through it. Damning indeed.

[UNI88]

No I didn’t. Why should I take the word of some tweeter over what CID, 93 and Ibanez said when it happened? If they did what Hillary did they would be out of a job and likely prosecuted. Hillary wasn’t because of who she was. trump thought that would protect him. Thankfully he was wrong. Unfortunately, Hillary wasn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

I like to read strings on my laptop and Comcast internet isn’t letting me connect to CS so I have to use my phone with the Wi-Fi off. I am able to access CS through Wi-Fi at work and AGS from home or work.

I know that there are differences as well as similarities between trump and hillary.

Archives and the DoJ gave trump plenty of opportunities to cooperate and he chose to be difficult. It was his choice and he’s responsible for the consequences. This is no witch-hunt, he brought it upon himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

I like to read strings on my laptop and Comcast internet isn’t letting me connect to CS so I have to use my phone with the Wi-Fi off. I am able to access CS through Wi-Fi at work and AGS from home or work.

I know that there are differences as well as similarities between trump and hillary.

Archives and the DoJ gave trump plenty of opportunities to cooperate and he chose to be difficult. It was his choice and he’s responsible for the consequences. This is no witch-hunt, he brought it upon himself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok! In the future I shall launch all future sorties under cover of darkness.

Thanks!

[BDKJMU]

No I didn’t. Why should I take the word of some tweeter over what CID, 93 and Ibanez said when it happened? If they did what Hillary did they would be out of a job and likely prosecuted. Hillary wasn’t because of who she was. trump thought that would protect him. Thankfully he was wrong. Unfortunately, Hillary wasn’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

It was the Obama DOJ that initially chose not to prosecute. Then the Trump DOJ took the high road after Clinton lost, something the Biden clearly isn’t doing.

[kalm]

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

It was the Obama DOJ that initially chose not to prosecute. Then the Trump DOJ took the high road after Clinton lost, something the Biden clearly isn’t doing.

Wait….choke, choke…did you just use high road and Trump in the same sentence?

So you’re on board with some government officials are above the law?

[houndawg]

Red Herring is the name of your fallacy, this time.

The document that Trump's lawyers are unable to produce upon demand was last in Trump's custody in a latrine at Mar a Lago, he is the one unable to account for its location, so please..... and of course that doesn't prove that the Saudis gave his son-in-law $2,000,000,000 for we don't yet know how many top secret documents, but many people are saying...

[houndawg]

I figured you hadn’t. It points out all of the mistakes and potentially illegal stuff Hillary did while also showing the glaring differences between the two cases.

You’ll get little argument from me on selective prosecution.

But…it’s not as if she wasn’t thoroughly investigated or the Trump DOJ had the ability to prosecute.

It was the Obama DOJ that initially chose not to prosecute. Then the Trump DOJ took the high road after Clinton lost, something the Biden clearly isn’t doing.

Nobody takes the high road like Billy Barr

[BDKJMU]

If there’s any alleged obstruction such alleged obstruction would have occured in Florida.

It would have but wouldn’t be obstruction of an investigation that originated in DC?

Well now we have our answer. Was listening to Andy McCarthy on Clay & Buck on Fri. McCarthy was saying it was a smart move by Smith to last minute file the charges in Florida because if he filed in DC Trump’s legal team would have filed a motion for change of venue would have delayed things for several months and Smith’s team was going to lose that.

[kalm]

It would have but wouldn’t be obstruction of an investigation that originated in DC?

Well now we have our answer. Was listening to Andy McCarthy on Clay & Buck on Fri. McCarthy was saying it was a smart move by Smith to last minute file the charges in Florida because if he filed in DC Trump’s legal team would have filed a motion for change of venue would have delayed things for several months and Smith’s team was going to lose that.

I just read the same. And federal trials are different than local in this regard or interstate extradition.

I stand corrected.

[BDKJMU]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

[kalm]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

Well she got knocked around pretty good in her last attempt. This time though she’ll be able to see some of the evidence I think.

[houndawg]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

So what happens if she doesn't make all of her rulings in Trump's favor? She's a trump-hating RINO?

