LordAdam16:


Yes.

And Biden unknowingly and unintentionally moved and retained classified materials to his office at Penn and his garage where they remained for 6 years.

LordAdam16:

And in your informed opinion, Garland goofed by appointing a SC because there is nothing to see there. So how long can he retain these classified documents before it becomes a problem? 10 years. 20 years. Forever?

LordAdam16:

For the umpteenth time, Trump was POTUS. He argues he declassified them, so the "knowingly" and "intent" was authorized. Not unauthorized as is the case with Biden. Biden can only plead ignorance, which he's gotten used to doing anyway.

LordAdam16:


Yes.

And Biden unknowingly and unintentionally moved and retained classified materials to his office at Penn and his garage where they remained for 6 years.

And in your informed opinion, Garland goofed by appointing a SC because there is nothing to see there. So how long can he retain these classified documents before it becomes a problem? 10 years. 20 years. Forever?

For the umpteenth time, Trump was POTUS. He argues he declassified them, so the "knowingly" and "intent" was authorized. Not unauthorized as is the case with Biden. Biden can only plead ignorance, which he's gotten used to doing anyway.

See why I call you a Biden leg-humper? Respect yourself and rest.

-Lord

IjeBos:
I'm a strong Christian, but how this tweet even appropriate given the 1st amendment.

wirinet:


It's you that misyarn continuously in your desperate attempt to defend Trump.
Ordinarily Mishandling of classified document is not a serious crime. It is with an intent to retain them at an unauthorised location that makes it a serious crime. Keyword intent. Just like Murder, you have to prove intent.

Now between the Biden's case and Trump's case, which one will it be easier to prove intent?

LordAdam16:


The question is not which is easiest to prove, it is that they both can be indicted.

Whether the charges will stick is a whole different kettle of fish. And as I've said at least twice already, I don't see it sticking to Biden. Trump's argument will go to the highest courts because the legal writ on declassification powers of POTUS is not cut and dry.

But in their fervor to take down Trump using anything in the codecs, they created this blind spot.

Usually, prosecutors prefer to file charges when they're sure of getting a conviction. Especially with cases that have high bars to clear. It is why the Feds were trying to get Trump on sale or transfer of national secrets to foreign agents.

Likewise with Gen. Flynn. The Logan Act has been flouted so many times with prosecutors turning a blind eye. But they used it to go after him, then nicked him for lying to an agent.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


The question is not which is easiest to prove, it is that they both can be indicted.

Whether the charges will stick is a whole different kettle of fish. And as I've said at least twice already, I don't see it sticking to Biden. Trump's argument will go to the highest courts because the legal writ on declassification powers of POTUS is not cut and dry.

But in their fervor to take down Trump using anything in the codecs, they created this blind spot.

Usually, prosecutors prefer to file charges when they're sure of getting a conviction. Especially with cases that have high bars to clear. It is why the Feds were trying to get Trump on sale or transfer of national secrets to foreign agents.

Likewise with Gen. Flynn. The Logan Act has been flouted so many times with prosecutors turning a blind eye. But they used it to go after him, then nicked him for lying to an agent.

-Lord

IjeBos:

Ding Ding Ding. Now we are on the same page. Now Read the law. To prosecute him, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he knowingly did it and with an intent to keep them. Speaks to the competency of his team, but not all stupid actions are illegal. Argue to change the law, not ignore it. [/color]



Easy question. Find me a law that makes what he did illegal. I'll be waiting. Again, argue the laws aren't sufficient. Or what Biden did was wrong. Don't argue he did something illegal based on the facts that we know, based on how you feel the laws should be.



And you can repeat it 100 more times it won't make it true or pertinent. The only arguments that matter when people are under criminal investigation are the arguments they make in court under the penalty of perjury. He declined to make that argument when he had the opportunity. And besides this statue, he is in trouble for obstruction and other statues as well since the documents still belong to the government. Trump is in a world of trouble for not doing what Biden so easily did.

IjeBos:


So we should indict people with the understanding that the charges may not stick? You should read up on how well that went for John Durham. But welcome to the autocratic Republican party.

The "Fox News" is strong in you.

IjeBos:


So we should indict people with the understanding that the charges may not stick? You should read up on how well that went for John Durham. But welcome to the autocratic Republican party.

The "Fox News" is strong in you.

IjeBos:

Ding Ding Ding. Now we are on the same page. Now Read the law. To prosecute him, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he knowingly did it and with an intent to keep them. Speaks to the competency of his team, but not all stupid actions are illegal. Argue to change the law, not ignore it. [/color]



Easy question. Find me a law that makes what he did illegal. I'll be waiting. Again, argue the laws aren't sufficient. Or what Biden did was wrong. Don't argue he did something illegal based on the facts that we know, based on how you feel the laws should be.



