Trump's Secret Documents. The World awaits.

[houndawg]

They impeach Trump again, yet?

Klam has gone from blue checks to ordinary Joe's on Twitter to make his case. He's doing awesome.

His case has been made entirely by Republicans either appointed or hired by Trump. Try as you might you just can't get around that.


But its hilarious watching you try.

[Winterborn]

They got him this time!

Going the civil route shows how weak a case Letitia James has and it is a gamble that may not pay off. Also it is interesting that if it does pay off, what it will do to real estate development in NY.

Making risky bets is what happens when one bases their decisions on emotion and tries to justify them after the fact.

So we should base criminal law on how it potentially affects real estate markets?

And what is the bet here?

But it is not a criminal case but civil (which was stated in my post). And with respect to any law. we should look at what is actually passed (regulation wise) and go from there.

All current and past real estate transactions were based on those regulations, if Trump followed them, then her case is baseless. If he didn't, then it should be easy to convict him, no?

If other real estate developers also didn't follow those regulations, then they should also be convicted. If they are not, then it shows developers that the state is going to play politics when it comes to its own regulations.

[Winterborn]

A revealing, behind-the-scenes examination of how Congress twice fumbled its best chance to hold accountable a president many considered one of the most dangerous in American history. The definitive—and only—insider account of both Trump impeachments, as told by the two reporters on the front lines covering them for The Washington Post and Politico.

I wouldn't mid reading that and keeping what is stated with a grain of salt.

[kalm]

So we should base criminal law on how it potentially affects real estate markets?

And what is the bet here?

But it is not a criminal case but civil (which was stated in my post). And with respect to any law. we should look at what is actually passed (regulation wise) and go from there.

All current and past real estate transactions were based on those regulations, if Trump followed them, then her case is baseless. If he didn't, then it should be easy to convict him, no?

If other real estate developers also didn't follow those regulations, then they should also be convicted. If they are not, then it shows developers that the state is going to play politics when it comes to its own regulations.

Welcome to America where it’s only illegal if you get caught.

[Winterborn]

But it is not a criminal case but civil (which was stated in my post). And with respect to any law. we should look at what is actually passed (regulation wise) and go from there.

All current and past real estate transactions were based on those regulations, if Trump followed them, then her case is baseless. If he didn't, then it should be easy to convict him, no?

If other real estate developers also didn't follow those regulations, then they should also be convicted. If they are not, then it shows developers that the state is going to play politics when it comes to its own regulations.

Welcome to America where it’s only illegal if you get caught.

Still better than the alternative. Don't like the laws? Elect people that will pass better ones.

Still with our flaws, I am happy to live in a place we are innocent until proven guilty.

[kalm]

Welcome to America where it’s only illegal if you get caught.

Still better than the alternative. Don't like the laws? Elect people that will pass better ones.

Still with our flaws, I am happy to live in a place we are innocent until proven guilty.

The alternative could also mean better enforcement. If people continuously get away with violating regulations what’s the point in having any? I get the avalanche potential of over-regulating but some of this stuff is common sense and clearly dirty.

(Never mind…I think I know your answer

[Winterborn]

Still better than the alternative. Don't like the laws? Elect people that will pass better ones.

Still with our flaws, I am happy to live in a place we are innocent until proven guilty.

The alternative could also mean better enforcement. If people continuously get away with violating regulations what’s the point in having any? I get the avalanche potential of over-regulating but some of this stuff is common sense and clearly dirty.

(Never mind…I think I know your answer

Was that answer better enforcement? I have no problem with Trump being charged and if found guilty being convicted. But that standard better be applied evenly because nobody is going to like the answer when people realize that it is an arbitrary rule that is applied based on who is in power. There is a reason that justice has a blindfold on.

I am also for closing said loopholes and making things more transparent. But for that to happen one would have to vote multiple people in with some integrity and that is a tall order. Especially in NY.

[kalm]

He declassified them.

[SDHornet]

He declassified them.

They'll get him this time!!!

[houndawg]

He declassified them.

They'll get him this time!!!

I think he'll be OK, because Leon Durham is about to straighten this shit out and show us all who the real criminals are - indictments will soon fall like rain.

[SeattleGriz]

They'll get him this time!!!

