It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump indicted in classified documents case in Florida

page: 67
38
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Reply to frogs453 and MrInquisitivr:

I've put forth my theory on the matter based on the evidence and information that I have come across and examined over last last few years. It looks like there are actually 601 pages within our election integrity threads.

Ultimately, I do not want to argue, or provide supporting evidence, too much, to a theory, that if true, would expose or hurt national security, or that could make me a target of a weaponized NS apparatus.

However, to answer some of your questions, I would suggest that if my theory is true, the level secrecy in play could be so high, that Trump could get himself in actual trouble by disclosing any information he had or has on this matter, and I would say that he most certainly wouldn't have been allowed to declassify that stuff on his own.



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: IndieA

Now that Trump's hand-picked defense attorneys have their Top Secret clearances, they can know what he knows.




posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

"Hand picked"?!!!!!

Thanks for the laugh!




posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 02:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: carewemust

"Hand picked"?!!!!!

Thanks for the laugh!


I always thought people picked lawyers by throwing a bunch of randoms in a bingo tumbler and see what pops out



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

Or, you get to hand pick out of the ones left out of the ones who won't touch your case with a bargepole......



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: vonclod

Or, you get to hand pick out of the ones left out of the ones who won't touch your case with a bargepole......


Some truth to that I bet.

As much as I dislike Trump, I do think this is "mostly" political, but he doesn't get any of my sympathy.



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: carewemust

"Hand picked"?!!!!!

Thanks for the laugh!



Whatever, All he needs are lawyers who can throw the big delay tactics that Democrats like to utilize to save people like Hunter Biden.




posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

If he's as innocent as you keep claiming and he plans on using this case to expose all the bad actors, why would he want to keep delaying the trial?



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: IndieA
Reply to frogs453 and MrInquisitivr:

I've put forth my theory on the matter based on the evidence and information that I have come across and examined over last last few years. It looks like there are actually 601 pages within our election integrity threads.

Ultimately, I do not want to argue, or provide supporting evidence, too much, to a theory, that if true, would expose or hurt national security, or that could make me a target of a weaponized NS apparatus.

However, to answer some of your questions, I would suggest that if my theory is true, the level secrecy in play could be so high, that Trump could get himself in actual trouble by disclosing any information he had or has on this matter, and I would say that he most certainly wouldn't have been allowed to declassify that stuff on his own.


Trump could have gotten himself in trouble for declassifying it, huh? What a convenient hypothesis. Put forward an unsubstantiated, far-out claim based on hearsay, and the provide an equally unprovable explanation to dismiss the most obvious and glaring flaw in your argument. Why would he have taken such documents then in the first place, to release upon his death? That doesn't sound very Trump-like. Seems that releasing them while he was president and still had power, and it could have caused him to remain president and take steps against the "conspiracists involved" was the time to do so.

Of course, you and others can believe whatever made-up hypothesis you want to. Obviously there is no stopping you from doing so. But don't expect rational, critical thinkers to buy such malarkey.



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: MrInquisitive

You twisted my words.

I suggested that he wasn't allowed to declassify such high level intel, and otherwise disclosing those secrets could have gotten him in actual trouble.

Presidents take with them a number of documents for a number of reasons. Only Trump knows why he took what he did. You make a lot of assumptions, jump to conclusions, and ignore too many possiblities. I don't have all the answers. I have questions and a theory based on all of my research. I've already stated why I don't want to argue or present all my evidence and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or put anything on blast that's already been made public.

I'm also not trying to poke a bear, just to poke a bear. I have seen evidence that great injustices have taken place, and I have hope that talking about them in an open forum can help lead to corrective measures.



posted on Jul, 23 2023 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: carewemust

If he's as innocent as you keep claiming and he plans on using this case to expose all the bad actors, why would he want to keep delaying the trial?


The overall situation is very FLUID. When Biden's cheat succeeded with putting him in the White House, the overall consensus started to shift. It now appears as if Team Trump feels he would have far more leverage to reveal "secrets" and prosecute high-level criminals simultaneously, as the U.S. President.




posted on Jul, 24 2023 @ 01:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: IndieA
a reply to: MrInquisitive

You twisted my words.

I suggested that he wasn't allowed to declassify such high level intel, and otherwise disclosing those secrets could have gotten him in actual trouble.

Presidents take with them a number of documents for a number of reasons. Only Trump knows why he took what he did. You make a lot of assumptions, jump to conclusions, and ignore too many possiblities. I don't have all the answers. I have questions and a theory based on all of my research. I've already stated why I don't want to argue or present all my evidence and I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or put anything on blast that's already been made public.