And you can repeat it 100 more times it won't make it true or pertinent. The only arguments that matter when people are under criminal investigation are the arguments they make in court under the penalty of perjury. He declined to make that argument when he had the opportunity. And besides this statue, he is in trouble for obstruction and other statues as well since the documents still belong to the government. Trump is in a world of trouble for not doing what Biden so easily did.

LordAdam16:


Bunch of rubbish.

Yet another TDS case of the "walls are closing in."

Trump has not been indicted or charged yet. Let the SC/DOJ indict him and then the defense would begin.

I asked a simple question of how long the classified documents could stay in Biden's garage before it becomes a problem, you started to shalaye. So I'm going to forward you to Garland. He just appointed the SC. Ask him to find what Biden did illegally.

This is all of your own doing. In trying to sink Trump, you opened up Biden to a stray bullet.

-Lord

LordAdam16:


That is the most id*otic statement you've made yet. And there are a lot of whoopers.

Has anyone been indicted yet? Or do you have difficulty understanding the role of a special counsel?

Why can't you use your brain? It is not an embroidery.

-Lord

IjeBos:


The elements of that statute are clear. Knowingly and Intent. The only stray bullets are the FEELS you have injected into it. I think I'm done taking your arguments apart.

SlyFoxxLivesOn:


The truth of the matter is that neither men will be charged for anything. Fools like IjeBos and the idiot you are responding too are just too deranged with Trump hate to admit it. If there was even a small chance of Garland bringing a case against Trump for this declassification fiasco, that has now been blown up by the Biden case. The political firestorm will be too much if Trump is indicted for something that both Biden and Hillary Clinton got away with. As in the institutional bias would be too apparent. Even Garland is not that crazy.

LordAdam16:


Don't mind them.

No original thought. IB was expecting Garland to sweep it under the carpet. After all, the FBI has been sitting on Hunter Biden laptop without indicting him for influence peddling, tax offenses, and a litany of crimes.

-Lord

IjeBos:


The elements of that statute are clear. Knowingly and Intent. The only stray bullets are the FEELS you have injected into it. I think I'm done taking your arguments apart.

SlyFoxxLivesOn:


Leave them bro. They are fools blinded by their bizarre loyalty to the democrat party. That IjeBos guy in particular is a clown. Don’t take him too serious for your own mental health sake.

IjeBos:


The elements of that statute are clear. Knowingly and Intent. The only stray bullets are the FEELS you have injected into it. I think I'm done taking your arguments apart.

LordAdam16:


The way here quiet after it was discovered Saint Biden kept classified documents for 6 years is hilarious.

E shock them.

-Lord

IjeBos:

To prosecute him, they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he knowingly did it and with an intent to keep them. Speaks to the competency of his team, but not all stupid actions are illegal. Argue to change the law, not ignore it. [/color]

SlyFoxxLivesOn:


Does this show intent bro? Why wasn’t she indicted?

Dumb fool. Democrat party slave boy.

benalvino3:


You mean he didn't know when he took the documents and abandon them? what are you people even smoking?

benalvino3:


nope, it does not show any intent.
they are smoking that shyt again

Emoc:
Omo see epistle na
Defense minister, always defending rubbish.

Branson, branson, braaanson!

How many times did I call you?

IjeBos:


Getting close. Even a declassified document would still be government property and not for Trump to keep. Even with evidence that Trump declassified them (There is 0 evidence yet and hasn't even claimed so in court), he still would have to return them. The difference in the Biden situation, Biden handed over everything that was in the same place as the documents that were classified out of an abundance of caution so the government can look and see what is theirs. Think about this for a sec. As to the classification, if Trump did declassify them, why not just say so in court and put the matter behind him? Why keep it secret?

Look, even the fact that we are hearing about this tells you something. How easy would it have been for Biden to just destroy the documents and not report them in the first location and even the 2nd? Instead he turned them in and walked into a political firestorm.

And they have only been found in 2 locations.

Emoc:



I really wanna know.

Why are you a staunch supporter of the democrats?
Any good reason?

IjeBos:


I wonder what percentage of that drop was Gas prices.

Emoc:


You started it, so let me finish it.

I neva knew of your existence until you came into my mention.
Just like 1stGenAmerican , you used the same approach typical of arrogant, empty & broke immigrants who are still deluding themselves with the myth that SCAMerica is exceptional.

So I will be giving the both of you regular updates & proofs of the great imperial collapse that has hit SCAMerica.

Stay tuned.

Stay tuned.

IjeBos:


You are absolutely right, it is the the right thing. But when one side is consistently doing the right thing and the other not? Just frustrated.

It's as if you're in a boxing match and the other boxer keeps kicking you in the nuts. And the refs not calling it. When do you start kicking in the nuts as well?

adamusuleiman3:
Incoming republican house committee chairs