@earl-of-trumps saidYou're asking valid questions but again: if Trump was not supposed to have those documents the FBI would not have probable cause to obtain a search warrant.
Dude, we are not talking about a bank being robbed here. We are talking nuclear documents protected by high level
American intel and that have gone missing with the national archives not even knowing about it. Jeeesh!
And I am not trying to say that Trump is innocent. I am just trying to get a grasp of the whole situation. 15 boxes of docs...? c'mon
How could the ...[text shortened]... ir control, and then not even know they are missing!
That's the first step to get a grasp of, IMO
12 edits
@earl-of-trumps saidhttps://time.com/4394178/hillary-clinton-email-fbi-investigation/
You need criminal intent to be unlawful, or is possession enough?
Anyway, Hillary also lied to the FBI, and she also destroyed evidence and refused to turn over documents.
We'll see what they do.
Comey *could have* charged Hillary with crimes but decided to let her go because he couldn't find any intent of wrongdoing or any proof the servers were hacked. He basically just chalked up Hillary's actions to being highly irresponsible rather than criminal.
Had Comey found any indication she deliberately misused those documents, like sent them to people who shouldn't have classified access, he would've pursued charges.
To answer your question, possession in of itself was enough to be a crime but Comey made a judgement call not pursue charges since he thought Hillary meant no harm.
If there's evidence that Trump's actions lead to those documents falling into the wrong hands, he may be charged with a crime. If evidence shows he intended wrongdoing, like leaking them for personal gain, he'd definitely be charged with a crime. Trump doesn't do anything unless it's for personal gain.
@vivify saidIf you read Comey's book, he was highly skeptical of some of HRC's answers to the FBI, but he didn't feel he had enough evidence to prove they were deliberate lies.
https://time.com/4394178/hillary-clinton-email-fbi-investigation/
Comey *could have* charged Hillary with crimes but decided to let her go because he couldn't find any intent of wrongdoing or any proof the servers were hacked. He basically just chalked up Hillary's actions to being highly irresponsible rather than criminal.
Had Comey found any indication she delibera ...[text shortened]... , he'd definitely be charged with a crime. Trump doesn't do anything unless it's for personal gain.
I find it unlikely Trump will ever willingly talk to FBI agents.
4 edits
@no1marauder saidTrue. But every time an investigation into Trump starts, new information gets found:
I find it unlikely Trump will ever willingly talk to FBI agents.
- Mueller's investigation found Trump's camp, like Don Jr., knowingly accepted help from foreign agents
- The House's inquiry found texts from Trump associates who admitted withholding military aid in exchange for Ukraine attacking his political opponent
- Trump knew campaign funds were used as hush money payments despite him claiming otherwise
And so on. I see no reason why new, more incriminating details won't get revealed in this case as well. The only difference is he'll be without the shield of the presidency if such details do come out.
Still, that's all just speculation. No matter how many investigations are thrown at him, Teflon Donald always escapes unscathed. There's no reason to think this FBI raid will be any different either.
@Earl-of-Trumps
You don't seem to understand the CONSPIRACY of at LEAST two to GET copies of TS/SCI docs. That deepens the entire treasonous affair.
2 edits
@Earl-of-Trumps
The issue is WHO HELPED TRUMP GET THE COPIES. That in itself is a national breach issue.
Now the facts come out about where those docs were in Trump's house, some of them IN HIS OWN BEDROOM. So there will be a tiny bit of a problem if Trump tries to claim he knew nothing about them.
And all those ultrarightwingnut zombies trying to say TRUMP DECLASSIFIED them doesn't matter whether he did or not. He stole documents belonging to the USA not Trump and he WILL be held accountable.
Rand Paul is a tad bit late trying to kill the espionage Act🙂
Funny how he used that same act to attack Hillary......
1 edit
@sonhouse saidI have not seen any reference to "copies" of documents, sonhouse. There is this ongoing problem here.
@Earl-of-Trumps
The issue is WHO HELPED TRUMP GET THE COPIES. That in itself is a national breach issue.
Now the facts come out about where those docs were in Trump's house, some of them IN HIS OWN BEDROOM. So there will be a tiny bit of a problem if Trump tries to claim he knew nothing about them.
And all those ultrarightwingnut zombies trying to say TRUMP DECLASSIFIE ...[text shortened]... t late trying to kill the espionage Act🙂
Funny how he used that same act to attack Hillary......
NY Times: "Items removed from Mar-a-Lago included files marked as top secret and meant to be viewed only in secure government facilities, according to a copy of the warrant."
-------------------------
Now, I am not trying to deflect here. If Trump is guilty, he is guilty. All I am trying to say is,
the bigger problem is the so-called secure government facilities. What the hell is going on???
@vivify saidvivify: There's no reason to think this FBI raid will be any different either.
True. But every time an investigation into Trump starts, new information gets found:
- Mueller's investigation found Trump's camp, like Don Jr., knowingly accepted help from foreign agents
- The House's inquiry found texts from Trump associates who admitted withholding military aid in exchange for Ukraine attacking his political opponent
- Trump knew campaign funds were ...[text shortened]... d always escapes unscathed. There's no reason to think this FBI raid will be any different either.
I disagree; it would be highly unusual for the FBI to execute a search warrant of this scope and criminal charges not to follow.
1 edit
@no1marauder said"I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges"---No1Marauder
I disagree; it would be highly unusual for the FBI to execute a search warrant of this scope and criminal charges not to follow.
- Joined
- 27 Sep 06
- Moves
- 251103
@sleepyguy saidSorry that you find it
Help me understand your frequent carriage returns and long ellipses chains. Are you posting from a Commodore 64? Is this supposed to be poetry? I don't get it.
so difficult to understand...........
What should I do to make my
posts easier for you to comprehend?
1 edit
@vivify saidYou're taking that quote way out of context; I suggest you read the qualifiers.
"I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges"---No1Marauder
EDIT: Actually I can't find that direct quote at all, but my point still stands; mere possession of the documents is unlikely to result in criminal charges.
@no1marauder saidPage 2 of this thread, second-to-last post. You're right, you did qualify that statement. So I apologize for not posting the full quote.
You're taking that quote way out of context; I suggest you read the qualifiers.
EDIT: Actually I can't find that direct quote at all, but my point still stands; mere possession of the documents is unlikely to result in criminal charges.
I agree with you that mere possession of documents won't result in charges. But as I mentioned before, with Trump, more incriminating evidence typically shows up in his investigations. But we'll see.
@vivify saidThe full quote was:
Page 2 of this thread, second-to-last post. You're right, you did qualify that statement. So I apologize for not posting the full quote.
I agree with you that mere possession of documents won't result in charges. But as I mentioned before, with Trump, more incriminating evidence typically shows up in his investigations. But we'll see.
no1: I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges based on the Donald having some documents he shouldn't have.
You put a period in front of "charges" which totally changes the meaning of the sentence. If you want to cheat in such a way again try "I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges ............." that's dishonest as well but at least slightly less reprehensible than the way you played it.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidI didn't use a period. Maybe you have a smudge on your screen.
The full quote was:
no1: I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges based on the Donald having some documents he shouldn't have.
You put a period in front of "charges" which totally changes the meaning of the sentence. If you want to cheat in such a way again try "I find it hard to believe that the DOJ will press charges ............." that's dishonest as well but at least slightly less reprehensible than the way you played it.
@vivify said(Shrug) Correct I guess, you just quoted half the sentence and implied it was all there was by not using ".........".
I didn't use a period. Maybe you have a smudge on your screen.
I find that dishonest and would never play the same game with another person's post but if you think that is proper I suggest you reevaluate your thinking.