I'm also not trying to poke a bear, just to poke a bear. I have seen evidence that great injustices have taken place, and I have hope that talking about them in an open forum can help lead to corrective measures.


I honestly wasn't trying to twist your words. Was just trying to make the best sense out of them that I could. From what I have read up on regarding the declassifying of information by the president, only documents having to deal with nuclear security and other highly sensitive, compartmentalized national security issues need to be signed off on by other agencies for the president to declassify them, in particular the Dept. of Energy. I really don't know how documents pertaining to some illegal program to fix the presidential election and use $8 billion in un-allotted taxpayer funds -- or private funds for that matter -- would first of all be considered a legitimate, legal government document, and there seems to be no rule that would preclude the president from declassifying such a document.


How does declassification work?

Information is usually declassified through a process known as “automatic declassification” (which is, in practice, anything but automatic) that takes place after information has been classified for 25 years. However, information may be declassified sooner if it is marked with an earlier declassification date; if the original classification authority who classified the information, their successor or supervisor, or another designated official determines that it no longer meets the standards for classification; or if the agency head or a designated senior agency official determines that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the need for protection. The decision to declassify is made in consultation with all agencies that have an interest in the information.

Information designated as Restricted Data or Formerly Restricted Data is subject to separate rules. By statute, Restricted Data may only be declassified by authorized Department of Energy officials. Although the statute is less clear on this point, it has consistently been interpreted to give the Departments of Energy and Defense sole authority to declassify Formerly Restricted Data, an interpretation enshrined in agency regulations. Neither category is eligible for “automatic” declassification.

Does the president have the authority to declassify information? Yes and no.

There are exceptions, however. The Constitution also provides Congress with significant authority in the area of national security. In areas where the president and Congress share power, Congress may choose to legislate in ways that limit the president’s authority. For example, because Congress has specified that only the Department of Energy may declassify certain nuclear information, the president has no authority to do so.

Notably, some of the documents the FBI retrieved from Mar-a-Lago had Formerly Restricted Data classification markings on them. Formerly Restricted Data can include information about the nuclear stockpile size, current and past locations of nuclear weapons, weapons yield information (i.e., how powerful they are), and above- or below-ground test results. Under long-standing interpretations of the Atomic Energy Act, such information may be declassified only by the Departments of Energy and Defense.


Government Classification and the Mar-a-Lago Documents

So, unless it has to do with nuclear secrets, or possibly other very compartmentalized areas legislated by congress, the president has the authority to declassify material. Is your next argument that congress has passed secret legislation to keep matters regarding illegal election tampering top secret, and only declassifiable by some alphabet agency? I'd think some congress members on both sides of the aisle would've raised a stink about this by now.

And getting back to the original indictment, I trust you are aware that there were many classified documents that were most certainly about matters other than domestic elections. And to be clear, I am not acknowledging that there were any documents on domestic elections, that is just your supposition.


[Jack] Smith said that violations of laws protecting national defense information “put our country at risk.” Smith pointed to the fact that Trump’s status as a former president shouldn’t factor into a decision to bring a charge, saying, “We have one set of laws in this country and they apply to everyone.”

The documents were produced by some of the most secretive agencies in all of government, including the CIA, the National Security Agency, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency that analyzes images generated by the country’s most closely guarded satellite capabilities, and the Department of Energy that is responsible for safeguarding the country’s nuclear weapons stockpile.

In one of the most potentially damning sections of the indictment, prosecutors allege that Trump showed classified documents to others on two occasions, and appeared to know that what he was showing off were government secrets. An audio recording from July 2021, has Trump telling a writer and publisher meeting with him at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey, that he was showing them a plan of attack prepared by the Department of Defense. Trump says that plan is “secret” and “highly confidential.” During the conversation, Trump says “as president I could have declassified it” and “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

The indictment also describes a moment in August or September 2021 at Trump’s Bedminster club when Trump let a political supporter look at a classified military map. Trump showed a “representative of his political action committee a classified map related to a military operation and told the representative that he should not be showing it to the representative.


What’s in the Trump Classified Documents Indictment

It's purdee clear that these documents dealt with matters other than domestic election rigging, hearsay claims to the contrary notwithstanding. Even if they were about the election, there is no law keeping him from declassifying and publicizing the information. And this is the third time in this thread that I have linked to this article about the president's authority to declassify documents. It's getting very tiresome to have to point out the same thing over and over again to various specious arguments in defense of Trump, based on declassification laws.



posted on Jul, 24 2023 @ 01:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: carewemust

If he's as innocent as you keep claiming and he plans on using this case to expose all the bad actors, why would he want to keep delaying the trial?


