Below is a longer version of my New York Post column on the recent claim of Hillary Clinton that she has been the subject to a long-standing and unfair “Clinton standard” while denying that there was any classified information found on her private server. In a signature move, Clinton is focusing on the actual classification of emails as opposed to the use of the unsecured server for communications with aides that revealed classified information — the reason why such unsecured servers are dangers to national security.
Here is the column:
“I can’t believe we’re still talking about this, but my emails. . .” The expression of utter incredulity was classic Clinton — she’s selling hats reading “But her emails” for $30 a pop. Hillary Clinton’s disbelief this week was shared by many critics left dumbfounded by her claim her private server contained “zero” classified documents.
But Hillary’s denial of what was found on her server exposes something far more serious than a simply false claim. It reflects establishment figures’ sense of license that they can literally rewrite history with little fear of contradiction by the media.
While calling for limits on free speech over “disinformation,” Hillary has no qualms about falsely denying what published government reports detail.
“As Trump’s problems continue to mount, the right is trying to make this about me again. There’s even a ‘Clinton Standard.’ The fact is that I had zero emails that were classified,” her but-my-emails tweet continued. “Comey admitted he was wrong after he claimed I had classified emails. Trump’s own State Department, under two different Secretaries, found I had no classified emails.”
Virtually everything about that claim is breathtakingly untrue.
Let’s quickly deal with the light lifting before getting back to the “Clinton Standard.”
“Zero emails” were “classified.”
A 2018 Department of Justice inspector general report revealed “81 email chains containing approximately 193 individual emails” were “classified from the CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET levels at the time.” Clinton is echoing her allies’ recent spin that there were only three documents with classification markings among 33,000 emails. It is utter nonsense.
The lack of classification markings in the Clinton email scandal was due in part because these were emails. There is no classification automatically stamped on text being typed out and sent within minutes by aides. While attachments and some emails can have classification markings, the whole point of using secure servers is that emails are created in the moment with inevitable slips in referencing classified material.
Nevertheless, the emails had classified information, including top-secret information tied to “Special Access Programs.” Yet some allies emphasize the inspector general also noted that in some cases there was “conscious effort to avoid sending classified information, by writing around the most sensitive material.” It failed. The emails still contained classified information.
That’s why she was reckless to use her own server: That does not mean that it warranted criminal charges or the mantra “lock her up.” Such mistakes on private servers are more vulnerable to capture by foreign intelligence services. Indeed, according to the FBI, “hostile actors gained access” to some of the information through the emails of Clinton’s associates and aides.
“Comey admitted he was wrong.”
It’s not entirely clear what Hillary is referencing here. But Comey never said there was no classified information in her emails — he said the opposite. He condemned her handling of the classified material while saying it didn’t warrant prosecution.
Comey did backtrack later, but not on this point. He said his “mistake” was in how he described her conduct: “I should’ve worked harder to find a way to convey that it’s more than just the ordinary mistake, but it’s not criminal behavior, and find different words to describe that.”
However, she had “dozens of conversations on email about secret topics” and “I think eight about top-secret topics,” he added. “So if I’m gonna be honest, I have to say somehow it’s more than ordinary sloppiness.”
Hillary has previously referred to different accounts over the precise markings on three emails with actual classification markings. Comey did state later that the classification markings on marked emails were “confidential” rather than one marked “secret.” (Clinton claimed not to know what a “(C)” classification even meant on a document). However, once again, they dealt with marked emails not the disclosure of classified information in the course of communications on the unsecured private server.
“A Clinton Standard.”
Clinton objects that she’s held to a different standard. That’s true — but not for the reason she cites. She’s long been subject to her own standard in brushing off alleged criminal conduct. Indeed, her husband Bill Clinton, personifies a family immunity from such charges. A federal judge and even Democrats concluded that he committed perjury in his sworn statements but he was never charged. Some of those who have clamored for criminal charges against Trump and others for an array of crimes were adamant that Bill Clinton should not be impeached, let alone charged, for the federal crime.
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly avoided criminal charges even as close associates were charged. Many believe she used insider information from a friend at Tyson Foods to reap a huge windfall on cattle futures in the 1970s. No charge. Then there was Whitewater. Bill Clinton later pardoned Susan McDougal, who went to jail in connection to the fraudulent land scheme that involved both Clintons. For Hillary, no charge.
Then there were the key long-sought Whitewater documents. After the case was effectively over, they suddenly appeared. The New York Times called the documents “elusive,” as if they moved by free will. Investigators specifically sought those records, and Clinton’s team denied possession only for them to be found later outside her office. Sound familiar? No charge.
The Clinton Standard is most evident in the email scandal. Clinton’s staff unilaterally destroyed thousands of emails with BleachBit despite being aware in 2014 that Congress and the State Department were seeking the evidence. I know few clients who would have the temerity to order such a unilateral destruction. Her lawyers turned over about 30,000 work-related emails to the State Department and deleted 33,000 others, unilaterally deeming them “personal.”
For a surprisingly long period, Clinton and her staff did not fully cooperate with investigators in refusing to turn over her emails and other evidence to State and DOJ investigators, including laptops holding suspected classified information. That delayed efforts to estimate any national-security damage, but there was no raid.
The FBI cut deals with her aides to secure their cooperation, and even then more classified material was found on the laptop of former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), who was married to top Clinton aide Huma Abedin — 49,000 emails potentially relevant to the Clinton investigation. Again, no charges.
So Hillary inadvertently hit upon one demonstrably true statement. There is a Hillary Clinton Standard, and that’s not good for anything other than hat sales.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
The Clinton standard is only the tip of the iceberg- one external manifestation of the systemic rot that has overtaken the highest levels of the national government.
Equally shocking is that Gary “deep state” Gensler, Biden’s handpicked choice to head the Securities and Exchange Commission, was the Chief Financial Officer for Hillary “what difference, at this point, does it make” Clinton’s 2016 Presidential Campaign. In that role, Gensler was responsible for the Hillary campaign’s financial affairs. We now know that the Hillary campaign laundered the payments for the discredited Steele Dossier through the Perkins Coie Law firm. What role did Mr. Gensler play in approving those payments? How does his obviously close role with Hillary affect his ability to lead the nation’s top securities watchdog agency? Inquiring minds (but not the corporate media or the DOJ, let alone the liberal tolls on this blog) want to know.
Here’s another one that is a little saucier, but no less shocking. Senior FBI official Peter “woody” Strzok, who along with his illicit lovebird and office mate Lisa “I can smell the Trump supporters” Page, rode heard on the disgracefully politicized and highly partisan Russia collusion probe, is married to Melissa “honey, did you tell Lisa you that you loved Hillary” Hodgman, the SEC Associate Director of Enforcement. Could any of us imagine a situation that is any more inbred? One that would give the American people reason to question the ability of the SEC to protect the interests of all Americans, not just Hillary and her cronies in the progressive elite?
