And here is the smoking gun in the newly released unsealed indictment

I get it you comment is tongue in cheek, but in the chance you didn't know...

2A is a number implanted in the photo to be referenced to inventory documents, as standard protocol

 

I understand it perfectly. Approximately 30-35% of the nation are gullible has hell.

What else is there to understand?

 

No, that's the number of the FBI's Taco Bell order.

 

Oh man, do you remember the doom and gloom when he got elected?

He was going to start world War 3, the US economy would tank, it will be the end of the country!

That didn't happen, and in most cases just the opposite.

The politics hyperbole has never been higher.

This thread and situation is proof, considering Biden is guilty of the same.

 

It takes some next level arrogance to be so woke.

 

Everything in DC is partisan.

Don't be gullible.

 

let's hear the audio..... more than likely a video.... let's see it...

how strange there just happened to be a recording of a Trump and staffer conversation...

let's see if Trump let the "staffer" read the secret document.....

 

"marked " classified.... words have meanings.... the court documents are specific about that...

 

Don’t be cynical.

 

I doubt there is video. Sounds like it might have been a biographer for Meadows

 

What country are you posting from? Here in America, every citizen accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Your early condemnation sounds exactly like your left wing compatriots in the early days of the Steele Dossier, the Mueller Report, the first Impeachment, the second Impeachment, and the Jan 6 kangaroo courts. .. and Trump was convicted of anything.

I guess some folks never learn.

 

Yada yada yada... like the Mueller Report... the Steele dossier, the First Impeachment, the Second Impeachment, Jan 6... yada yada yada.

 

Staffer?

 

Seems to me if they're gonna use the espionage act to indict him, they'll need to present evidence that espionage occurred. I havn't seen any evidence that classified intel was transferred to hostile enemy powers in the interest of undermining our military. ...which is what the espionage act was created to prevent.

So far its just a big excuse to interfere in his election campaign.

 

If and when this goes to trial, Trump's own words and nothing else will convict him. Right now, Judge Cannon is overseeing the trial, at least the early stages. And his own defense team will try to either get the charges dismissed or dilute as much of the evidence as possible through motions prior to trial.

 

Yep.... Braggs, Smith, and Georgia is just the stunt to pull to have Trump tied up in courts during the next election... the idea is to have Trump so loaded down with doubts people think he has to much baggage (government created baggage, not Trump)... I think Trump campaign ad will be his indictment as he will carry it to victory as Americans are not as stupid to see what is going on as the government thinks...... the DOJ doesn't need any messy court rooms with pesky lawyers, they will use the "court of public opinion... even if they loose it will be after the election.... remember, they are using the tax payer dollars to chase Trump around... and with no cap on spending now, they have unlimited funding to do it.... and a boatload of lawyers who play this game in court every day, it's their playground.

 

Discovery. The prosecution will have to lay it all out on the table.... Remember, grand jury indictments are a one sided presentation without possible rebuttal or cross examination...... there will be no transcribed interpretations there.

 

They will and the indictment is, as Turley said, pretty damning. For cross examiniation, you need to have evidence to present in court for any questions. Thus, any political question will not be allowed, at least federally. And I don't think Trump will take the stand in his own defense either because the prosecution will be prepared, very prepared for those questions in which he must answer truthfully.

 

The DOJ would never lie. Right?

 

and those are the empty folders... so what is your point with that picture...

I have news for America.... any trial if or when it happens..... the DOJ will be playing this silly games of hide and seek...... they will play peek a boo with classified documents as THEY will be the only ones to have security clearance and YOU don't...

 

I'm a realist.

 

And here is the smoking gun in the newly released unsealed indictment

So we want to incarcerate people for what they say in a private conversation. I nearly fell over backward laughing. If they want to find a crime to fit the man, they aren't doing very well. Politics is humanity at its worst.

 

Right.

 

So let me get this straight: are you REALLY calling for publishing top secret documents? Or do you just want to see the stamp saying “TOP SECRET”?

 

That's true in a court of law because in a court of law, one's liberty is at stake.

However, this is the opinions forum, where one's liberty is not at stake, and in the court of public opinion, we are entitled to our opinions, especially if there is publically available information where an opinion is reasonable.

Well, learn the following:

Your little rant requires critical analysis:

1. "Your early condemnation sounds exactly like your left-wing compatriots in the early days of the Steele Dossier, the Mueller Report, the first Impeachment, the second Impeachment, and the Jan 6 kangaroo courts." This is clearly a rant, a sentiment, an opinion you are entitled to, but provided without a stitch of substantiation.
   
   
2. "...and Trump was convicted of anything." In the cases of both impeachments, the Senate did not reach the necessary two-thirds majority to convict Trump. This does not mean that Trump was found innocent of any alleged misconduct; rather, it means that the Senate did not vote to convict him. And why is that? Perhaps the fact that Trump's mean tweets, threats from Trump's base, and the fact that Trump was notorious for primarying detractors, hey, ya think that might have had something to do with the acquittal by Republicans, who, during the days of Watergate, had the courage of their convictions, but no longer? Hmmmm?

Note that he term "kangaroo court" is often used to describe proceedings that lack fairness or due process. However, the subsequent investigations and legal processes related to the events of January 6 have followed established procedures, including the arrests and prosecutions of individuals involved.

Simply put, yours is a rant, not an objective conclusion based on publicly available facts, given that you rely on generalizations and simplistic conclusions of complex events, noting that 'simplistic' does not mean 'simplified' --- it means simplification past the threshold of being a merit worthy statement.