The overall situation is very FLUID. When Biden's cheat succeeded with putting him in the White House, the overall consensus started to shift. It now appears as if Team Trump feels he would have far more leverage to reveal "secrets" and prosecute high-level criminals simultaneously, as the U.S. President.



Biden's cheat? What do you mean? You claiming he cheated in the 2020 election? Then provide some documented evidence to substantiate your unfounded accusation. You can't just keep uttering BS and expect anyone with critical thinking skills to take you seriously. We already know that you outright lie in your posts, as per this one and my response to it:

Link

And that you never take back your false claims or apologize for them when they are brought to your attention.

Why would anyone with any sense except anything you write, when you have been shown to completely mischaracterize the content of links that you do cite as evidence of your POV?

The only reason he wants to put off the trial until after the election is because the trial will hurt him and he'll likely be found guilty, which will lessen his election chances, so he wants the best chance for himself to get re-elected and then attempt to pardon himself for any legal sentences he may get in a post-election trial, hoping that his hand-picked, corrupt, criminal, venal SCOTUS majority will back him up.



posted on Jul, 24 2023 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: MrInquisitive

Man, quite the bully. I guess it is hard for you to except that 2020 was a steal and make so many acceptions for your own opinions.



posted on Jul, 25 2023 @ 02:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: MrInquisitive

Man, quite the bully. I guess it is hard for you to except that 2020 was a steal and make so many acceptions for your own opinions.



I'm a bully because I don't put up with lies, and I don't accept the unsubstantiated claims of deluded and/or mendacious people? You might not like my stridency, but I don't lie, mischaracterize or make things up, and I back up my points with sources, which is a lot more than I can say for most of the folk on your side of the aisle.

It's ridiculous that the same people who are claiming Trump hasn't done anything wrong or broken any laws are the same people claiming Biden and most of the rest of the government is guilty of this, that and the other thing. So yeah, I don't have much tolerance for people with major double standards either.

Why would I accept that the 2020 election was stolen when no good evidence has been provided, Trump has lost over 60 cases regarding the matter, and Republicans who won their seats in districts or states that Trump lost aren't claiming that their election was rigged? You election deniers like to make your claims, but you can't back them up with facts. All you can do is throw out ad hominem attacks at persons who don't by your BS.



posted on Jul, 25 2023 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: MrInquisitive

No, for the way you talked to the person who posted.

You can have opinion. We all have them. But you use the same words all of those who have no evidence something did NOT happen.

Ad hominem. Strawman. Gaslight. Tolerance. Election deniers. deluded .

If you are trying to have a conversation why attack? You are relying on the same media and government that lied and locked us up over COVID.

It is called an open mind and some basic critical thinking skills. Thats all. Your sources are not the ultimate truth and neither are those who think there were mules for votes.

Take both stories and somewhere in the middle you the truth.

I do not deny an election. I deny the numbers. No modern day president has garnered almost 10% more votes during a re-election and lost...and only the swing states. The vote dumps are pushed aside because everyone has been conditioned to hate Donald Trump. 24/7 coverage of hate. I have even said he acts like a tool sometimes and cannot shut up be he is the best president we have had in decades. Non-establishment and needs no money. My kind of politician. You can see now, with half the GOP attacking him, why more was not done during his term.

and make sure to check your spelling before someone attacks you for that also...that was the sarcastic part of my last post you may have missed because I hate calling it out but drives me nuts when I read it.

In the end we are all f'd but conversation is fun.



posted on Jul, 27 2023 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Carlos Deoliveira, head of maintenance at MAL, has been indicted. Presumably, he is the maintenance worker that assisted Nauta in hiding boxes and attempted to flood the server room where surveillance footage was stored.



posted on Jul, 27 2023 @ 05:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Threadbare

There are also additional charges against Trump. I haven't read the full superseding indictment yet. The pdf can be downloaded here

I did catch that Carlos was to delete surveillance video because the "boss" wanted it gone. I'll post the relevant texts that were sent from phones, soon from the indictment
edit on 27-7-2023 by frogs453 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2023 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: frogs453

We're now up to 42 charges, although a few of those are specific to Nauta and Deoliveira. When I get a chance later, I'll compare it to the original indictment and see what new charges have been added for Trump. Right off the bat I can say a new document has been added to 18 USC 793e charges.



posted on Jul, 27 2023 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Threadbare

Yes it's a long indictment to read. I believe one additional count of willful retention of national defense information and two additional obstruction counts, related to alleged attempts to delete surveillance video footage.

He is now being charged for the document he was discussing on audio I believe.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join