And who presides at the top of this fetid dogpile? Joe “we’re at war with the fascist Trump supporters” Biden. Joe’s handpicked choice to head the Department of (Social) Justice, Merrick “at least I didn’t have a secret meeting with Hillary on the airport tarmac” Garland, had his chance for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court dashed when Donald “the great Satan” Trump defeated Hillary in the 2016 election. Yet we’re expected to believe that Uncle Joe and Merrick are technocrats dispassionately manning the helm while the government over which they preside enters its seventh year persecuting their most hated political enemy? Sure. Just chill people. Everything’s cool.
Is there any wonder why there is a Clinton standard? One standard for the progressive elite. And another standard for Americans who have the temerity to question the self-dealing and incessant wick-dipping among the beltway elite. No wonder the Biden regime cowered behind razor wire at Biden’s inauguration. No wonder Biden hid in the basement and still won’t face real questions from the American people. Not that he has the intellectual wherewithal to answer them.
The corrupt beltway insiders have lost the confidence of the American people. Hillary, Biden and their ilk are losing their grip on political power. Their corruption is being exposed. They know it. There is nothing they can do to stop it. And they are terrified.
I don’t recall.
They can and will stop it….because diebold and dominion. Are worth so much. Btw the sec hasn’t ever been on the up n up….in the @ 2004 didn t they just collect govt paychecks while sitting at work watching porn? Or has the memory hole deleted…those articles?
“Understanding Psychosis”
“What is psychosis?”
“The word psychosis is used to describe conditions that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality. When someone becomes ill in this way, it is called a psychotic episode. During a period of psychosis, a person’s thoughts and perceptions are disturbed, and the individual may have difficulty understanding what is real and what is not.”
– NIH, National Institute of Mental Health
________________________________
“The fact is that I had zero emails that were classified.”
– Mrs. Bill Clinton (Hillary), Sep. 6, 2022
________________________________
“Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System” (excerpted)
– Washington, D.C., FBI National Press Office, July 5, 2016
“That’s what we have done. Now let me tell you what we found:
“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
“For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
“None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
“Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
“While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.
“With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.”
Don’t give them a Dmsv” crutch. …..they know exactly what they do and right from wrong. They don’t have psychosis…they are just evil and treasonous lawbreakers. Who believe they are above accountability. We can take the high road without devolving into their “crazy lable” soundly alinsky Marxist division.
We are america……we are….not them ….we are america! Let’s say we loose at the ballot box by their cheating….. They do wanna eat. They do want armies raised. the 15% of rural america a holds all the actual power. Taking down trump or bannon….while popular for tv ratings doesn’t change to “soul” of america….the 15% who supplied the food and cannon fodder….just saying. And we already are doing swell denying them troops….next it’s food. ….or do it seems. We win js!
Bill Clinton’s immutably unethical, immoral and loathsome acts, in and out of the highest office in the land, are momentous. Those contemptible acts will follow him through history. Mrs. Bill Clinton, Hillary, has accomplished nothing but notoriety and failure through her husband. Hillary has followed Bill Clinton invariably. Hillary attached herself to Bill Clinton by acquiring and caching Bill’s secrets, while bearing one child for political purposes and a loose claim to “family.” Bill Clinton is Hillary’s meal ticket. She couldn’t leave Bill if she wanted to. Where on earth would she go? What in the world would she do? Without Bill Clinton and a heaping teaspoon of affirmative action, Mrs. Bill Clinton would have been lucky to hire on at Motel 6.
What may shock most Americans is that “Judicial Branch courts” are more accurate intelligent gatherers and have fewer leaks than any of our Executive Branch security agencies. Courts have a really good record of keeping Grand Jury testimony secret and discovering intelligence separating fact from fiction.
This is not to disparage security agencies, since they deal more in assumptions, educated guesses and theories. Security agencies can’t always place someone under oath or subpoena documents. The problem is these agencies sell “assumptions” as “facts” misleading voters, then they build on that false-foundation leading them in the wrong direction. Agency leaders still do this today.
Courts have better intelligence gathering and keep secrets much better for several reasons. Judges essentially “walk-the-walk” on being loyal to their Oath of Office – it’s not just talk. Executive Branch security agencies don’t always subscribe to their supreme loyalty oath to follow the U.S. Constitution. When agency leaders are disloyal to their oath of office, that act alone creates massive intelligence leaks from their subordinates who are loyal to their oath of office (top managers giving illegal orders that violate their employees’ oath of office).
Courts also “confront” litigants and witnesses under oath. Security agencies give veiled death threats, intimidation and covert punishments to entire groups. Since they don’t know who to punish, they punish everyone without any due process at all.
Maybe our security agencies could improve their systems by learning from their co-equal Judicial Branch on how to accurately obtain, classify and protect secrets? Courts are the leaders on secrecy practices.
May be. Yet I tend to agree. Big picture….once a local judge to placate his cops……made up evidence….to proceed with a case against me……just to shaft them on their desired level of jail punishment…..told the prosecutor ” that’s impossible”. ….. She doesn’t have an attorney and I never assigned her one either” …..judges walk a really find line . Between authoritarianism and liberty…. Rip poole.
Let’s assume everybody’s wrong, what about future reforms?
The system is also flawed. Why could any president remove paper documents anyway? Phones, devices and computer connected to the internet (world wide web) is an “unsafe” technology – information literally traveling through the air.
This internet technology can likely never be made safe. Fortune 500 companies can’t protect online data. According to newspapers, our most secret agencies use manual typewriters and human couriers because they don’t trust this unsafe technology.
Whether you like Trump or Hillary, why did the “system” allow this to happen? How do we reform it?
Pass a new law: all office work to be done with quill pen and ink on parchment.
Signed, a goose farm owner,
time to buy your first firearm David, to protect your geese of course.
😉
2021 National Firearms Survey: Updated Analysis Including Types of Firearms Owned
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4109494
A majority of gun owners (56.2%) indicate that they carry a handgun for self-defense in at least some circumstances, and about 35% of gun owners report carrying a handgun with some frequency. We estimate that approximately 20.7 million gun owners (26.3%) carry a handgun in public under a “concealed carry” regime; and 34.9% of gun owners report that there have been instances in which they had wanted to carry a handgun for self-defense, but local rules did not allow them to carry.
The average gun owner owns about 5 firearms, and handguns are the most common type of firearm owned. 48.0% of gun owners — about 39 million individuals — have owned magazines that hold over 10 rounds (up to 542 million such magazines in total), and 30.2% of gun owners — about 24.6 million individuals — have owned an AR-15 or similarly styled rifle (up to 44 million such rifles in total). Demographically, gun owners are diverse. 42.2% are female and 57.8% are male. Approximately 25.4% of Blacks own firearms, 28.3% of Hispanics own firearms, 19.4% of Asians own firearms, and 34.3% of Whites own firearms. In total, Americans own over 415 million firearms, consisting of approximately 171 million handguns, 146 million rifles, and 98 million shotguns.
According to newspapers, our most secret agencies use manual typewriters and human couriers because they don’t trust this unsafe technology.
