Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston
Wednesday, August 31, 2022
PRIVATE CITIZEN FLORIDA GUY GETS CAUGHT WITH TOP SECRET DOCS THAT BELONG TO US GOVERNMENT -- GOES ON A RANT -- PROVES HE'S AN UNSTABLE KOOK!
This is from Fox!:
Steve Doocy: “Keep in mind, according to the filing, the agents found three classified documents in Donald Trump’s desks. What were they doing in the desk?!”
DOJ in new filing last night regarding Mar-a-Lago search:
Luke Broadwater, NYTimes: “The government also developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the Storage Room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government’s investigation.”
Luke Broadwater, NYTimes Congressional correspondent:
Donald Trump, his attorneys and maybe others, conspired to hide documents that did not belong to them. That alone is illegal. The fact that they were top secret puts the entire nation that they all swore to protect at risk.
Trump is a criminal and a danger to our country. What verbal and mental gymnastics are his co-conspirators in the Trumpblican Party and on FAUX NOOZ going to go through now?
Lindsay Graham said that if Trump is indicted there will be riots in the streets. Then so be it. As all those so called “patriots” have said many times. Freedom isn’t free.
If these apparent criminal offenses are not prosecuted as they would be for any citizen, then Trump will have succeeded in damaging America's justice system.
Tuesday, August 30, 2022
Lindsey Graham: "Nice country you have here. Shame if something happened to it if you administer justice where justice is due."
Graham: “If there’s a prosecution of Donald Trump for mishandling classified information,” said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham on Fox News, there will be “riots in the streets.”
Graham compared what happened to Secretary of State Hilary Clinton with what could happen to Trump. But there is no "bothsiderism" in this case:
"Clinton was not charged because the facts did not merit it. We don’t yet know whether Trump will be criminally charged. But if the Justice Department decides in this case that the facts do merit charges — which of course should be the foundation of any determination to charge — the disparity in charging decisions cannot by itself constitute unequal treatment."
"...there’s a more pernicious danger here that shouldn’t escape notice. Underlying Graham’s threat is another attack on the rule of law, one that more Trump propagandists will resort to when their man’s legal perils deepen. It’s an effort to discredit the idea that the law can be applied to the former president at all."
"...in both cases, the facts would be dictating the outcome. That might seem obvious on its face. But it’s precisely the point that Trump and propagandists such as Graham want to obfuscate.
Let’s be clear: Their argument, effectively, is that equal treatment constitutes refraining from prosecuting Trump regardless of whether investigators conclude that the facts add up to evidence of crimes that prosecutors believe would sustain a conviction!"
My understanding of this false bothsiderism claim:
I believe the Clinton and Trump cases are entirely different.
For one thing, Clinton turned over all her devices voluntarily; there was no need for a search warrant.
For another, the laws governing the records Clinton and Trump were dealing with were different.
Clinton was dealing with Federal records, covered by the Federal Records Act. Very few are permanent; most must be retained only as long as necessary to serve their legal purpose, as prescribed by official records schedules.
Trump is dealing with Presidential Records, covered by the Presidential Records Act. All of these are permanent, and belong to the American people, under the auspices of the National Archives.
Monday, August 29, 2022
Brookings Institution scholar Norman Ornstein points out that we quickly learned from the redacted affidavit that there was no lock on Trump’s storage area.
Beyond that, Ornstein says, “There is no revelation here beyond what we knew — which is just devastating to Trump.”
The former president had “documents, including the most sensitive national security secrets, handled in a slapdash fashion, kept in multiple unsecured locations, intermixed with photos and family stuff.”
Ornstein observes the plethora of “lies about what had and had not been returned [and] laughable assertions about Trump’s ability to declassify unilaterally.”
He concludes, “It reinforces how dangerous Trump is to the nation, and that is without any information yet about what malign reasons he had for grabbing these documents.”
vs. a Trump cultist blog whining:
Why do we read Trump cultist blogs? Because that's how we know what they're thinking and what their reasons are for continuing to support him.
The above comment shows us that they slavishly support Trump and that they have zero evidence for what was posted on their blog. It's all weak, paranoid speculation and pathetic whining because Trump is in deep, deep trouble, and they just can't bring themselves to believe what a corrupt and colossal disaster he is for America.
They make up stories to shield themselves from the truth. Because THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH about Trump.
1) There were a LOT of documents
Of the 15 boxes Trump staffers returned to government possession in January, 14 contained super-secret information. “A preliminary triage of the documents with classification markings revealed the following approximate numbers: 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, including 67 documents marked as CONFIDENTIAL, 92 documents marked as SECRET, and 25 documents marked as TOP SECRET.”
2) The claim of declassification is evidence against Trump It is telling that the government wants to highlight the argument from Trump’s team, raised in particular by Kash Patel, that Trump had a standing order to declassify the materials. (“FPOTUS COUNSEL 1 asked DOJ to consider a few ‘principles,’ which include FPOTUS COUNSEL 1′s claim that a President has absolute authority to declassify documents.” This is nonsense both factually and legally. It is also irrelevant to the retention of any government documents. There are no such principles that would help Trump here.
3) We don’t know how the government knew Trump still had more documents This portion of the affidavit is redacted, a necessary (and expected) measure to protect the investigation and identity of witnesses. If the Trump brain trust thought they were going to get the name of a “mole,” they really are living in fantasy land.
4) Trump had no right to keep top-secret documents in an unsecured location
5) We don’t know what actions might have violated the obstruction statute (Section 1519) and the mutilation statute (Section 2071) The latter subjects to criminal punishment “Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing ...”). We know from news reports that certain documents were torn. But we do not know whether Trump attempted to destroy or alter other documents. (His handwriting was found on some.) The New York Times previously reported that subpoenaed surveillance “footage showed that, after one instance in which Justice Department officials were in contact with Mr. Trump’s team, boxes were moved in and out of the room.”