Federal Indictment of Donald Trump

#8,156
#8,156
If so, we will likely learn the following:

1) Evidence that Trump knew that his claim that the moment he walked out the door with a document it was auto declassified, was bogus.

2) Evidence of an illegal purpose in retaining those specific documents.

3) Evidence he was repeatedly told that what he was doing was illegal, and he did it anyway.

4) Evidence that as this emerged he attempted to cover his tracks, either by hiding the documents or taking steps to hinder their return or this investigation.

To me, the real political and legal effect turns on 2 and 4.

I've been asking why for a long time and really this is the big issue. Why did he insist on doing this, and maintaining it, when he knew it was unlawful. What was the motivation? I can imagine all sorts of ways he can squirm out of this -- for example if its that the documents were personally embarrassing to him he can claim they were false and so he acted to prevent misleading materials from being maintained. (This would be a bogus argument but he can make it to this base because they already believe it).

But if he sold information, or traded on it, or in any way benefited personally by taking and trying to keep them, his goose is, as they say, cooked.
 
#8,157
#8,157
lawgator1 said:
If so, we will likely learn the following:

1) Evidence that Trump knew that his claim that the moment he walked out the door with a document it was auto declassified, was bogus.

2) Evidence of an illegal purpose in retaining those specific documents.

3) Evidence he was repeatedly told that what he was doing was illegal, and he did it anyway.

4) Evidence that as this emerged he attempted to cover his tracks, either by hiding the documents or taking steps to hinder their return or this investigation.

To me, the real political and legal effect turns on 2 and 4.

I've been asking why for a long time and really this is the big issue. Why did he insist on doing this, and maintaining it, when he knew it was unlawful. What was the motivation? I can imagine all sorts of ways he can squirm out of this -- for example if its that the documents were personally embarrassing to him he can claim they were false and so he acted to prevent misleading materials from being maintained. (This would be a bogus argument but he can make it to this base because they already believe it).

But if he sold information, or traded on it, or in any way benefited personally by taking and trying to keep them, his goose is, as they say, cooked.
Click to expand...

LMAO .... cry harder.
 
#8,158
#8,158
lawgator1 said:
If so, we will likely learn the following:

1) Evidence that Trump knew that his claim that the moment he walked out the door with a document it was auto declassified, was bogus.

2) Evidence of an illegal purpose in retaining those specific documents.

3) Evidence he was repeatedly told that what he was doing was illegal, and he did it anyway.

4) Evidence that as this emerged he attempted to cover his tracks, either by hiding the documents or taking steps to hinder their return or this investigation.

To me, the real political and legal effect turns on 2 and 4.

I've been asking why for a long time and really this is the big issue. Why did he insist on doing this, and maintaining it, when he knew it was unlawful. What was the motivation? I can imagine all sorts of ways he can squirm out of this -- for example if its that the documents were personally embarrassing to him he can claim they were false and so he acted to prevent misleading materials from being maintained. (This would be a bogus argument but he can make it to this base because they already believe it).

But if he sold information, or traded on it, or in any way benefited personally by taking and trying to keep them, his goose is, as they say, cooked.
Click to expand...

YGHN
 
#8,159
#8,159
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
LMAO .... cry harder.
Click to expand...
C-south said:
YGHN
Click to expand...

i-guess-well-see-clarence-thomas.gif
 
#8,160
#8,160
lawgator1 said:
If so, we will likely learn the following:

1) Evidence that Trump knew that his claim that the moment he walked out the door with a document it was auto declassified, was bogus.

2) Evidence of an illegal purpose in retaining those specific documents.

3) Evidence he was repeatedly told that what he was doing was illegal, and he did it anyway.

4) Evidence that as this emerged he attempted to cover his tracks, either by hiding the documents or taking steps to hinder their return or this investigation.

To me, the real political and legal effect turns on 2 and 4.

I've been asking why for a long time and really this is the big issue. Why did he insist on doing this, and maintaining it, when he knew it was unlawful. What was the motivation? I can imagine all sorts of ways he can squirm out of this -- for example if its that the documents were personally embarrassing to him he can claim they were false and so he acted to prevent misleading materials from being maintained. (This would be a bogus argument but he can make it to this base because they already believe it).

But if he sold information, or traded on it, or in any way benefited personally by taking and trying to keep them, his goose is, as they say, cooked.
Click to expand...
Speaking of a cooked goose, I'm as happy as Scrooge on Christmas morning
 
#8,164
#8,164
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Nothing has been proven on this topic yet. But keep wasting everybody's time & effort.
Click to expand...


I disagree. The following are known facts:

1) The National Archives made requests for return of the documents. Trump ignored those requests.

2) Formal request was made by the FBI for return of the documents. Trump ignored it.

3) Trump is seen on video assisting an aide moves boxes of the documents from one place to another shortly before the FBI raid to retrieve them.

4) Trump was counseled by several attorneys that he was in the wrong on this and needed to comply with the requests. Trump ignored their instructions.

5) Trump has since tried, on multiple occasions, to argue that he had the power to declassify anything simply by taking it to Mar-a-Lago. However, Trump has been caught on audio admitting that he knew that this claim by him was false.

I therefore return to my original question: Why?

Why put himself in such a pickle, despite being told not to keep doing it and despite many opportunities to simply fix ti by returning the documents? What is it about THOSE documents that led him to take them with him from the WH?
 
#8,172
#8,172
Vol8188 said:
“The IT equipment in the room was not effected”
Click to expand...


That was what one person said.

Plus the attempt is enough. Think about it: if anyone in the World was so incompetent as to initiate such a thing and screw it up, isn't Trump near the top of the list?
 
#8,173
#8,173
lawgator1 said:
That was what one person said.

Plus the attempt is enough. Think about it: if anyone in the World was so incompetent as to initiate such a thing and screw it up, isn't Trump near the top of the list?
Click to expand...

Seems like you’re reading what you want into vs what actually happened. If he wanted them to destroy information and this is only coming out months later, why would he have stopped?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolStrom
#8,174
#8,174
lawgator1 said:
That was what one person said.

Plus the attempt is enough. Think about it: if anyone in the World was so incompetent as to initiate such a thing and screw it up, isn't Trump near the top of the list?
Click to expand...
Serious question. Were you ever successful as an attorney?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top