Spying on your adversaries is as old as man. It didn’t start with the internet. Information is still the real currency in the world. $trillions worth of transactions take place everday. How much $ get traded in the stock markets of the world? The commodity markets of the world? Life is nothing be tradeoffs, security for speed. What do you do?
Please cite the Constitution for claims with reference to classified materiel.
It is impossible for the chief executive of the executive branch to mishandle materiel which the chief executive of the executive branch alone classifies and/or declassifies.
The Constitution does not confer any power of “classification.”
“Classification” is an internal function of the executive branch.
The legislative branch has no power to usurp the power of the separate but equal executive branch.
Legislation exercising any form of dominion over the executive branch by the legislative branch is unconstitutional, and vice versa.
Under the doctrine of Judicial Review and the powers conferred to it by the Constitution, the Supreme Court must review and find for the president with reference to the classified and unclassified material of the executive branch.
By their sworn oaths, judges and Justices must support the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The judicial branch (i.e. Supreme Court) enjoys the power of Judicial Review.
_____________________________________________________________
Judicial Review in the United States
Abstract
The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.
– DOJ, Office of Justice Programs
___________________________
Primary Documents in American History
Marbury v. Madison
The U.S. Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional. The unanimous opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
– Library of Congress
Jonathan: This is your second column about Hillary Clinton in a week.. What Clinton did pales in comparison to what Donald Trump did in taking so many top secret docs back to Mar-a-Lago. We now know Trump was illegally holding such sensitive national security docs that only a small number of people would be allowed to see them. This column, like the previous one, is simply an attempt to divert attention from Trump’s crimes. One person with inside knowledge of how Trump handled official docs is speaking out.
Ty Cobb, a former WH lawyer for Trump and former federal prosecutor, indicates the authorized FBI search warrant was “comprehensive” and permitted the FBI to “take any box that has a document. You can take any box adjacent to a box that has it, these are pretty broad parameters”. Cobb’s observation pretty much eviscerates you claim the search warrant was “ridiculously broad”.
Cobb has also addressed how Trump dealt with official docs: “The president…was cautioned many times about not tearing up documents. In my own experience, I have to say, there wasn’t really anything quite as consequential as the press reports that I have read. I saw him tear up newspaper articles which sadly, some staffer would have to tape back together at the end of the day. I saw him tear up inconsequential documents, but I never saw him tear up a classified document or something that was important”. This probably explains why Trump was able to steal super classified material and take it back to back to Mar-a-Lago. He wanted to use the docs for some nefarious purpose. As to Trump’s continued false claim the 2020 election was “stolen” from him, Cobb offers this explanation: “I believe president Trump to be a deeply wounded narcissist, and he is often incapable of acting other than in his perceived self-interest or for revenge”.
Speaking of Trump’s “revenge”, a federal judge just dismissed Trump’s lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and other Democratic officials, claiming the Dems tried to “rig” the 2016 election over Trump’s collusion with the Russians. Judge Middlebrooks ruled that Trump not only violated the statute of limitations in bringing his claim, but it was not seeking “redress of any legal claim” and Trump failed to make his case that he was harmed– and that any statements made by Clinton and the Dems were “plainly protected by the First Amendment”. As Francis Bacon famously said: “A man that studieth revenge keeps his own wounds green”. Continuing to pursue Hillary Clinton is apparently your own attempt at “revenge”.
Jonathan: This is your second column about Hillary Clinton in a week.. What Clinton did pales in comparison to what Donald Trump did in taking so many top secret docs back to Mar-a-Lago
pt
First. No government office or title has the power to challenge that all the documents are no longer classified.
Clinton lacked the authority to use email not approved by the State Dept.
You are way behind on degree of guilt.
“No government office or title has the power to challenge that all the documents are no longer classified.”
Once again, none of the alleged crimes hinges on them being classified.
18 USC 793e makes it illegal for someone to have unuauthorized possession of NDI if they also fail to deliver it to the government upon demand, as Trump did when he was subpoenaed for all government documents, including those with classified markings, and he kept thousands of government documents including over 100 with classified markings amounting to hundreds of pages:
“Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over … information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, … willfully retains the same, and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; … Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
ANTITHETICAL, ANTI-AMERICAN AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTS TAKE PLACE CONSTANTLY
THE FOUNDERS GAVE AMERICA A SUPREME COURT TO STRIKE DOWN THOSE ABERRATIONS
I don’t suppose you noticed that the Supreme Court recently struck it down and decided that the corrupt Supreme Court of 1973 made an egregious, malicious and unconstitutional decision, absurdly claiming that abortion was a constitutional right when God and everyone read and understood that to be false and untrue. Ditto Chief Justice Taney with reference to the innumerable crimes of high office of “Crazy Abe” Lincoln.
Please cite the Constitution for claims with reference to classified materiel.
It is impossible for the chief executive of the executive branch to mishandle materiel which the chief executive of the executive branch alone classifies and/or declassifies.
The Constitution does not confer any power of “classification.”
“Classification” is an internal function of the executive branch.
The legislative branch has no power to usurp the power of the separate but equal executive branch.
Legislation by the legislative branch, exercising any form of dominion over the executive branch, is unconstitutional (or vice versa).
Under the doctrine of Judicial Review and the powers conferred to it by the Constitution, the Supreme Court must review and find for the president with reference to the classified and unclassified material of the executive branch.
By their sworn oaths, judges and Justices must support the clear and evident, meaning and intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The judicial branch (i.e. Supreme Court) enjoys the power of Judicial Review.
The singular American failure is the Supreme Court.
The Constitution is conservative.
__________________________
Judicial Review in the United States
Abstract
The doctrine of judicial review holds that the courts are vested with the authority to determine the legitimacy of the acts of the executive and the legislative branches of government.
– DOJ, Office of Justice Programs
___________________________
Primary Documents in American History
Marbury v. Madison
The U.S. Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review—the power of the federal courts to declare legislative and executive acts unconstitutional. The unanimous opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
– Library of Congress
__________________
“The clause in the Constitution which authorizes the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is in the ninth section of the first article. This article is devoted to the Legislative Department of the United States, and has not the slightest reference to the Executive Department.”
“I can see no ground whatever for supposing that the President in any emergency or in any state of things can authorize the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, or arrest a citizen except in aid of the judicial power.”
“I have exercised all the power which the Constitution and laws confer on me, but that power has been resisted by a force too strong for me to overcome.”
– Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, May 28, 1861
I didn’t respond to your post. I responded to McIntyer
But since you jumped in. What govt officer of office has the power to challenge the classification status of any document in Trumps possession?
AGAIN:
18 USC 793e does not mention classification.
Get it through your thick head: None of the alleged crimes depends on the classification status.
Please!
*************8
https://www.judicialwatch.org/presidential-records-found-right-in-clintons-drawer/
Judicial Watch calls them presidential records, but they weren’t created by the government.
I was quoting law about ‘information relating to the national defense.” The tapes JW is talking about weren’t NDI.
“Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over … information
Trump authorized himself to have all those documents. No person or office has the power to appeal that decision
Trump is no longer President. He has not been authorized to possess them since Jan. 20, 2021.
By law — signed by / agreed to by the Executive Branch — he cannot authorize himself to possess the documents after he leaves office. They are government documents. The government owns them, and the government is supposed to possess them. He was subpoenaed for them, and his lawyers lied and said that they’d all been returned. He was in unauthorized possession of them.
Trump is no longer President. He has not been authorized to possess them since Jan. 20, 2021.
OK, you admit the President is not bound by the statute.
What statute are you referring to when you say that President Biden is not bound by the statute?
There you go…..now your catching up. There is no law. We are talking about the power of the Executive branch.
Trump isn’t President, and you admit you were lying about me when you said ” you admit the President is not bound by the statute.” The President is indeed bound by many statutes — because the Executive signed them into law binding the Executive.
kept thousands of government documents including over 100 with classified markings amounting to hundreds of pages:
Just like Clinton’s wife. NOT a Crime
As I said earlier: Clinton ALSO should have been indicted. Whether they committed crimes gets resolved in court, not by you.
The courts don’t get cases, the DoJ refuses to prosecute. The DoJ as set their own precedent. Lets see if they have any principles to treat all equal under the law.
iowan2:
I wish I could arrive at my point as succinctly as you. By the time I meander to my conclusion, readers have already moved on.
Thanks Karen.
Its a simple sales tool, to address objections. break it down into small simple parts. Find agreement.
Notice, no one has risen to the challenge about the Presidents Plenary power to declassify, at will.
Dear Dennis: Kudos. I couldn’t have said it any better. The tide is turning against Trump, so Turley has to turn to the usual crap to keep the disciples’ faith. BTW: Rick Wilson, who wrote “Everything Trump Touches, Dies”, wrote that one of the surest ways to rile up the faithful is to invoke Hillary Clinton and/or Nancy Pelosi, usually with unflattering photos, if at all possible. So, they use their photos even in purely local elections. The disciplies don’t have a clue that they are being manipulated and deceived into ignoring the real crimes and issues Republicans are trying to distract the faithful from thinking about–like, for instance, their present effort and intent, if they seize power, to nationalize a total ban on abortions, despite claiming they were in favor of each state deciding this issue for itself. Hey Trumpsters–didn’t Hannity tell you about this one?
There’s only so much “whataboutism” that can be peddled to the disciples to divert away from the inconvenient truth about Trump and his crimes. Politics aside, stealing TS/SCI documents, lying about returning all of them, and then trading on your own wrongdoing for political and financial gain is just about as outrageous as it gets. Like Laurence O’Donnell said (paraphrasing): “The only thing that could make Donald Trump’s reputation worse would be if they found kiddie porn among the papers at Mar A Lago”. Not only has Trump endangered our national security, he has turned his disciples against law enforcement, all while the Republican Party pretends to be pro law and order. Then, there’s our allies: how can they ever trust us with nuclear or other sensitive secrets if Trump gets away with this? Bear in mind that he wasn’t even home when the FBI executed the search warrant. The papers were found in unsecure locations all over the place, and there was no one there to be certain that the documents and/or their contents weren’t stolen or copied. And, the bigger question: WHY did he steal them and lie about returning them? IMHO, he intended to try to leverage his possession of these papers and possible threat to disclose them to our enemies in exchange for an agreement not to prosecute him and/or to somehow allow him to be “reinstated” as President.
I don’t even know what to say about it. She is a true sociopath, and AOC and her followers are her heirs. We can turn this around or not. Start paying attention, vote accordingly in numbers that can’t be refuted, or pay the price. There was a time in this country when we considered, compassionately, mental illness to be a problem, even if the solution wasn’t easy. There is nothing ok about this.
And yet, you give your Commander-the-THIEF a pass?
Cant give him a pass. He’s done nothing wrong.
You sound a tad biased.
Are saying is is guilty of a crime? Anything less is a difference of opinion
I certainly wouldn’t know what “(C)” meant on an email…
In my day so-called “Classified” information was routinely discussed at the office prior to the censor coming around to stamp the documents. Just didn’t take that information home but then nobody took any work home back then and there.
David, were you a Secretary of State? Did you sit through 12 hours of training about classification? I mean Clinton’s wife refused to be trained, but a regular person would get trained. Clinton’s wife already knew all about classification, as evidenced her refusual to get trained. So she knew exactly what C meant.
If America is a constitutional rule of law nation – where local, state and federal statutes are required to “circumscribe” the U.S. Constitution (Article VI), then Trump (and his fellow insurrectionists) are “disqualified” from ever running again or ever holding authority ever again.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump and friends – they are done holding government authority. So the real issue here is not Trump (he’s retiring). Disqualification court cases are already happening over the January 6 insurrection, there is legal precedent using this clause to remove insurrectionists.
The issue here is redesigning the secrecy process so these crimes and abuses never happen again in the future. Trump’s disservice to the nation is over.
Ashcroft Z – The definition of “insurrection” needs to be examined. Since the 14th amendment was passed in response to the succession of 11 states from the union, and is coupled with the word “rebellion”, it is likely that it should be construed to mean a wide-spread act of violence intended to end a political regime. Trump did not call for violence and did not seek to end the United States of America. He did seek to have VP Pence refuse to certify electoral ballots from about 7 states and ask those states to reassess their selections of pro-Biden electors in light of Trump’s belief that Biden’s victory was actually in doubt. In this, he followed the example of Al Gore Jr. who went to court to stop the State of Florida from certifying the election for Bush in 2000. The next election cycle, Democrats objected to the certification of Ohio’s crucial electors. No claims of “insurrection” by anyone. Even in 2016, Democratic electors were trying to persuade their Republican counterparts to repudiate their duties under state law to support the candidate who officially won the election in their state and form a coalition to elect a Mitt Romney! (“At least a half-dozen Democratic electors have signed onto an attempt to block Donald Trump from winning an Electoral College majority, an effort designed not only to deny Trump the presidency but also to undermine the legitimacy of the institution.” [https://www.politico. com/ story/2016/11/democrats-electoral-college-faithless-trump-231731] Again, no one shouted “insurrection”, nor did any prominent Democrats even express disapproval. As Humpty Dumpty said: “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”
Cad Hatter
I view these denials as the classic gaslighting of a narcissist. By narcissist, I am referring to personality flaws, similar to selfishness, and not a diagnosed disorder in the DSM5.
She portrays herself as a victim. It’s not her, it’s YOU. You’re the problem, for correctly pointing out she used an illegal server in order to keep records of her official communications out of government archives. These weren’t hard copy documents, in a secure location, with the full knowledge of the FBI, in which the issue is a disagreement over the declassification of documents, or what constitutes a personal record. Hillary Clinton circumvented that entire argument, because she never let State review all 80,000 of her emails. SHE decided what she would allow them to have, and the rest she deleted with Bleach Bit, giving HERSELF the only, and final, word, with impunity. Trump didn’t hide documents; he’d shown the FBI the secured room in which they were kept and consulted with them on security. These documents weren’t scanned and uploaded to a totally insecure Cloud. Unlike Hillary Clinton, he could declassify information. Imagine, for a moment, if Trump simply shredded all those documents, and then burned the shreds, giving himself the final word. Would Democrats shrug their shoulders and say, well, that’s just the way it goes?
