JOE BIDEN is Executing an Attempted Sabotage of Candidate Trump B4 the 2024 Election.

a reply to: JIMC5499

Once again the PRA is irrelevant. Trump was in possession of classified documents without a security clearance. He shared the contents of those documents with other people without security clearances.

He hid those documents, failed to comply with a subpoena, lied to investigators about them, and tried to destroy evidence.

Those are the crimes he is accused of. I don't see anything in there that is dependent on him being noncompliant with the PRA.

originally posted by: CoyoteAngels
a reply to: frogs453

Imagine being charged for obstructing justice for moving boxes around in your own residence.

FFS

Keep trying to defend that.

You know it took Obama nearly 8 years to sort all his stuff from office out, right?

He wasn't just moving them around from a secure to an unsecure area, and was moving them out of state to not comply with the subpoena. He also asked his attorney to destroy government records and also to "pluck out" some to not return.

Keep spinning it however you like, but that is not what occurred.

And Nara was in control of President Obama's records, which is how it is supposed to be.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JIMC5499

Once again the PRA is irrelevant. Trump was in possession of classified documents without a security clearance. He shared the contents of those documents with other people without security clearances.

He hid those documents, failed to comply with a subpoena, lied to investigators about them, and tried to destroy evidence.

Those are the crimes he is accused of. I don't see anything in there that is dependent on him being noncompliant with the PRA.

And again, a response from the DOJ yesterday does mention the PRA:

As for the impact of the Presidential Records Act on this prosecution, any argument that it mandates dismissal of the Indictment or forms a defense to the charges here borders on frivolous. The PRA is not a criminal statute, and in no way purports to address the retention of national security information. The Defendants are, of course, free to make whatever arguments they like for dismissal of the Indictment, and the Government will respond promptly. But they should not be permitted to gesture at a baseless legal argument, call it “novel,” and then claim that the Court will require an indefinite continuance in order to resolve it.

a reply to: nugget1

my guess is a viable third party candidate that would beat them both, hands down. Who that would be is guesswork at this point.

Kennedy / Gabbard?

originally posted by: CloneFarm1000

originally posted by: PurpleFox
a reply to: Klassified
Trump is the People’s choice.

It’s pretty obvious.

If they destroy him then we destroy them.

I think they know this as well.

Enjoy the show.

Already enjoyed that show, it was called Jan. 6th.

Tracked by phone and put on a no fly list, the people sure destroyed them...

Oh, I'm sorry, you are under the impression Jan6th was a real insurrection?
lmao
Bless your little heart

originally posted by: JIMC5499
a reply to: Threadbare

Google "Bill Clinton, sock drawer documents".

That ruling pretty much stated that the President can claim anything as a presidential record. Plain and simple.

.....

You are confused.

First of all, in order for an ex-President to claim that he has a legal right to retain records he had possession of while in office, he would have to claim them as "personal" records, not "Presidential" records. A "Presidential" record is--by definition--NOT a personal record and is required by the Presidential Records Act to be turned over to NARA BEFORE a POTUS leaves office.

Second, a genuine document marked "Classified" is by definition not a personal record, whether or not the POTUS declassified it or claims he declassified it. It would still be the property of the government in any case. That's why the DOJ demanded that Trump return all documents "marked classified" and got a warrant from the judge to search for and recover any documents "marked classified"--because there is no possible stretch of the imagination by which documents "marked classified" could be the personal property of the ex-POTUS. Plain and simple.

BTW, I'm not sure which Obama documents you are referring to that were "found in Chicago", but here's what NARA had to say about it in a press release last month:

"Did President Obama take Presidential records to Chicago after he left office?

No. When President Obama left office in 2017, NARA took physical and legal custody of the records of his administration in accordance with the Presidential Records Act. NARA made arrangements to move the roughly 30 million pages of paper Presidential records of the Obama administration to a federally acquired, modified, and secured temporary facility that NARA leased in Hoffman Estates, IL, which meets NARA’s requirements for records storage and security. NARA moved the records to Hoffman Estates because of the intention of President Obama to build a Presidential Library in the Chicago area.

Subsequently, former President Obama decided not to fund, build, endow, and donate a physical Presidential Library to NARA (his foundation is building a privately operated Presidential Center that will not have archival storage for any Presidential records). Instead, the Obama Foundation agreed to help pay for the cost of digitizing the unclassified paper records and for the cost of moving the classified and unclassified records from NARA’s temporary facility in Hoffman Estates to other NARA-controlled facilities (for which NARA otherwise would have to pay). A September 2018 Letter of Intent from the Obama Foundation to the Archivist of the United States addresses Obama’s commitment to paying for these costs; but it in no way suggests that Obama had physical custody of any Presidential records. As NARA stated in September 2022, neither former President Obama nor his foundation “had possession or control over the [Presidential] records” of his administration."

www.archives.gov...

a reply to: 1947boomer
Most of your problems lie in the fact that you believe known liars. The same ppl that have lied straight to your face with no remorse for over 7 years.

