TwistedKnickers...
FromTheRiverToTheSea
Can't get any lower than this Jew Hater.
This idiot thnks HAMAS is truthful.
FromTheRiverToTheSea
Can't get any lower than this Jew Hater.
This idiot thnks HAMAS is truthful.
-
Comment -
Good to see that somebody here is prepared to call out DipShit for responding to my post calling it a lie, and as per normal, failing to explain precisely what the lie is.
I suspect he probably does that to almost every post I make. Much like he used to respond to every post with the most childish of gifs.
That's why I have had him on ignore for years.Comment -
I’m generally a patient guy but…
when is SCOTUS going to tell us if it’s ok for a President to order Seal Team Six to assassinate his opponents?Comment -
It is a lie. You lie all the time. I simply post out lies when I see them. You just lie more than anyone else. I have posted dozens of examples of your lies and have provided evidence. So have others. Just like I am doing now.
Trump isn't charged with espionage. I have already proved it. Whereas, as my worthy counterpart did his best to make his case, but clearly wasn't able to.
Here's more evidence ...
“In this case, former President Trump hasn't been charged with spying for a foreign government, or espionage as we normally think about it, but he has been charged with willfully withholding national defense information – which is the way that a case like this is normally charged,” Cordero said.
Espionage is the crime of spying or secretly watching a person, company, government, etc. for the purpose of gathering secret information or detecting wrongdoing, and to transfer such information to another organization or state. Trump hasn't been accused of any of those things. Duh!
Last edited by DwightShrute; 06-27-24, 08:27 AM.Comment -
-
He should keep his "we"s to himself. Just because he only knows morons don't project that onto normal people.
What he is trying to say is that he did not realize breaching the Espionage Act means that you have committed espionage.
But now you both know that he has definitely and inarguably been charged with espionage, I wonder if either of you will stop the BS..Comment -
That could be true, or not. (pretty sure that falls under stalking and privacy laws)
But unless it is defined as illegal under the Espionage Act, then it isn't the legal definition of espionage.
But this DEFINITELY is what espionage is legally;
"That section makes it illegal for anyone who has "unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over" national defense information -- such as documents, blueprints, photos, plans and more -- and who "has reason to believe [the information] could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation" then either shares it with unauthorized people or "willfully retains the same and fails" to return it."
No spying word involved. That's your made up talking point and irrelevant when we have documented laws with definitions..Comment -
Comment -
he has definitelt NOT been charged with teh espionage act.
At the center of Donald Trump's historic federal indictment is the Espionage Act, under which prosecutors have charged the former president with illegally keeping government information after leaving the White House and then refusing to give it back.
Julian Assange to plead guilty to violating Espionage Act . He didn't plea or been convicted of espionage either.
Under the Motor Vehicle Act you could be charged with a whole bunch of things just as the espionage act.
- Operating Under the Influence
- Leaving the Scene: Personal Injury
- Leaving the Scene: Property Damage
- Negligent Operation
- Open Alcohol Container
- Operating without Ignition Interlock
- Operation After Suspended or Revocation of License
- Refusal to Obey a Police Officer
- Tampering with Ignition Interlock
So you can't tell me tampering with the ignition is the same as running over someone and killing them while drunk even though you can be charged under the same act. I am not say that's the best example but anyone can understand.
A president with the ability to declassify top secret documents and having those documents at his residence isn't anywhere close to the definition of espionage. It just isn't no matter how much you want it to be. Biden couldn't declassify top secret docs but still have hundreds of them in several place including in his garage where his crackhead son lived, and Biden wasn't charged with anything, let along espionage.Last edited by DwightShrute; 06-27-24, 06:09 PM.Comment -
Fetterman hasn't been the disaster like he appeared to be.Comment -
Who cares?
tomatoe, tomartoe.
You say illegally keeping govt info, and I say espionage because that is what he did is defined as under law.
You say he never met her, I say he raped her because the judge said that is what he did under the law.
You say peaceful picnic, I say insurrection because that's what the law makers called it.
See the pattern? You have been groomed into having no respect for the laws anymore...
