Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 14
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:02:54 AM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

THEY DID
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Him declassifying them isn't actually a defense to the charges.  The only viable defense is that the records were public and/or the records were not related to national defense.  This is why the recording was basically a slam dunk case because he explicitly says that the documents are not public and they are from DOD and related to national defense.

If it's a slam dunk, why didn't they charge him for those documents?

THEY DID
Citation needed.

ETA - I'm feeling nice, so I'll save you some trouble...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-memo-not-among-the-31-records-underlying-charges-in-trump-federal-indictment/
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:04:33 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

If it's a slam dunk, why didn't they charge him for those documents?
View Quote


I would imagine that being pragmatic from the prosecutors’s standpoint, there is no difference between a 100 count indictment and a 30 count indictment. He is facing a maximum sentence of like 400 years if convicted as it is.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:05:59 AM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Ok. So which one of the charges brought against him relate to this tape?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:


The law doesn't require the information related to national defense has to be specified.  If I steal and willfully retain classified national defense information, record a tape detailing that I stole and retained this information then destroyed the documents I still committed the crime.

Ok. So which one of the charges brought against him relate to this tape?


Per the indictment the charges for 18 USC 793 subsection e)
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:08:04 AM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I would imagine that being pragmatic from the prosecutors's standpoint, there is no difference between a 100 count indictment and a 30 count indictment. He is facing a maximum sentence of like 400 years if convicted as it is.
View Quote

Oh, come on...

So they just chose to omit the only one they have a "confession" on because, "we've already put him through so much"?

You can't be serious.


Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:08:14 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Citation needed.

ETA - I'm feeling nice, so I'll save you some trouble...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-memo-not-among-the-31-records-underlying-charges-in-trump-federal-indictment/
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Him declassifying them isn't actually a defense to the charges.  The only viable defense is that the records were public and/or the records were not related to national defense.  This is why the recording was basically a slam dunk case because he explicitly says that the documents are not public and they are from DOD and related to national defense.

If it's a slam dunk, why didn't they charge him for those documents?

THEY DID
Citation needed.

ETA - I'm feeling nice, so I'll save you some trouble...

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-memo-not-among-the-31-records-underlying-charges-in-trump-federal-indictment/

You realize that you only need evidence of a crime to be charged right? Like if you beat your wife to death on video and they never find the body, you're still getting indicted for Murder 1.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:08:33 AM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Per the indictment the charges for 18 USC 793 subsection e)
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:


The law doesn't require the information related to national defense has to be specified.  If I steal and willfully retain classified national defense information, record a tape detailing that I stole and retained this information then destroyed the documents I still committed the crime.

Ok. So which one of the charges brought against him relate to this tape?


Per the indictment the charges for 18 USC 793 subsection e)

You're wrong.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:10:53 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

You realize that you only need evidence of a crime to be charged right? Like if you beat your wife to death on video and they never find the body, you're still getting indicted for Murder 1.
View Quote

You're talking in generalities, when we're having a discussion on specifics. He was not charged for any documents discussed at that table.


Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:19:53 AM EDT
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Oh, come on...

So they just chose to omit the only one they have a "confession" on because, "we've already put him through so much"?

You can't be serious.


View Quote


Well like I said, he is being charged in the southern district of Florida, and the indictment only contains allegations of crimes committed at Mar-a-Lago. The taped audio was from his club in New Jersey.

And it’s not the only one. The indictment contains a second audio transcript, where Trump more or less says “I shouldn’t be showing you this… but come take a look.”

ETA: And no, it has nothing to do with Trump being “put through so much”.  It would have to do with the length of a trial and the jury. But I’m just speculating.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:24:53 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Well like I said, he is being charged in the southern district of Florida, and the indictment only contains allegations of crimes committed at Mar-a-Lago. The taped audio was from his club in New Jersey.

And it's not the only one. The indictment contains a second audio transcript, where Trump more or less says "I shouldn't be showing you this  but come take a look."
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Oh, come on...

So they just chose to omit the only one they have a "confession" on because, "we've already put him through so much"?

You can't be serious.




Well like I said, he is being charged in the southern district of Florida, and the indictment only contains allegations of crimes committed at Mar-a-Lago. The taped audio was from his club in New Jersey.

And it's not the only one. The indictment contains a second audio transcript, where Trump more or less says "I shouldn't be showing you this  but come take a look."

I'm sure we'll see associated charges if they think they have sufficient evidence. But, that will have to be for another thread. In the here and now, this audio means very little.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:28:17 AM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I'm sure we'll see associated charges if they think they have sufficient evidence. But, that will have to be for another thread. In the here and now, this audio means very little.
View Quote


Sure, it’s just the indictment.  The prosecution will ultimately have to present their evidence, and make their case, at trial in front of a jury.  If that tape plays a part in that, I’m sure they’ll include it.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 12:43:30 PM EDT
[#11]
Heard on the radio they're taking SS agents to testify to the grand jury about what Trump was up to on January 6th, they seemed certain at this point there would be 87 more indictments coming...

Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 12:44:21 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


A cop wanting people to post pictures of their guns or be banned. How rich. Has it ever crossed your mind that it is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS? I bet not.

What litmus test should we give you, Mr. Police Officer?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
When a poster constantly attacks others and claims they're communists, leftists, Biden voters,  etc because they don't support a certain candidate's anti-gun stance. It is laughable, especially when that poster can't/refuses to prove they're a gun owner.

This is a gun forum first and foremost. One of the goals for Arfcom by the late great Arfcom Founder, Edward Avila, was to promote, protect, and advance gun rights.

Having people here promote anti-gun candidates goes against that. We, the collective membership should be vigilant and make sure people of ulterior motives are not given safe refuge here. They should be expunged and excommunicated.

Proving one simply owns firearms is a very simple litmus test.




A cop wanting people to post pictures of their guns or be banned. How rich. Has it ever crossed your mind that it is NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS? I bet not.

What litmus test should we give you, Mr. Police Officer?


I haven't been a cop since 2020.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 12:51:52 PM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Yes, we can agree on that.

However, Trump is a soundbite machine that is extremely easy to take out of context. Love him or hate him, he's braggadocios and doesn't think or care about how his words can be used against him. I suspect this audio is another example of exactly that.

He can be dumb, but he's not stupid. I'd be shocked if he was actually flipping through and passing around classified documents during this recorded interview.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the DOJ knows that, and knows this particular piece of evidence isn't going anywhere in the court room, so they are getting their money's worth out of it though the leak.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Lol


Well, at least I'm happy we can both at least agree the audio isn't an AI fake, because there were a whole bunch of posters in this thread who were talking trash believing it was exactly that.

Yes, we can agree on that.

However, Trump is a soundbite machine that is extremely easy to take out of context. Love him or hate him, he's braggadocios and doesn't think or care about how his words can be used against him. I suspect this audio is another example of exactly that.

He can be dumb, but he's not stupid. I'd be shocked if he was actually flipping through and passing around classified documents during this recorded interview.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the DOJ knows that, and knows this particular piece of evidence isn't going anywhere in the court room, so they are getting their money's worth out of it though the leak.

He sure is a sound bite machine and needs to learn when to jeep his mouth shut.

Veteran Reporter Points Out Key Passage in Mark Meadows Biography Undercutting Trump's Latest Docs Defense

The reason a recording exists of Trump allegedly discussing classified documents with people without clearance is because a ghostwriter was working with Meadows on his memoir. That book, The Chief’s Chief, includes a prologue by the ghostwriter wherein he discusses following Meadows around while he worked with Trump. Veteran journalist Robert Mackey posted the excerpt on Twitter and pointed out:

Seems overlooked that Mark Meadows’s memoir undercuts Trump’s claim that he showed the book’s ghostwriter and publisher articles, not a war plan.

The excerpt Mackey posted, from the prologue of The Chief’s Chief, indicates that the papers were exactly what Trump is describing in the audio — a plan from General Mark Milley to attack Iran:

The president recalls a four-page report typed up by Mark Milley himself. It contained the general’s own plan to attack Iran, deploying massive numbers of troops, something he urged President Trump to do more than once during his presidency.



Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:09:05 PM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sure, it’s just the indictment.  The prosecution will ultimately have to present their evidence, and make their case, at trial in front of a jury.  If that tape plays a part in that, I’m sure they’ll include it.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

I'm sure we'll see associated charges if they think they have sufficient evidence. But, that will have to be for another thread. In the here and now, this audio means very little.


Sure, it’s just the indictment.  The prosecution will ultimately have to present their evidence, and make their case, at trial in front of a jury.  If that tape plays a part in that, I’m sure they’ll include it.

The audio recording is irrelevant and should be thrown out at trial. It doesn't relate to any of the charges.

Next!
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:28:44 PM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

The audio recording is irrelevant and should be thrown out at trial. It doesn't relate to any of the charges.

Next!
View Quote


Yeah?

They teach rules of evidence during your second year of law school, correct?
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 1:46:46 PM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Yeah?

They teach rules of evidence during your second year of law school, correct?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

The audio recording is irrelevant and should be thrown out at trial. It doesn't relate to any of the charges.

Next!


Yeah?

They teach rules of evidence during your second year of law school, correct?

Yeah, when the evidence has no relation to a charge and adds no value to the trial other than to taint the jurors for the prosecution and interfere with an election, then it should be thrown out.

Unless you're rooting for the government and prosecution instead of a fair trial, then you would say it's direct evidence if not for the missing(non-existent) classified document.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 2:16:20 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Yeah, when the evidence has no relation to a charge and adds no value to the trial other than to taint the jurors for the prosecution and interfere with an election, then it should be thrown out.

