quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:
The shame is his pet Judge slow-walking his espionage trial in Florida for compromising sensitive national security and intelligence information, any one page of which would send an enlisted soldier to prison for ten years.

Unless you’re Joe, the Big Guy and his super secure garage and the Chinese storage at Penn Biden Center. Ironic, isn’t it that Biden gets a DOJ pass for being old and senile and his supporters seem to forget that immediately. They don’t even want the American public to see Joe’s interviews on tape. What’s with that?

It surely isn’t intellectual honesty to not treat the hose and gander equally.

“Show me the man and I’ll find the crime.” Beria

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Even if he is acquitted or the jury hangs, the trial was worth it to just to make the bastard sit there and have his lies, deceit and immoral conduct force fed him.

That^^^would pretty much be the definition of “lawfare.”

And I would not be betting my life savings he will be acquitted or the jury will hang. You commit the crime,

Just exactly what crime would that be?

you may beat the rap but you aren’t going to beat the ride.

Jines

Lane....trump cheats on his wife.

How does that play in to your beliefs?

It plays nicely into his beliefs. As Lane demonstrates repeatedly, today's Christians can rationalize anything.

quote:

If you didn’t believe “lawfare” existed…

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Even if he is acquitted or the jury hangs, the trial was worth it to just to make the bastard sit there and have his lies, deceit and immoral conduct force fed him.

That^^^would pretty much be the definition of “lawfare.”

And I would not be betting my life savings he will be acquitted or the jury will hang. You commit the crime,

Just exactly what crime would that be?

you may beat the rap but you aren’t going to beat the ride.

Jines

Lane....trump cheats on his wife.

How does that play in to your beliefs?

It plays nicely into his beliefs. As Lane demonstrates repeatedly, today's Christians can rationalize anything.

What these two posts as well as Jine’s prove is that many of you are fine with ”lawfare” as long as it is directed at those you dislike.

As Jonathan Turley has espoused…there is a burden on the prosecutor in a case such as this to only bring if he has “proof.” Even with the help of Merchan…no such proof has been provided.

Further, the judge has conducted this trial much like a circus.

It is a sham and will serve as a classic example of “lawfare” for eons to come.

It really gives me pause that the lawyers aren’t stepping up to call this out.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Even if he is acquitted or the jury hangs, the trial was worth it to just to make the bastard sit there and have his lies, deceit and immoral conduct force fed him.

That^^^would pretty much be the definition of “lawfare.”

And I would not be betting my life savings he will be acquitted or the jury will hang. You commit the crime,

Just exactly what crime would that be?

you may beat the rap but you aren’t going to beat the ride.

Jines

Lane....trump cheats on his wife.

How does that play in to your beliefs?

It plays nicely into his beliefs. As Lane demonstrates repeatedly, today's Christians can rationalize anything.

What these two posts as well as Jine’s prove is that many of you are fine with ”lawfare” as long as it is directed at those you dislike.

As Jonathan Turley has espoused…there is a burden on the prosecutor in a case such as this to only bring if he has “proof.” Even with the help of Merchan…no such proof has been provided.

Further, the judge has conducted this trial much like a circus.

It is a sham and will serve as a classic example of “lawfare” for eons to come.

It really gives me pause that the lawyers aren’t stepping up to call this out.

The prosecution is required to prove that trump knew his business records were falsified in relation to the payment to Daniels and that the records were falsified for political reasons. In other words, to keep the public from knowing he paid money to cover up his dalliance with the porn star.

You can't offer a credible argument that such evidence hasn't been presented to the jury. It absolutely has.

So, keep crying about the law, the judge, and most of all, keep relying on what the paid political commentator shills from FOX are saying....because that's the "evidence" you're relying on.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Even if he is acquitted or the jury hangs, the trial was worth it to just to make the bastard sit there and have his lies, deceit and immoral conduct force fed him.

That^^^would pretty much be the definition of “lawfare.”

And I would not be betting my life savings he will be acquitted or the jury will hang. You commit the crime,

Just exactly what crime would that be?

you may beat the rap but you aren’t going to beat the ride.

Jines

Lane....trump cheats on his wife.

How does that play in to your beliefs?

It plays nicely into his beliefs. As Lane demonstrates repeatedly, today's Christians can rationalize anything.

What these two posts as well as Jine’s prove is that many of you are fine with ”lawfare” as long as it is directed at those you dislike.

As Jonathan Turley has espoused…there is a burden on the prosecutor in a case such as this to only bring if he has “proof.” Even with the help of Merchan…no such proof has been provided.

Further, the judge has conducted this trial much like a circus.

It is a sham and will serve as a classic example of “lawfare” for eons to come.

It really gives me pause that the lawyers aren’t stepping up to call this out.

The prosecution is required to prove that trump knew his business records were falsified in relation to the payment to Daniels and that the records were falsified for political reasons. In other words, to keep the public from knowing he paid money to cover up his dalliance with the porn star.

You can't offer a credible argument that such evidence hasn't been presented to the jury. It absolutely has.

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

So, keep crying about the law, the judge, and most of all, keep relying on what the paid political commentator shills from FOX are saying....because that's the "evidence" you're relying on.

quote:

Yes…I will take Turley’s opinion over yours.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

Yes…I will take Turley’s opinion over yours.

That's because Turley says what you want to hear.

I don't know Turley or what he says--other than what you say he says. If he is a lawyer, he should know better than to throw around terms like "lawfare" just because a GOP idol is involved.

I bet Turley's not a real lawyer, just an entertainment lawyer like we see on TV a lot.

Whereas, I bet Mike here is a real lawyer. Regardless, Mike speaks more truly than Turley.

