I'm not arguing that it is incompetence.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Printable View
I'm not arguing that it is incompetence.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Found liable for sexual assault and defamation of Jean E Carroll.
5 million damages
I'm kind of wondering why they agreed that he sexually abused her, but didn't feel convinced that he raped her?
Weirdly still don’t think it will stop him running again!
i'm sure he won't have to put his grubby hands in his pockets to pay the fine
let the crowdfunding commence
It absolutely won't. For his demented followers it will just be further 'proof' that the establishment is out to get him 😔Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
The reprehensible Jacob Rees-Mogg defending him on GB news.
A vote for the conservatives is a vote for this ****.
Trump indicted again on 7 charges
And once again this doesn't stop him running for office. The USA is mental.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
... And are being spurred on by Republican politicians, including the leader of the house - who know exactly who he is and what he's done, and that this has all been brought about by his own behaviour - who are claiming that this is Biden engaging in election interference. And failing to acknowledge that this happened under the direction of a Trump appointed Republican FBI director, with charges only laid after recommendation by a Grand Duty in Florida, following evidence from Republican witnesses and Trump employees, appointees and cohorts. It's deeply cynical, cowardly and irresponsible.Quote:
Originally Posted by neil7908
Regretfully the Trump hard core will merely have their twisted belief that Trump is being victimised confirmed even more
I hold no love for the clown, but at this point, he's simply been charged with committing a crime, he's not been found guilty of anything yet in a criminal court. If (and I hope when) he is convicted, he'll be disqualified for running for office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
Government is merely a legalised crime syndicate. Everybody who has made it to the top has done so with blood on their hands and are clearly immune to any real life consequences for their actions. Trump getting a pretendy telling off in court won't change anything. It's all a show that's put in place for the masses to give them a false sense of accountability being upheld, when there's really no accountability at all.
https://twitter.com/calltoactivism/s...dxJXScFNwz8V4A
Can’t read this and not smile.[emoji23]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do you think Biden should be indicted as well ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
If he committed a crime the same then yes. Don’t think he has though? The most serious charges are the obstruction ones and the lying? No evidence of Biden doing that?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thought concealing classified documents was a serious crime .Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
What's he done?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Has he concealed any?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The FBI had to search his houses to find them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
He invited the FBI in to come and check and gave them full access to everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Trump repeatedly blocked the FBI until they had to raid his home. Trump then doctored the cctv videos to make it look like nobody had seen the docs.
There is a massive difference.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Biden had been sitting on the documents for 7 yearsQuote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
They obviously weren't that important then.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Yeah but Biden ...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyMtY7Ga...pg&name=medium
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
if it wasn’t so terrifying that such documents are lying around, it would be comical given how much the Americans like to bang on about national security, and have been chasing the guy from wiki leaks for years, yet a ‘patriot’ has extremely sensitive information casually around the house
If there was evidence that he had committed a crime, then of course he should. In the wake of the Trump incident, his people looked through his stored documents to see if there was anything that should have been returned. They found some documents, reported them to the authorities and volunteered to cooperate with any further search or enquiry, which is what happened. Same thing with Mike Pence.In both cases, the investigation concluded that there had been no deliberate attempt to conceal or misuse the docs.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Trump ignored polite and discrete requests for the return of specific documents for over a year. He ignored a subpeona for their return, and we now know he moved boxes of documents out of the way of the ensuing FBI raid, and lied about it.
There's no comparison - if Trump had cooperated, we'd never have known he took them, and none of this would have happened.
Also worth noting that the rules on information handling were looser when Biden was VP. Trump criminalised mishandling of government documents as part of his ongoing campaign against Hillary Clinton.
Removed them from the Whitehouse and never replaced them after he was booted out, that's the offence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Take him away!
Some of them were classified and that should be what matters. Blind justice and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
I think the attempt to obstruct and conceal is the difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Except it doesn't. The national records authority published its guidelines on wrongly retained records, should you come across them after leaving office. Pence and Biden looked for and found materials and followed the official procedures for their return, and following investigation were not found to have committed an offence. If Trump had returned the records as requested, he wouldn't have been charged either.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
As an aside, it was pointed out at the time that there is a recognised over-classification issue, with vast quantities of items being unnecessarily categorised as classified by default, and it was suggested that probably all previous presidents and VPs will have items amongst their papers that technically shouldn't be there.
However, none of that is relevant to Trump's indictments, which are based on, as others have pointed out, refusing to return, hiding, and lying about his wilful retention of documents that we now know have national security significance. And because he's a childish braggart, he showed one to at least one other person to demonstrate his importance.
What the world needs more than anything right now is for folk to stop making excuses for the likes of Trump, Johnson and Putin and the way they play so fast and loose with stuff like the law and the truth.
Just because the end might be what you perceive to be in your interests, doesn't justify their means.
Isn't anyone curious to know what was in those documents that he was so desperate to hold on to?
This article is from Reuters :Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-...es-2023-06-09/
There is more detail available about the document he's heard sharing with someone at Bedminster, when he was trying to show up General Milley.