Unless you're rooting for the government and prosecution instead of a fair trial, then you would say it's direct evidence if not for the missing(non-existent) classified document.
View Quote


Well, I'm neither the judge nor jury.  But if I were, I would consider the recorded audio to be key prosecutorial evidence to counter Trump's likely defense strategy that "I was President and I declassified everything before I left office".
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 6:55:11 PM EDT
[#18]
Hahah. Fucking hilarious how many have been taken in by bullshit once again.

I seriously can not understand how so many believe anything the media says and takes it at face value.  How stupid.

He's literally not charged for it.  Probably because what he was talking about was very public and made so by the cocksucker Milley who is probably posting in this thread right now.

Milley's claim.

In the context of that it's rather obvious that the snippet of audio we get from CNN (which was recorded AFTER the article was published) is him referring to declassifying documents to show Milley is a liar.

Hey just wondering, but where's the rest of that audio from CNN?  Why haven't they released more so we can know the context?  Probably because they don't have to and idiots will still believe everything they say so long as it's publicly damaging to Trump.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 8:34:41 PM EDT
[#19]
Top Trump campaign aide identified as key individual in classified docs indictment

One of the top advisers on Donald Trump's 2024 campaign is among the individuals identified but not named by special counsel Jack Smith in his indictment against the former president for allegedly mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House and obstructing the government's efforts to retrieve them, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

Susie Wiles, one of Trump's most trusted advisers leading his second reelection effort, is the individual singled out in Smith's indictment as the "PAC Representative" who Trump is alleged to have shown a classified map to in August or September of 2021, sources said.

Trump, in the indictment, is alleged to have shown the classified map of an unidentified country to Wiles while discussing a military operation that Trump said "was not going well," while adding that he "should not be showing the map" to her and "not to get too close."

The alleged exchange between Trump and Wiles is the second of two instances detailed by prosecutors in the indictment showing how Trump allegedly disclosed classified information in private meetings after leaving the White House. The first was a July 2021 audio recording, obtained by ABC News earlier this week, in which Trump is heard showing people what he describes as a "secret" and "highly confidential" document relating to Iran.

ABC News has reported the meeting involved people who were helping Trump's former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, with his memoir, according to sources. Smith's team has spoken to the meeting's attendees, which included the writers helping Meadows with his book and at least two aides to Trump, according to sources.



In this Aug. 8, 2022, file photo, Susie Wiles, a lobbyist and seasoned Republican strategist who ran Donald Trump's successful 2016 Florida effort, is shown.


It does not appear, based on the indictment, that Trump was charged specifically for his retention of either the Iran document or the classified map shown to the person identified as Wiles. Rather, the two instances speak to what Smith's prosecutors see as Trump's state of mind in how he handled and sometimes shared classified materials in his possession after leaving the White House, sources said, as well as his alleged efforts to subvert the government’s efforts to get the documents back.
Link Posted: 6/29/2023 9:02:02 PM EDT
[#20]
It's a nothing burger.  There's nothing there actually damning, particularly if you don't rip shit out of context like CNN loves to do.
Link Posted: 6/30/2023 12:15:59 AM EDT
[#21]
Trump 2024 aide who allegedly saw classified map works for China lobbying firm

A top Trump campaign adviser — who apparently was shown classified documents by the former president — has a top post at a lobbying firm serving Chinese entities that potentially pose a national security threat and help Beijing commit human rights abuses.

Susie Wiles works on Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign and is co-chair of Mercury Public Affairs, which has taken millions of dollars in recent years from Chinese companies such as Yealink, Hikvision and Alibaba.

Wiles, a veteran of several GOP campaigns including Ron DeSantis’ 2018 run for Florida governor, has also been identified as one of several people to whom the 45th president allegedly revealed sensitive material, ABC News reported late Wednesday.

According to a 37-count indictment brought earlier this month by Special Counsel Jack Smith, a “PAC representative” — reportedly Wiles — visited the 77-year-old ex-president at his Bedminster, NJ, golf club in August or September 2021 and was improperly shown a classified map of a foreign nation.

Trump told the person “he should not be showing the map” and “to not get too close,” prosecutors say.

If confirmed, the episode is further complicated by both Wiles’ high standing in the Trump campaign and her firm’s lobbying for potential hostile entities — though a search of the Justice Department’s registry of foreign agents indicated Wiles had not worked directly for those clients.

“Susie could put Trump away for years in just one minute of testimony to Jack Smith,” a rival GOP operative told The Post. “She’s got Trump by the balls, which means she can name her price for her loyalty and Trump can’t say no.”





Link Posted: 6/30/2023 12:56:07 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

THEY DID
View Quote



THEY did not.  The "Iranian War Plans" documents are not listed in the indictment.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-memo-not-among-the-31-records-underlying-charges-in-trump-federal-indictment/
Page / 14
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top