D.C. Court of Appeals made a horrible ruling against Trump

a reply to: WingDingLuey

You can download the pdf here

It's time to do what the Declaration demands of the people and take care of things. Relying on the criminal government is not an option any longer. They are literally destroying the country and we either take it back or we let things take their course to destruction.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Lazy88

Again, Trump's charges are all related to him refusing to turning them over, obstructing turning them over, and lying that they all were turned over.

Please point to any of the others since the 80s who refused to do so, and we can discuss.

Bull.

You are basing your answers on what they are telling you to be fact, when the “facts” they are telling you are probably not the REAL facts.

a reply to: RazorV66

Because again, he is being charged with his refusal, lying and obstruction in regards to returning government property. Again, please point to another case of the same and we can have a further discussion.

a reply to: Threadbarer

What actions? That he told supporters to peacefully protest? That he told supporters not to attack police officers? That he told people to stop and go home?

a reply to: frogs453

The grand jury stated the evidence of such was enough to indict. He will be able to defend doing so, or show the "facts" don't exist as stated in the indictment.

a reply to: Boomer1947

We are not in any wars and were not when Obama was in. All these drone strikes are unilateral decisions made by one person

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Boomer1947

I bet a few in the world would still like to get to Obama…

Despite Obama’s new executive order, U.S. drone policy may still violate international law

By Ben Jones
July 7, 2016 at 9:00 a.m. EDT

www.washingtonpost.com...< br /> W

BTW, I’m not personally justifying either Obama’s actions or Trump’s actions in these cases. I’m just pointing out that because both were acting as Commander-in-Chief at the time, they were performing a Constitutionally mandated function. That makes it an official action and raises the bar quite a bit for bringing criminal charges.

As a counterexample, there is no place in the Constitution that says one of the duties of a POTUS is to pay hush money to a porn star and then lie about it on official forms. That makes it a personal action, not an official action.

a reply to: norhoc4

INDICTMENT as to DONALD J. TRUMP

originally posted by: norhoc4
a reply to: Boomer1947

We are not in any wars and were not when Obama was in. All these drone strikes are unilateral decisions made by one person

Yes and that one person is the Commander-in-Chief.

Also, the Constitution does not require there to be a declaration of war for the POTUS to act as CIC.

originally posted by: AlexandrosOMegas
It's time to do what the Declaration demands of the people and take care of things. Relying on the criminal government is not an option any longer. They are literally destroying the country and we either take it back or we let things take their course to destruction.

You go first.

I don’t understand though, people here keep claiming there was no insurrection. So why would Trump be trying to claim presidential immunity, if there was no insurrection in the first place?

originally posted by: AlexandrosOMegas
It's time to do what the Declaration demands of the people and take care of things. Relying on the criminal government is not an option any longer. They are literally destroying the country and we either take it back or we let things take their course to destruction.

Who is “WE”?

Would that be everyone that agrees with you?

This is a very diverse country of laws — that apply to ALL citizens.

Trump is a citizen. Nothing more at this time.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Lazy88



Please point to any of the others since the 80s who refused to do so, and we can discuss.

Didn’t like you proved banana republic.

There is no intent. The law is the documents have to be stored in an area appropriate to their classification. Any divergence of that is punishable by law. The whole intent thing is BS.

Any other person would be able to show they have been unreasonably and repeatedly harassed by the federal government, the government has broken laws through that harassment, prosecutors are using biased juries, there is no fair trial(s), and lack of punishment for those that didn’t even have presidential powers over classification that have set a precedence. But, because of Trump derangement syndrome. We are just going to turn a blind eye to equal application of the law, not use the same lack precedence of law. Trump isn’t the threat to the rule of law and the constitution.

originally posted by: Annee

This is a very diverse country of laws — that apply to ALL citizens.

So? Police officers are not granted special protections?

a reply to: Lazy88

Trump will have the opportunity to defend that the PRA does not apply to his Presidency and that he had every right to obstruct and lie to the government.

a reply to: frogs453

What about when Obama did not like those journalists and he went after them? It was personal and not part of his capacity as President. Right?

That is the slippery slope.

Hell, any president that started a conflict can be charged since they did not declare a war through Congress.
The CR's are illegal and against the Constitution so lets arrest Congress and the Cabinet and the POTUS.

Qualified Immunity

The doctrine of qualified immunity protects state and local officials, including law enforcement officers, from individual liability unless the official violated a clearly established constitutional right.

The evolution of qualified immunity began in 1871 when Congress adopted 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which makes government employees and officials personally liable for money damages if they violate a person’s federal constitutional rights. State and local police officers may be sued under § 1983. Until the 1960s, few § 1983 lawsuits were successfully brought. In 1967, the Supreme Court recognized qualified immunity as a defense to § 1983 claims. In 1982, the Supreme Court adopted the current test for the doctrine. Qualified immunity is generally available if the law a government official violated isn’t “clearly established.”

If qualified immunity applies, money damages aren’t available even if a constitutional violation has occurred. If qualified immunity doesn’t apply, while the government employee or official technically is responsible for money damages, the government entity virtually always pays. So qualified immunity protects states and local governments from having to pay money damages for actions not yet deemed unconstitutional by a court.

www.ncsl.org...

Let’s get to a real issue. The president is supposed to be the elected civilian to oversee the power of the military. To what extent should the law interfere with that ability as in a president kept classified documents if the individual wanted to act as a whistleblower for lack of a better term…..

a reply to: Lazy88

(a)Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

18 U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

The law is actually pretty clear about intent being required.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Lazy88

Trump will have the opportunity to defend that the PRA does not apply to his Presidency and that he had every right to obstruct and lie to the government.

What proof do you have of lies? The same government apparatus that lied about Trump Russia Collusion.

Obstructing while he is innocent? When the Elected civilian should have power over the classification system? And how does “classification” get to trump that power and his freedom of speech.