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

quote:

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

quote:

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
The FBI is investigating the D Mayor of NY right now for election campaign malfeasance.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

He's been kid gloved till the cows come home. In the document case especially anyone else would have been behind bars from the git go.

You have to be kidding correct? When was Biden arrested?

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

He was POTUS. He is allowed to know everything in those documents. He can make notes about what he knows…he can write about what he knows. I have seen zero credible evidence that he was copying to sell.

Yes, we should clean up how documents are handled and how the Whitehouse is cleaned out. But keeping docs has been the precedent for some time.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
He is not allowed to keep them.

There are dangers in his keeping.

Like, folks coming to his glorified golf course. He trying to empress and shoeing them.

You loved to quote AG Barr until he said it was a crime.

HRC cooperated with DOJ, you condemned her for how she handled documents. It was a reason I did not vote for her.

Yet, President Trump, president, mishandled and refused to return. Or is okay.

That is why you are a party hack.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
He is not allowed to keep them.

There are dangers in his keeping.

Like, folks coming to his glorified golf course. He trying to empress and shoeing them.

You loved to quote AG Barr until he said it was a crime.

HRC cooperated with DOJ, you condemned her for how she handled documents. It was a reason I did not vote for her.

Yet, President Trump, president, mishandled and refused to return. Or is okay.

That is why you are a party hack.

I “didn’t” say it was OK. I said it was the current president — offering Biden as evidence. I went on to say we needed to change it.

But make NO mistake…how they handled it with Trump was a form of “lawfare” and against precedent.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

Sell them? Quid pro quo is more likely.

His ego is more important to him than money in this instance.

Espionage? He doesn't even know the word, and wouldn't hesitate.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

He's been kid gloved till the cows come home. In the document case especially anyone else would have been behind bars from the git go.

You have to be kidding correct? When was Biden arrested?

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

He was POTUS. He is allowed to know everything in those documents. He can make notes about what he knows…he can write about what he knows. I have seen zero credible evidence that he was copying to sell.

Yes, we should clean up how documents are handled and how the Whitehouse is cleaned out. But keeping docs has been the precedent for some time.

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

He's been kid gloved till the cows come home. In the document case especially anyone else would have been behind bars from the git go.

You have to be kidding correct? When was Biden arrested?

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

He was POTUS. He is allowed to know everything in those documents. He can make notes about what he knows…he can write about what he knows. I have seen zero credible evidence that he was copying to sell.

Yes, we should clean up how documents are handled and how the Whitehouse is cleaned out. But keeping docs has been the precedent for some time.

In reality there are a few besides the President who could possess the documents without many repercussions, but that would be very few.

So he can write a book and quote verbatim what is in the most highly classified documents? I don't think so. Any notes he took would probably have to be surrendered upon leaving office.

I would put it past him to trade info in the documents for favors. Just because nobody has heard about it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Was it Will Rogers who said that "He who thinks money is everything [that would be trump] may well be suspected of doing anything for money."

quote:

Originally posted by Jefffive:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by ANTELOPEDUNDEE:

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:

quote:

There really was nothing but the word of Cohen.

The jury watched every minute of Cohen's testimony, especially the cross-examination, which by most accounts shredded him. The judge should tell the jury that in weighing the testimony of a witness, they may consider that the witness has lied before. Why not trust the jury to do its job?

The leaders of criminal organizations are often convicted only on the word of underlings, who are just as slimy as the bosses. Cohen is a lying, thieving underling who's testifying against someone he claims is a bigger liar and thief. Par for the course in white collar crimes.

Like always, you want a Trump exception to the rules.

Nah…I just want Trump treated like he was a Democrat.

He's been kid gloved till the cows come home. In the document case especially anyone else would have been behind bars from the git go.

You have to be kidding correct? When was Biden arrested?

That he may have copied them and may sell the copies doesn't seem to concern some folks in the least.

He was POTUS. He is allowed to know everything in those documents. He can make notes about what he knows…he can write about what he knows. I have seen zero credible evidence that he was copying to sell.

Yes, we should clean up how documents are handled and how the Whitehouse is cleaned out. But keeping docs has been the precedent for some time.

In reality there are a few besides the President who could possess the documents without many repercussions, but that would be very few.

So he can write a book and quote verbatim what is in the most highly classified documents? I don't think so. Any notes he took would probably have to be surrendered upon leaving office.

I would put it past him to trade info in the documents for favors. Just because nobody has heard about it doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Was it Will Rogers who said that "He who thinks money is everything [that would be trump] may well be suspected of doing anything for money."

It is not just "the documents" that are classified like they are some sort of holy talisman, it's the information they contain, and that is classified whether it's in the original document, in notes taken while reading the document or in the memory of someone who read the document.

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
The Federal Law Enforcement Center is in my county. Secret Service and FBI agents abound in this town (as do Homeland Security folks). They worship, vote, play and raise their children locally.

They do their duty but having this discussion with some of them would very much surprise those who preach that the DOJ is a non-partisan and non-weaponized agency interested in justice (and the Mar-a-Lago raid was justified, particularly as conducted).

They certainly don’t think that they’re mindless MAGA minions, but they do believe their agencies are becoming political tools of the administration in power. They fear the possibility of pay-back and retaliation when the D’s change to R’s as is inevitable.

They are good folks but are very dispirited men and women.

BTW, I’ve authorized several thousand search warrants. In my opinion, there should never be a S.O.P. “use of deadly force” clause. Here, when the residence to be searched was already secured by Federal Agents, what’s the purpose? You know from the get go that Secret Service agents are armed and certainly should be ready and willing to facilitate the search. Why give some zealot a gun and discretion to abuse the search and seizure.