We’re being too sensitive. It’s a witch hunt. It’s a vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. We need to disbelieve our lying eyes. The classified information didn’t exist because she tells us to forget all about it, and if we don’t, then we’re misogynists. We’ve heard the gaslighting and victim-blaming all before. So have Juanita Broaddrick and Jennifer Flowers.
Most presidents go back and forth with the National Archives on what to turn in. This is not unusual, or unpredictable, especially given that General Services just appeared to have packed everything up rather haphazardly.
Year after year, we are expected to accept that the law does not apply to prominent Democrats, and accept the abuse of the law against conservatives.
The same happened with Dinesh D’Souza. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and many other prominent politicians have violated election campaign funding laws. They got fined, and in some cases had to return the money. Rosie O’Donnell used 5 different spellings of her name to contribute more than the legal amount. The amount D’Souza coordinated should have been a fine. Instead, he was thrown into prison with murderers. The law was not applied equally, but rather weaponized and used to excess against a Republican, because Democrat activists are in positions of authority.
@Karen
Your posts are always excellent, i really admire you and I thank you for sharing, you have taught me a lot; but at what point do we decide that the rule of law still means something? The entire premise of this blog, though I am grateful for it, sort of rests on that supposition. The likes of AOC and her followers are probably legitimate sociopaths, and this just doesn’t matter to the people propping them up. By all means, keep saying it, I will too. Unless people that feel this strongly actually vote or get involved in other ways, what difference does it make? Fall of Rome? I won’t stop, and I hope you don’t either, because everything is on the line, but we are preaching to a choir. Even the Professor is, at this point. A 25 year-old educated in modern times that thinks the country legitimately, very legitimately, hates women and people of another color have not the life experience and context you do. They just know what they’ve been told and how they feel about it, and they are the ones inheriting our society. I thank my lucky stars that I will not see the 22nd century. Try to wrap your mind around the fact that the upcoming electorate quite honestly don’t have any first-hand memory of anything before 2004, and they haven’t been taught anything honest, accordingly.
Try to wrap your mind around the fact that the upcoming electorate quite honestly don’t have any first-hand memory of anything before 2004, and they haven’t been taught anything honest, accordingly.
Well said James. Not only do they lack the first-hand knowledge, they lack the intellectual curiosity and critical-thinking skills necessary to understand the history they’ve never experienced. So when these narcissists are led by sociopaths, we get an army juiced to commit national suicide.
No, James, I beg to disagree: Karen S. is a faithful mule who just repeats Fox’s messaging. She tries to pretend she is knowledgeable about medicine and science, law, politics and culture, but she’s nothing but a disciple, and not a particularly bright one at that, proven by her efforts to use big words she heard someplace. Now, she’s projecting Trump’s actual narcissism onto Hillary Clinton, like the faithful pupil she is, while continuing to repeat the factual errors that she has been corrected about over and over again. There’s no “issue” about “declassification”– according to Barr, the AG at the time, and Bolton, National Security Advisor at the time, declassification didn’t happen, but even if it had, Trump is still guilty of a crime–the papers weren’t his property regardless of whether he “declassified” them. Also, declassification is a process that creates a specific paper trial–a paper trail that does NOT exist. This is just a lie fed to the disciples as a diversion. Karen has been corrected about this over and over again, but keeps on repeating it..
She claims the “FBI” knew Trump had stolen and hidden records. The FBI didn’t get involved until after the NARA gave up on trying to obtain Trump’s voluntary cooperation to return the papers he stole. They had to resort to the DOJ that began with a simple subpoena for the records, and then, after a tipster told them Trump was lying about returning all of the papers and that they were being kept in multiple unsecure locations, were forced to resort to a search warrant. TRUMP DID HIDE DOCUMENTS AND LIE ABOUT THEM. All Hillary did was allow classified information to be sent to her home server which was not secure–something she shouldn’t have done, but there was no criminal intent. She tried to mitigate any damage by using programs that would take the emails off of her server and destroyed her hard drive to prevent our enemies from getting the documents.. She did not intentionally steal anything, and that’s why she was found NOT to have committed any crimes. Trump stole TS/SCI documents after being told by at least 2 White House lawyers and the NARA NOT to take the papers. He took them anyway fought the NARA over returning them, lied about turning over ALL of them, and is now fundraising over the problem HE caused. AND, that is the big difference here.
And, Karen S. is virtually clueless when she repeats the Fox lie about it being common practice for presidents to go “back and forth” with the National Archives regading NARA documents. That’s just another batch of made up facts put out by Fox . She doesn’t know, or has ignored the statement made by the NARA in response to the Fox lie about Obama “stealing” thousands of classified documents: that didn’t happen. The NARA took ALL of Obama’s papers and is sorting through them in a facility in the Chicagoland area. The NARA has facilities all over the country, not just in Washington, DC. The GSA also issued a statement that they don’t decide what does or does not get packed when someone is required to leave the White House after losing an election.She ignores the fact that, last December, Trump personally went through all of the boxes. He did NOT remove his passports, medical records, magazines or newspapers, so if they were packed in boxes with materials he had no right to take and got seized after lying about returning all of them, that’s his fault. The Order for seizure of the materials specifically allowed the FBI to seize entire boxes of materials in which ANY responsive documents were located, as proof that Trump callously failed to secure these critical documents. Karen S. just seems to be incapable of telling the truth, just like she won’t let go of the fact that Hydroxychloroquine is not effective for treating COVID, despite studies proving that it is not just ineffective–it produces a worst result.
RE: ” Karen S. is a faithful mule who just repeats Fox’s messaging”…Judging from these ratings there must a few others out there as well.” https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/these-are-the-top-rated-cable-news-shows-for-august-2022/513419/
“I view these denials as the classic gaslighting of a narcissist. ”
That’s how I view Trump’s denials.
Good analysis, Karen!
It reflects establishment figures’ sense of license that they can literally rewrite history with little fear of contradiction by the media.
In high school we learned within our school speech and debate team (Forensics), in order to win in state and national debate competitions, to never allow your adversary to frame the argument. Never. Force your opponent to address your well reasoned and articulated arguments which should include history. The outcome is always in your favor. Hillary wins because her opponents allow her minions to frame the argument with emotion.
Democrats Were the First Election Deniers
In 2005, 31 members of the House objected to certifying Ohio’s Republican electors
On the House floor in 2005, the ranking Judiciary Committee Democrat, Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.), presented the case for awarding Ohio to the Democrats, claiming “electronic machines transferred” votes from Mr. Kerry to Mr. Bush, creating situations with “significantly more votes than voters in some precincts, significantly less ballots than voters in other precincts, and voters casting more than one ballot.” He even asserted that a voting-machine company “reprogrammed the computer by remote dial-up” in a way that altered the outcome. Sound familiar?