That will be fun to watch

[UNI88]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

That means that the DoJ and American people won’t get a fair trial (at least based on your posts about trump not getting a fair trial from a liberal judge in a liberal location).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

That means that the DoJ and American people won’t get a fair trial (at least based on your posts about trump not getting a fair trial from a liberal judge in a liberal location).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wrong.

Trial in DC:
-Donk judge
-Donk Prosecutor
-Jury pool: DC: 93%, 4% Trump


Trial in Miami-Dade Co:
-Conk judge
-Donk Prosecutor
-Jury pool: 53 Biden/46% Trump.

One is a lot more balanced/fair than the other.

[kalm]

Course now the left is complaing that you have a Trump appointed judge to oversee the trial. Some libs are calling the 41 or 42 year old latina a ‘MAGA’ judge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... r-AA1clGMf

That means that the DoJ and American people won’t get a fair trial (at least based on your posts about trump not getting a fair trial from a liberal judge in a liberal location).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Indeed. The result of an era of lost faith in institutions. It applies across the political spectrum.

Turnings

While writing Generations, Strauss and Howe described a theorized pattern in the historical generations they examined, which they say revolved around generational events which they call turnings. In Generations, and in greater detail in The Fourth Turning, they describe a four-stage cycle of social or mood eras which they call "turnings". The turnings include: "The High", "The Awakening", "The Unraveling" and "The Crisis".[2]

High

According to Strauss and Howe, the First Turning is a High, which occurs after a Crisis. During The High, institutions are strong and individualism is weak. Society is confident about where it wants to go collectively, though those outside the majoritarian center often feel stifled by conformity.[34]

According to the authors, the most recent First Turning in the US was the post–World War II American High, beginning in 1946 and ending with the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.[35]

Awakening

According to the theory, the Second Turning is an Awakening. This is an era when institutions are attacked in the name of personal and spiritual autonomy. Just when society is reaching its high tide of public progress, people suddenly tire of social discipline and want to recapture a sense of "self-awareness", "spirituality" and "personal authenticity". Young activists look back at the previous High as an era of cultural and spiritual poverty.[36]

Strauss and Howe say the U.S.'s most recent Awakening was the "Consciousness Revolution", which spanned from the campus and inner-city revolts of the mid-1960s to the tax revolts of the early 1980s.[37]

Unraveling

According to Strauss and Howe, the Third Turning is an Unraveling. The mood of this era they say is in many ways the opposite of a High: Institutions are weak and distrusted, while individualism is strong and flourishing. The authors say Highs come after Crises when society wants to coalesce and build and avoid the death and destruction of the previous crisis. Unravelings come after Awakenings when society wants to atomize and enjoy.[38] They say the most recent Unraveling in the US began in the 1980s and includes the Long Boom and Culture War.[2]

Crisis

According to the authors, the Fourth Turning is a Crisis. This is an era of destruction, often involving war or revolution, in which institutional life is destroyed and rebuilt in response to a perceived threat to the nation's survival. After the crisis, civic authority revives, cultural expression redirects toward community purpose, and people begin to locate themselves as members of a larger group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E ... nal_theory

[UNI88]

That means that the DoJ and American people won’t get a fair trial (at least based on your posts about trump not getting a fair trial from a liberal judge in a liberal location).

Wrong.

Trial in DC:
-Donk judge
-Donk Prosecutor
-Jury pool: DC: 93%, 4% Trump

Trial in Miami-Dade Co:
-Conk judge
-Donk Prosecutor
-Jury pool: 53 Biden/46% Trump.

One is a lot more balanced/fair than the other.

I disaqree.

• You either don't include the prosecutor or you include the defense attorney which makes that a wash.
• It's the defense team's job make sure the jury is as favorable as possible. It would be their (and trump's) fault if they were incompetent enouqh to allow a jury that is 93% aqainst their client to be seated.
• I would think that the judqe holds a metric sh!t ton of influence in a trial like this so they're worth double or triple.

Usinq your judicial conspiracy theory approach trump has the advantaqe. The fix is in. The DoJ and the American people won't qet a fair trial.