Trump under investigation for potential violations of Espionage Act, warrant reveals

You really are biased beyond all reason. Facts mean nothing to you and your fellow Trumpers.

As such, your opinions are meaningless. It's sad that we have to waste a vote to cancel your irrational one.

 

I've often thought this would be the next way to "get" Trump. Afterall a leaked draft version of the SC was enough to inspire a nut to try to kill a SC Justice. Imagine the fame an assassin of Trump would garner among many democrats. Oh sure, they would feign surprise and horror over it while beneath the surface celebrating.

 

Assuming that is the case, then making an example of Dirty Donnie is an even higher priority since he attempted to use the bureaucracy to overturn a free, fair and secure election.

 

Well, when the impeachment Jury are dominated by those over whose careers Trump can bully into oblivion and primary them out of a job given the size of his fan base, that jury's ruling in Trump's favor cannot possibly be construed as 'justice'. Oh, how the framers of the Constitution got that one wrong; they simply could not foresee the idea of America of two parties, left versus right.

So, any cries of 'impeachment attempts that failed' is of no consequence or significance whatsoever.

 

No, there is no such file.

 

Pot, meet kettle.

 

If intent is not required, that will be in the Judge's instructions to the jury, who will stress that their verdict must be achieved within the parameter of the existing law pertaining to any charge.

In the attorney's closing argument, he will reaffirm and remind the jury of that instruction.

Rest assured, if intent is not required for a charge, it will not be considered in the jury's verdict.

Therefore, if a violation only requires possession, regardless of how the possession occurred, and the law requires punishment thereof, then the only deciding issue for a verdict is whether or not the defendant actually possessed the contraband, and whether where the contraband was found, the defendant was the legal owner of the property in which it was found by the FBI. However, and of course, it would have to be established that the reason the defendant was in possession was due directly because of his actions, inadvertently or otherwise, which resulted in possession. However, the exception would be that if someone or a third party planted the contraband, accidentally or intentionally, which was done outside the control of the defendant, then he or she cannot be held responsible.

Caveat: IANAL. the above is my understanding of the law in this case. I could be wrong, of course. Do your own research.

 

Perhaps you could explain why Trump claimed that those Top Secret files that were removed were declassified yet you say they did not exist?

 

If they have the records they can certainly prove them in court. He will also be tried in very very blue DC where his approval is single digits.

Let’s see

Will you accept a verdict from his peers?

 

Polling for even this upcoming election which y’all should have in the bag shows a bare majority in one and an unlikely win in the other.

The youth absolutely hate everything the right wing stands for. I could be wrong and polls might unexpectedly shift over to right wing fascism but that doesn’t look like a possibility.

On the last poll for “should trump be attested” received almost 60% in the affirmative. I don’t think this is going to have the type of impact you are desperately wishing it has.

I am sure that you don’t believe polls unless they agree with you so we will just have to see.

 

He's not going to be charged under the espionage act. It's debatable that a president or former president even can be charged under this act. That's a liberal pipe dream.

 

It's amazing how people who have no idea what they're talking about appear to be so confident speaking about things they don't know.

 

Then why all of the hoopla? The DOJ and FBI has already set the precedent of a politician violating the Espionage Act, and that is 'Pfft; have a nice day."

 

Sure as soon as you identify which ones he’s referring to.

 

do the three code violations being investigated require intent?

To my knowledge, only one of them does.

Feel free to back up your claim. I will be happy to demonstrate the basis for the above claim, by referring to the codes.

So, fire away.

 

I think it’s deliciously fitting for trump to be finally kneecapped by the espionage act since he was a quisling during his time in office.

 

Lol…is that a confession?

 

That’s hilarious given that every single attempt by y’all to “get him” has failed miserably and spectacularly and yet you still think he’s guilty while you say if we get him for something minor that means we got him for realsies lol

Not to mention what do you think is going to happen? You’re going to put him on trial for something you can’t present to the people and you think that’s going to go over well during an election? Lols y’all are going to get mirked in 2022 and 2024

 

Lol...the feds were trying to indict Al Capone for years for all the murders everyone knew he commited, but our strong democratic traditions of observing the rule of law allowed him to escape accountability for his crimes, until they were able to get him for tax evasion.
Unfortunately for you and your orange boy, his latest crimes have left a clear paper trail.

 

love it

 

Lol you can’t prove what y’all think you can.

Nevertheless, let’s assume for a moment you can. What do you think is going to happen? Lol

 

Don't you know? This place is suddenly full of lawyers and other legal experts. Just like it's full of covid experts.

 

Bahahahah so he created the law and then y’all assert he INTENDED on keeping them. Are you people listening to yourselves? Jesus christ

 

He also claims he declassified those docs. So the FBI planted The Stain’s declassified material...???

 

They cannot release the files to the public — the jury has a little more latitude and a judge has complete latitude.

It is interesting that your defense isn’t that he is innocent but rather the crime is so egregious that it cannot be presented. That would tell a cognizant individual that their agenda is flawed

I don’t understand what you believe has failed?
Twice impeached
Removed from office
Numerous associates fined
Numerous associates arrested
Currently under federal investigation

Maybe we have different definitions of failure