Mr. Clyburn, now House majority whip, wasn’t the only significant Democrat pushing these wacky theories. Consider other 2005 Democratic election deniers who today hold top congressional posts. These include then-Rep. Ed Markey (D., Mass.), now a senator; Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D., Ariz.), Natural Resources Committee chairman; Rep. Frank Pallone (D., N.J.), Energy and Commerce Committee chairman; Rep. Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), Financial Services Committee chairman; Rep. Bennie Thompson (D., Miss.), chairman of both the Homeland Security and Jan. 6 committees; Rep. Danny K. Davis (D., Ill.), chairman of a Ways and Means subcommittee; Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D., Texas), a senior member of the Judiciary, Homeland Security and Budget committees; and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D., Ill.), senior chief deputy whip. Even the now-deceased civil-rights icon, Rep. John Lewis (D., Ga.), was an election denier, voting not to accept Ohio’s certification for Mr. Bush.
Though she didn’t vote to flip the Buckeye State, then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) defended her party’s election deniers. She said the “debate is fundamental to our democracy” and warned Republicans not to “talk about this as a ‘conspiracy theory,’ ” arguing instead “it is about the Constitution.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-invented-election-denial-2005-bush-kerry-clyburn-jan-6-voting-machines-maga-republicans-biden-speech-11662581117
Well, you can always count on Turley to come up with a BUT….BUT….Hillary column. Sad, just sad.
But True, True, True.
As usual FishWings puts his hands over his ears and hollers blah blah blah I can’t hear you just like he did in middle school.
She is the But…
“Virtually everything about that claim is breathtakingly untrue.”
How typical and how Clintonesque.
My take is investigate them both (Trump and Clinton). If either violated any criminal statute, then proceed accordingly. I’m not tied to any one person, only to policy and philosophy. But I will say this, as a former federal employee, I would have been investigated and fired if I had done what Hillary did- of that there can be no doubt. Possibly jailed as well
Hillary was already investigated. Multiple times in fact. There was no evidence that she intended to disseminate any classified information to unauthorized individuals.
She was in violation of department policy which is not a crime.
I don’t think she had any intent to disseminate information either, but her poor judgement from Arkansas to the White House should have disqualified her for any office.
Svelaz, where did you see, read or hear that Trump INTENDED to disseminate the information? Odd that a little partisan hack like you would have two different standards, one for Republicans and one for the fascists.
Hullbobby, I never said Trump intended to disseminate the information. You’re reading things that are not there.
Trump DID intend to KEEP those documents which IS a crime. They are not his to keep.
HRC sells caps at $30.00 a pop! Pure chutzpah! Maybe her next foray into entrepreneurship will be teflon pantsuits!
RE:”Hillary has no qualms about falsely denying what published government reports detail.” It reflects the hubris of Clinton and others of her ilk that the electorate are, in her own words, indeed a ‘basket of deplorables’, held in contempt, of their intelligence, judgement, and what ever other positive values of character any citizen might possess. After all, were it not so, how would these wretched examples of moral and ethical turpitude ever be raised to high office?.
Obama started the terror against Americans and Biden is accelerating it with a bitter, demoralized Attorney General. Never forget Obama’s reign of terror
One of the most significant episodes in the use of state power to intimidate private citizens’ political behavior was the Internal Revenue Service’s investigation during Barack Obama’s first term of small tea-party groups, which organized around the goal of controlling federal spending. Some threat that was.
The IRS’s investigations of 501(c)(4) groups and delays in approving their tax status made a household name out of Lois Lerner, head of the agency’s tax-exempt groups unit. That federal offensive chilled the tea-party movement. With their just passed legislative “victory,” the Democrats and Mr. Biden are creating an army of IRS auditors.
…
Mr. Biden’s rants about restoring limits on political behavior would have a smidgen of respectability if he criticized any of his own, such as the mobs that paraded in front of the homes of all six Republican-nominated Supreme Court justices, an obvious attempt to influence them and thus a violation of federal law. His attorney general did nothing, even after a man was arrested for allegedly trying to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh. In other words, the president was OK with this show of intimidation.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/take-joe-biden-seriously-speech-maga-republicans-trump-investigate-persecute-democracy-intimidation-11662581177
“Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced during a visit to Kyiv Thursday that the U.S. will provide $2.2 billion in military aid to Ukraine and 18 other European countries that are “potentially at risk of future Russian aggression.”
If you see this as a bottomless pit of gritting that creates nothing but death and destruction around the world while systematically redistributing wealth from American citizens to various parasites that have accumulated influence in Washington, you are probably a bitter enemy of Our Democracy ™.
Turley is just trying to deflect from the increasing problems Trump is facing. There’s no comparison between Trump’s carelessness and Clinton’s. None.
Hillary and her aides had security clearances high enough to be able to communicate freely about those classified or confidential emails. Using a private server was indeed a mistake, but it was not the dire set of circumstances that Turley and the rest of the right-wing critics purport them to be.
She didn’t commit a crime. She violated department policy.
Trump on the other hand did far more than just violate a policy. He literally committed multiple crimes as a private citizen AND was in possession of stolen government property AND kept highly classified documents with little to no security or controls in who accessed them, when, and who kept tabs on their whereabouts at all times. Trump was found to have classified marked folders that were empty. That’s not a good thing. Where are the contents? We’re they sold? Stolen? Lost ? Given away as suvenirs?
Clearly Trump’s recklessness is far more serious and more likely to be the basis for felony charges than Hillary ever was. Turley’s poor attempt at deflection is laughably obvious. But, but, but, Hillary’s emails!
LOL!!! What a joke Turley is.
Look in the mirror if you want to see a bigger joke.
What was said that is not true? You give no clue. It appears trump had lots and lots of classified documents in his house. Secure or not, we do not know yet. Were they in his house? Most definitely yes. So the big question is what about Hillary? You have to be kidding.
I am no Hillary fan, she appears to have been very involved in making as much money as she can for herself while in office. Trump has done the same. However, now out of office, trump appears to have top secret documents in his house! How many people have been prosecuted for far lessor offense of handling secret documents? Reality Winner for one?
If you are so concerned about the crimes Hillary may have done, what about what looks like a perhaps treasonous act of trump? Did he sell documents? Did he show them to people to show what a big man he was? We don’t know yet. What we do know is the classified documents were there. trump admitted they were in his house, his lawyer admitted they were in his house. But what about Hillary? sheeeeeesh.
@Baby Trump , @Svelaz
Wow…
First Trump was the ultimate in terms of authority while POTUS. He could declassify anything. Clinton? Since she was SoS and not the classifying agency in most of the material found but not scrubbed… she did not have the absolute authority that Trump had. Score 1 for POTUS Trump.