End result is still the same if he is convicted though, so no matter..Comment -
I say he wasn't charged with espionage because he wasn't charged with espionage. I can reality look up the definition of espionage and I can also understand English.
Trump wasn't convicted of rape. No matter what the judge thinks.
It wasn't an insurrection because I have 2 eyes and ears and also the FBI said there was no insurrection.
See the pattern? You have been groomed into having no respect for the laws anymore and believing the lies you are being continuously told by the same people that have been caught lying to you repeatedly for years.
Crooked Hillery, FBI subpoena for email, deletes them, has her staff smash devices with hammers. Biden, classified doc all over the place, sticking out of boxes in an open garage with a crackhead, no charges. Trump dozens of charges having docs in a secure location surrounded by SS.
Comment -
You don't need to look up the definition anywhere else but within the laws he is charged under
Here's a link direct to the full definition here https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Anyway, I am just being the patsy in this stupid politicized game the extremists want us to play by having this extended conversation about it. So carry on as you were
.Comment -
I am only hoping you at least understand what I am saying, not expecting that you would ever agree with anything I say.You don't need to look up the definition anywhere else but within the laws he is charged under
Here's a link direct to the full definition here https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
Anyway, I am just being the patsy in this stupid politicized game the extremists want us to play by having this extended conversation about it. So carry on as you wereComment -
Another shot fired !
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal judge presiding over the classified documents case of former President Donald Trump granted his request Thursday for a hearing on whether prosecutors had been permitted to improperly breach attorney-client privilege when they obtained crucial evidence from one of his ex-lawyers.
The order from U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ensures further delays in a criminal case that has already been snarled by significant postponements, resulting in the indefinite postponement of a trial that had been set to begin on May 20 in Fort Pierce, Florida. It means that Cannon will revisit a different judge’s order from last year that permitted prosecutors to get testimony and other evidence from a Trump attorney that wound up being repeatedly cited in the indictment of the former presidentComment -
BOA12 nailed it on the head here. Who knew this Line would move this much?
Good luck gentlemen!Comment -
Biden a disaster already
Comment -
How is this for an appetizer and another kick in the nuts to you and that corrupt POS Jack Smith ?
Supreme Court overturns conviction on obstruction charge used in hundreds of Jan. 6 cases
By a 6-3 vote, the court said obstruction of an official proceeding requires defendants to impair the availability or integrity of records, documents or objects.Comment -
The problem with those "checkers" is that if a candidate says they reduced something 35 percent but it was actually 34 percent, they consider that a "lie"
not in my book. The American people are smarter than that as a whole, and rightfully said Trump dominated Biden.Comment -
Stick your Seal Team Six hypothetical up your *ss
Judge Flo Pan, just reversed by SCOTUS, wrote both appellate court opinions upholding 1512c2.
She also is the dunce who raised the "Seal Team Six" hypothetical in presidential immunity oral arguments.
Her opinion denying Trump's claims of immunity also will be scrutinized in SCOTUS immunity order, which will post Monday.
Last edited by jt315; 06-28-24, 01:35 PM.Comment -
You can believe whatever you want. Before the next debate, I will come into this thread again and post another Winner. And even after your rationalzation, you STILL won't bet the Over. I'm trying to make you some money here. I've posted SEVERAL winning plays in this thread. Regardless of how you think they've won, that fact is, they have still Won. If you were "smart" you would have figured that out a LONG time ago.Comment -
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Who did this <a href="https://t.co/zP55AIUY5i">pic.twitter.com/zP55AIUY5i</a></p>— �������� �������� ♛ ✡︎ (@NiohBerg) <a href="https://twitter.com/NiohBerg/status/1806658273623322832?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" >June 28, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>Comment -
BOOM !
What’s that sound you hear ?
The sound of corrupt Jack the Jerkoff Smith’s chances of a trial reaching a verdict before Election Day coming to a screeching halt .
Trump Immunity --
Absolute immunity for core POTUS powers.
PRESUMPTIVE IMMUNITY for "official acts."
No Immunity for private acts.Comment