That’s not anyone else’s fault but your own.

a reply to: PurpleFox

Says the person that believes Trump.

a reply to: frogs453

The precedent for that was set by Hillary. She destroyed 33 THOUSAND emails that were under subpoena and actually took hammers to hardware. Remember 'you mean like wipe it with a cloth'. A mockery was made of the DoJ.
And she wasn't even elected to her office. She was an appointee. The people didnt get to weigh in on her top secret clearance like they do for elected people, like they do for POTUS.

Pluck out the documents? yeah, like do we have to let them sort thru all my personal stuff or can we pluck out the ones they want. Same as 'find me the votes', not new ones, bad ones. It's all on context.

Nobody was shown details of national security info in that interview where he had been sorting out documents from one of his boxes and complained to the interviewer about how silly it all was. Again, context.

I dont' think Trump is an effective leader. I think he is a much better firebrand. I dont support his campaign at this time. If he gets the nomination, then I will hold my nose and support him again.

The more dangerous pick is to vote for Biden or any current DNC pick.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Her team actually instructed her IT company not to delete anything once they received the subpoena. An employee at the IT company had an "Oh #" moment after he remembered Hillary's team had instructed them months before to setup a rule to delete emails after 60 days. He then proceeded to delete the emails that were supposed to be deleted months before.

Hillary's instructions to the IT company are all documented in texts and emails.

As for the claim that equipment was destroyed after the subpoena was received, that never happened.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: PurpleFox

Says the person that believes Trump.

One person, who has been right about most (important) things. The man literally everyone loved and trusted prior to his walk down the golden escalator.

As opposed to

A trillion dollar media industrial complex that have lemmings like you brainwashed.

It’s you, not me.

Trump and their supporters have screwed up the race for 2024. Yea, losing isn't fun but all they had to
do was watch Biden screw up everything and came back stronger for 2024 election. Trump pointed out a
women in a photo that wasn't even his wife. Trump sabotaged his return...Liberals just taking advantaged
of his mistakes....

a reply to: Threadbare

Right. Her illegal IT guy. Her personal server guy. To conduct govt business. Away from spying FOIA requests. Away from the system every other govt employee used to conduct govt business. That guy?

You uniformed people fall for anything team donk comes up with to cover their asses.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Please provide the law that makes the email server illegal.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: nugget1

my guess is a viable third party candidate that would beat them both, hands down. Who that would be is guesswork at this point.

Kennedy / Gabbard?

Kennedy is a gung-ho climate change advocate, and extremely anti-gun. Will still have too many 2A advocates for that to fly - at least for a few more years, anyway.

a reply to: Threadbare

Here you go: (you could have found it yourself by googling: federal government email policy

Pay particular closely to FOIA requirements which are predicated on the idea that the PEOPLE own the government records those that are not classified may be reviewed by anyone anywhere after filing the request and paying for the reproduction.

Particularly since you've decided that Trump doesn't own those records.

Enjoy!



www.opm.gov...

a reply to: SideEyeEverything

We have no real say in the matter any longer and I'm frankly surprised anyone here at ATS doesn't know that already.

I think a lot do, but are holding out hope they're wrong - or some mythical hero will appear at the last minute and save us all. But then, we'll all be saying 'he/she's too good to be true; he/she must be the Anti-Christ'.

originally posted by: nugget1

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: nugget1

my guess is a viable third party candidate that would beat them both, hands down. Who that would be is guesswork at this point.

Kennedy / Gabbard?

Kennedy is a gung-ho climate change advocate, and extremely anti-gun. Will still have too many 2A advocates for that to fly - at least for a few more years, anyway.

I'm glad you brought that up. You reminded me of this from yesterday...
RFK Jr.: ‘Climate Change Is Being Used to Control Us Through Fear’

That still leaves the guns though.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: PurpleFox

You do know that if Trump had returned the docs, not asked his lawyers to destroy them, not ask him to "pluck out the bad ones", not accept the subpoena, but then hide and move them, lie on the attestation to the government, while discussing Natl Security info to those without clearance, he would not be going through this, right?

This was of his own making. He chose to do these things. He never claimed for 18 months that these were "his" documents to keep, destroy, and talk about. He fully accepted the subpoena to return the documents to the rightful ownership of the government. Yet, just decided these were too valuable to him to return for some reason and it was better to lie to and obstruct the government.

Maybe the president was tired and bitter after being target in the manufactured Trump Russian Collusion case?

So what is real and what is manufactured now a days anyway. But Trump has been unduly and biasedly target by agents of government with little or no consequences for right out false / manufactured evidence.