Second… We clearly can see the crime Clinton committed. Well several actually. First the Espionage Act sections which Hillary broke… do not require intent.
But since you will probably want to argue intent… She had it in spades. Why did she set up the server? To evade FOIA requests.
And we saw this in action because there is evidence that her counsel, Ms Mills did respond to FOIA request(s) that no emails existed. Why? Because she was using her secret server.
Yeah, so violation of FOIA is a misdemeanor. It would have meant Hillary and her senior staff should have been charged which would have meant Ms. Mills losing her law license. (Hillary voluntarily gave it up.)
So do you really want to play this game?
BTW, Have you ever set up and maintained a private mail server? (I have for many years) So yeah, I kinda know about the security issues and what she didn’t do properly to secure the server.
-G
What section of 18 USC 793 are you claiming Clinton violated?
Trump made up the lie about “declassifying” documents, which implied that he could just take them, as a diversion that you faithful disciples bought, hook, line and sinker. Declassification is more than just waving a magic wand over a box of documents and saying “I declassify you”. First of all, that NEVER HAPPENED, according to former AG Bill Barr and former National Security Advisor, John Bolton, both of whom would know about any alleged “standing order”. Declassification is a process that involves creating a paper trail that DOES NOT EXIST. Nuclear related documents CANNOT BE DECLASSIFIED per federal statute. Secondly, even IF your hero had declassified these papers, he still had no right to take them. If that were not the case, then WHY didn’t his lawyer object with the subpoena was served on him, instead of partially complying and then lying about fully returning all such documents? You are a dupe if you fall for this.
“Trump made up the lie about “declassifying” documents, which implied that he could just take them, as a diversion that you faithful disciples bought, hook, line and sinker. Declassification is more than just waving a magic wand over a box of documents and saying “I declassify you”.
It can be exactly that. Or according to the federal courts it can be tweeting – “this is declassified”.
Again – there exists an open question as to whetherthe documents DOJ/NARA retreived are at this time classified.
They may be. It appears there is agreement that there were documents at MAL “marked” classified.
Just as even DOJ noted there were empty binders for classified documents.
But we do not know and DOJ is not sharing what the contents of those documents are.
If those documents are collusion delusion related they are INARGUABLY declassified AND we are facing a massive coverup and efforts at objstruction by DOJ/FBI/NARA/WH.
There is ZERO doubt that Trump ordered – on several occasions the declassification of Collusion Delusion information.
If some or all of these marked documents are collusion delusion related – DOJ/Biden/NARA/FBI are in deep schiff.
This is a coverup.
Conversely if some/all are not – it is POSSIBLE that there is some very limited jeophardy for Trump.
But first you have to establish what these documents are.
And we have not.
DOJ.FBI are not saying, Neither is Trump. All Trump is saying is they are declassified. All DOJ/FBI is saying is they are marked.
Neither side is telling us what we need to know.
But the actual burden of proof falls with the DOJ/FBI
” First of all, that NEVER HAPPENED, according to former AG Bill Barr and former National Security Advisor, John Bolton, both of whom would know about any alleged “standing order”. ”
Again – you have not provided a quote from either,
and it is pretty much impossible for their to be one that matches what you say, as Bolton would not need to know.
And Barr both would not need to know, but was publicly involved in declassifying documents at Trump’s direction.
“Declassification is a process that involves creating a paper trail that DOES NOT EXIST.”
Again FALSE,
Per federal judge years ago directing DOJ to take a Trump tweet as an order to declassify.
“Nuclear related documents CANNOT BE DECLASSIFIED per federal statute.”
Multiply false.
We have nothing but anonymous leaks claiming nuclear documents.
And Obama declassified several nuclear documents.
I provided links for the latter much earlier.
If you can not find those – google is your friend.
“Secondly, even IF your hero had declassified these papers, he still had no right to take them.:
Still false.
“if that were not the case, then WHY didn’t his lawyer object with the subpoena was served on him, instead of partially complying”
Because there is no obligation to do so.
If DOJ is unhappy with compliance with their subpeona they can get a court order – but going after a court order gives Trump and his attornies the oportunity to respond.
DOJ/FBI have been trying to do all of this in secret. Trump has been trying to get it out in the open.
The FBI put the spotlight on themselves when they raided MAL. Now they can not get it off.
“and then lying about fully returning all such documents?”
No one said anything was “fully returned” – nor would they. Trump is claiming these documents are legitimately his.
You do not have to return what is yours.
What Trump’s attorney’s said was to their knowledge there was no classified documents at MAL.
Whether that is true has not been established.
“You are a dupe if you fall for this.”
We have all heard for 6 years – Trump will be perp walked into prison today.
Still has not happened.
Why are we suspicious of the DOJ/FBI ?
Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!
It appears trump had lots and lots of classified documents in his house. Secure or not, we do not know yet.
The fact is all we have are appearances. And that’s not by accident. If their case was as airtight as you’ve been lead to believe, there would be no need to leak to the media. The current Democrat party narrative however is that Trump and MAGA Republicans are an existential threat to our democracy. So they needed to deploy their politically-weaponized FBI/DOJ to make a case before the public that would appear to support their narrative.
Were they in his house? Most definitely yes.
Were they in his house before the FBI showed up?
Had any or all of them been declassified?
Like him or hate him, Donald Trump is not an idiot. He had and continues to have national security advisors and attorneys that most certainly knew of whatever documents were held at MAL and what he had to do legally. Especially after the FBI visit in June. So the appearance that Trump is sitting around in his boxer shorts, recklessly making paper airplanes of our deepest, most closely-held national security secrets is absurd. But it does fit the narrative.
As Robert Barnes said last night on his update in regards to Fm Prez Trump goes there is no one currently to run in 2024.
Typo, crap;
Oky1 says:
September 9, 2022 at 1:30 PM
As Robert Barnes said last night on his update in regards to Fm Prez Trump there is no one Better currently to run in 2024 then Trump.
I don’t know who Robert Barnes is, but I don’t agree. I’m not convinced he’s going to run for office in 2024. It wouldn’t surprise me in the least that he hasn’t announced one or the other so as to focus the attacks on him and not the candidate he will endorse. And that candidate will have to be committed to the America First vision.
Barnes is a successful attorney on par with P Turley.
I’m signed up for some of his stuff. easy to do or Rumble or Youtube.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=VivaBarnesLaw&ia=web
“The fact is all we have are appearances. And that’s not by accident. If their case was as airtight as you’ve been lead to believe, there would be no need to leak to the media. The current Democrat party narrative however is that Trump and MAGA Republicans are an existential threat to our democracy. So they needed to deploy their politically-weaponized FBI/DOJ to make a case before the public that would appear to support their narrative. ”
Backing up a bit…….
Biden’s recent attacks on all America supporters is most likely a result of the insider polls that are showing the Democratic & Independent Voters are Rebelling Against the Democratic Party.
Biden, only 11-12% support him & the rest of the Dims close behind.
(Re: Greg Hunter also Martin Armstrong, etc.)