I think he'll be OK, because Leon Durham is about to straighten this shit out and show us all who the real criminals are - indictments will soon fall like rain.

No shit. His reputation as a "hard hittin' lawyer" sure got destroyed.

Read the Russia thread and see where I called this. I said he wouldn't go after anyone of worth and that came true. I know, I know. We all knew that, but I was saying that in the beginning. "Libs and Cons were going to be pissed because nothing happened to anyone of value".

[houndawg]

I think he'll be OK, because Leon Durham is about to straighten this shit out and show us all who the real criminals are - indictments will soon fall like rain.

No shit. His reputation as a "hard hittin' lawyer" sure got destroyed.

Read the Russia thread and see where I called this. I said he wouldn't go after anyone of worth and that came true. I know, I know. We all knew that, but I was saying that in the beginning. "Libs and Cons were going to be pissed because nothing happened to anyone of value".

and I said he had nothing, which is the reason he wouldn't go after anyone of worth.

[SDHornet]

No shit. His reputation as a "hard hittin' lawyer" sure got destroyed.

Read the Russia thread and see where I called this. I said he wouldn't go after anyone of worth and that came true. I know, I know. We all knew that, but I was saying that in the beginning. "Libs and Cons were going to be pissed because nothing happened to anyone of value".

and I said he had nothing, which is the reason he wouldn't go after anyone of worth.

No he had some folks dead to rights, then a DC jury let them off. Do better.

[kalm]

[houndawg]

and I said he had nothing, which is the reason he wouldn't go after anyone of worth.

No he had some folks dead to rights, then a DC jury let them off. Do better.

he got diddly squat and laughed out of court

[JohnStOnge]

Lindsey Graham is a poster child for the idea of putting Party over Country. Just absolutely disgusting.

[Winterborn]

Lindsey Graham is a poster child for the idea of putting Party over Country. Just absolutely disgusting.

So that makes him like 99.693% of the rest of his peers then.

[kalm]

Lindsey Graham is a poster child for the idea of putting Party over Country. Just absolutely disgusting.

So that makes him like 99.693% of the rest of his peers then.

Tulsi and Liz Cheney being the outliers.

[Winterborn]

So that makes him like 99.693% of the rest of his peers then.

Tulsi and Liz Cheney being the outliers.

Both are factored in my percentage. I will let you guess on which side(s) they land.

[SeattleGriz]

Not sure what the complete article says because it's behind a paywall, but the one quote I have in the article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... ce=twitter

Now that the election is over...

"That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said."

[UNI88]

Not sure what the complete article says because it's behind a paywall, but the one quote I have in the article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... ce=twitter

Now that the election is over...

"That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said."

So what? Not taking the documents for "nefarious" reasons doesn't absolve trump of taking the documents.

[SeattleGriz]

Not sure what the complete article says because it's behind a paywall, but the one quote I have in the article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... ce=twitter

Now that the election is over...

So what? Not taking the documents for "nefarious" reasons doesn't absolve trump of taking the documents.

Wasn't he going to sell nuke secrets? That's quite a step down by the media. Seems they keep walking back their outrageous claims. Pretty soon it'll all just go away as another nothing burger.

[UNI88]

So what? Not taking the documents for "nefarious" reasons doesn't absolve trump of taking the documents.

Wasn't he going to sell nuke secrets? That's quite a step down by the media. Seems they keep walking back their outrageous claims. Pretty soon it'll all just go away as another nothing burger.

Fortunately the justice system doesn't rely on the media. If trump did something wrong he should be charged and tried by the courts.

[SeattleGriz]

Wasn't he going to sell nuke secrets? That's quite a step down by the media. Seems they keep walking back their outrageous claims. Pretty soon it'll all just go away as another nothing burger.

Fortunately the justice system doesn't rely on the media. If trump did something wrong he should be charged and tried by the courts.

I agree, but for some reason he still hasn't been on his multitude of "crimes". It's almost like he's innocent.

[UNI88]

Fortunately the justice system doesn't rely on the media. If trump did something wrong he should be charged and tried by the courts.

I agree, but for some reason he still hasn't been on his multitude of "crimes". It's almost like he's innocent.

Or he uses his wealth and influence to bury any prosecution. Another thing he has in common with Hillary.