Reports I’m seeing/hearing are Dims are losing Hispanics & Blacks. Up to 50% of Hispanics in places are supportive of Trumps controlled border policies.
AKA: C/N Dim Head Fake. Look Squirrl, Trump/Supporters Bad……..
Same crap the last 7 years or so.
More……..
Fl Gov DeSantis looks promising & is likely great of Domestic Polices.
Yet there’s concern among some he wouldn’t be as good as Trump on US Foreign Policy & that the Deep State Globalist seems to happy with him.
Re: Trump has strongly hinted he is running in 2024. There are multiple issues involved. Willard the Rat Romney’s niece controls the GOP’s purse, Ronna McDaniel, & that as soon as Trump announces the GOP will stop paying the legal bills for all the C/N, (Commie/Nazi), Dim/Rino’s Lawfare Scams.
Plus there are the issues with the FEC change the day one declares being a candidate for public office.
****************
I thought it worth the time. 22:15 min
***
Peter Navarro: Kushner Was The Rasputin Of The Trump Administration
5,069 views
·
Sep 9, 2022
2
Share
Download
The American Journal
The American Journal
Peter Navarro: Kushner Was The Rasputin Of The Trump Administration
Order Alex Jones’ new book ‘The Great Reset: And the War for the World,’ that eloquently delivers a full analysis on the global elite’s international conspiracy to enslave humanity!
https://banned.video/watch?id=631b8137eb01dc5919d69690
*****************
26:52 Min’s………..
Steve Bannon Joins Alex Jones After Arrest To Rally Patriots For New Revolutionary War Of Information
28,203 views
Sep 9, 2022
18
Share
Download
The Alex Jones Show
The Alex Jones Show
Steve Bannon joins Alex Jones live via Skype to give an exclusive interview after his politically motivated arrest under false charges.
https://banned.video/watch?id=631b7e2aeb01dc5919d44150
Trump has already stated that they were in his residence in boxes. He complained about them being unboxed for the photos. The information in the court filings are not leaks, and you have no way of determining that information shared with the press comes from a government leak rather than from Trump’s side.
“He had and continues to have national security advisors and attorneys that most certainly knew of whatever documents were held at MAL and what he had to do legally.”
So you think that Christina Bobb “knew of whatever documents were held at MAL and what [Trump] had to do legally” when she certified that all documents responsive to the subpoena had been turned over, when it hadn’t all been turned over? You think Evan Corcoran “knew of whatever documents were held at MAL and what [Trump] had to do legally” when he certified that all relevant boxes had been searched and all remaining documents were in the storage room, despite those boxes containing remaining records and some of them being in Trump’s office? I think you’re assuming facts not in evidence, and I think you’re assuming that Trump’s counsel is more competent than is accurate.
Svlaz: I think you missed the point. Hillary violated the law. Whether Trump did so remains to be seen but cannot be assumed from what is thus far known. There was a delination of prosecution in the Clinton case as there probably will be in the Trump case, too. When you run out of false legal claims, you resort to the lowest form of argument, the ad hominem. That impeaches any credibility you might have had with your points.
There is zero doubt that Trump violated the law. He had classified documents in a non-approved location, documents he was not allowed to have, and those documents were accessible by people without clearances.
Sammy:
How can he have classified documents if a president can declassify any document he wishes?
It sometimes takes years for the National Archives to obtain every document they wish from a president after leaving office. Pretending that this never happens is spurious.
You should also consider that Eric Holder argued in court for 5 years before being forced to turn over documents he wasn’t allowed to have. Where shall I send his care package in prison? Oh, right…
There isI have zero doubt that Trump violated the law. He had classified documents in a non-approved location, documents he was not allowed to have, and those documents were accessible by people without clearances.That will be the least surprising opinion I will read all day. I have zero doubt that you currently have no proof of your allegations beyond the leaked narrative pushed by the FBI/DOJ to their media allies.
RE:”There is zero doubt that Trump violated the law” I prefer to reserve such judgements to procedures and outcomes. One never knows what yet undiscovered ‘lack of precedents’ might act in his favor. After all, such events served Clinton, did they not?
RE:”Svlaz: I think you missed the point,: Think again. If you read enough of Svelaz’ rebuttals you’ll understand why I say so. The point is well understood but not to Svelaz’ purpose as is clearly understood in the writing.
The evidence to date shows that Trump was in violation of 18 USC 793e. If you’re going to discuss it, keep up on what’s known from the evidence submitted to the case docket.
JJC,
There is no doubt Trump violated the law. It’s not an assumption or a “perhaps” he did. The FBI found classified documents in his residence as a private citizen. That’s not even disputed by Trump.
He was in possession of stolen documents when the FBI executed a search warrant on his home. That alone is one crime.
Hillary violated department policy and her sloppy handling of her emails merited a department disciplinary action. Not an indictment. There was never enough evidence for charges despite what the republicans wanted. Hillary still had a security clearance. Trump does not. He’s not even allowed to have the customary national security briefing because he’s not trustworthy enough for obvious reasons.
Which claims were false?
FBI found classified documents in his residence as a private citizen. That’s not even disputed by Trump.
There were no classified documents at MAL. Trump has no need, or venue to challenge the FBI’s lie.
Actually, he does, per the government’s appeal. Have you read it? (I doubt it but of course could be wrong.)
I’m surprised you didn’t say she had right to smash phones and device’s and bleach bit emails because she should have won. Turley doing her a favor and being CHARITABLE didn’t talk about her conduct with her charity called the Clinton Foundation. That has basically been dormant since she lost and spent a real small % of the incoming 10’s of millions on charities. While her and Billy were doing the grift. Your so du” you probably thin the Laptop from Heaven was Russian disinformation and there was Russian Collusion. Keep drinking the koolaid. Trump is a bull in a CCP shop but didn’t grift while in Govt and seems his kids didn’t either. Meanwhile being the most invesigated family in America
@svelaz
“Turley is just trying to deflect from the increasing problems Trump is facing. There’s no comparison between Trump’s carelessness and Clinton’s. None.”
Turley says these things because he is a ‘nazi’ too! And as a good, tolerant leftist, don’t you wish you could destroy him?
antonio
Antonio,
No, Turley is just being a partisan hack. Nothing more nothing less.
He hasn’t made any legal analysis of judge cannon’s ruling or even the DOJ’s latest response which puts her in a difficult position of either rejecting the DOJ’s motion and exposing her as deliberately stymieing the investigation or accept the motion and partially reverse her ruling and lay the DOJ continue the investigation with just the classified documents.
Professor Turley is just showing the hypocrisy, on a daily basis, of our entire political system.
We all know there will always be scoundrels and criminals. What disturbs me is that our Justice Dept can’t seem to hold a certain brand of this such human and political detritus accountable. We should be more worried about that than the fact that thugs such as hillary exist.
Hillary represents the very epitome of bias in American society.
Her shields are on the same level as organized crime, without them her true awfulness wouldn’t serve her or her cowering husband well.