The question is why. Some people have suggested he planned to sell them or use them as leverage. Others have suggested - maybe more likely - that he planned to use them to embarrass people or countries or just as 'trophies' to show off to himself and others how important he was.
Let's see what former US Attorney General William Barr:Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1...546732544?s=20
What would he be indicted on?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcas...=1000616872738
A great listen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hope he is found guilty and punished accordingly. If found not guilty, I think he will walk the next election.
He can stand even if he's jailed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
I don't think that's true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
In some states he won’t even be able to vote, never mind stand for election. He needs to delay this as long as possible till after the election and hope he wins so he can pardon himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
According to some yapper on the BBC News channel last night it is. He could stand but he wouldn't be allowed to vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/0...rison-00090931Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
Fair play, I hadn’t realised it was possible. Doubt he has a chance either way but from prison, I think even Americans are not that daft.[emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, even if he can stand, he probably wouldn’t win. If he is not convicted, there will be a groundswell of support for him, and he will undoubtedly win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kato
"As an aside, it was pointed out at the time that there is a recognised over-classification issue, with vast quantities of items being unnecessarily categorised as classified by default, and it was suggested that probably all previous presidents and VPs will have items amongst their papers that technically shouldn't be there."
When I was in the civil service I heard about an unnamed UK Government department that classified a manufacturer's advertising document as secret. A document that anyone could ask the manufacturer for!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltheHibby
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trum...media-believes
I know it’s Fox News but the Presidents Records Act does seem to give Trump the right to retain any record from his time in the presidency.
This suggestion has been widely debunked, and the National Archives issued a statement rejecting it.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/29/polit...alk/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/09/polit...ent/index.html
Seriously, did you really, honestly believe something you read on Fox News? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
No , not without some deep thought. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Are you saying the Presidential Records Act does not exist ?
Where did I say that?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
It was mentioned on Fox News and you don’t believe anything on Fox NewsQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
It's not whether it exists it whether it applies in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
Really? You thought it worth typing this out?Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
(Don't bother answering).
Saw Gordon Brown at the Borders Book Festival yesterday.
Talking about Donald Trump "In the US, they like their presidents to have conviction. And in Donald Trump they have a candidate who has convictions."
Also in relation to Trump, "...the only President who has paid more in fines than taxes"
Here is the text of the National Archives (the people responsible for receiving and storing and securing Presidential Records under the Act) statement about the claim you're referring to:Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
Press Statements in Response to Media Queries About Presidential Records
Media Alert ·Friday, June 9, 2023
June 9, 2023, statement
Recent media reports have generated a large number of queries about Presidential records and the Presidential Records Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 2201-2209. The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations. Below is additional information about how NARA carries out its responsibilities under the PRA. Please note that the PRA treats the records of the President and those of the Vice President in almost the same manner such that, in most cases below, President and Vice President can be used interchangeably.
How much time do outgoing Presidents have to go through their papers to determine what to retain as personal documents?
The Presidential Records Act (PRA) requires the President to separate personal documents from Presidential records before leaving office. 44 U.S.C. 2203(b). The PRA makes clear that, upon the conclusion of the President’s term in office, NARA assumes responsibility for the custody, control, preservation of, and access to the records of a President. 44 U.S.C. 2203(g)(1). The PRA makes the legal status of Presidential records clear and unambiguous, providing that the United States reserves and retains “complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records.” 44 U.S.C. 2202. There is no history, practice, or provision in law for presidents to take official records with them when they leave office to sort through, such as for a two-year period as described in some reports. If a former President or Vice President finds Presidential records among personal materials, he or she is expected to contact NARA in a timely manner to secure the transfer of those Presidential records to NARA.
How does NARA store the records of an outgoing President after the end of an administration?
In the past, and in accordance with the Presidential Libraries Act (44 U.S.C. 2112), former Presidents would fund, build, endow, and donate to NARA a traditional Presidential Library (NARA-operated traditional Presidential Libraries exist from Presidents Hoover through George W. Bush). Accordingly, NARA would arrange to move the Presidential records to a temporary NARA facility near the designated location of the forthcoming Library – e.g., Hoffman Estates, IL, for the records of President Obama (who subsequently decided not to build a Presidential Library for NARA, see below); Dallas, TX, for President George W. Bush; Little Rock, AR, for President Clinton. In each case, the facility was modified to meet NARA requirements for records storage and security, NARA had physical and legal custody of the records from the end of the Administration, and the temporary facility was under the exclusive control of NARA.
NARA no longer expects to move Presidential records to a temporary facility outside of Washington, DC, given the relatively small volume of paper Presidential records created by recent administrations, as compared to the huge volume of electronic records and the strong interest in the digitization of paper records. In addition, the increased endowment requirements first applicable to President Obama under the Presidential Libraries Act may impact decisions by former Presidents concerning whether to build a traditional Presidential Library for NARA.
Prior to the end of his administration, President Trump did not communicate any intent to NARA with regard to funding, building, endowing, and donating a Presidential Library to NARA under the Presidential Libraries Act. Accordingly, the Trump Presidential records have been and continue to be maintained by NARA in the Washington, DC, area, and there was no reason for NARA to consider a temporary facility in Florida or elsewhere.
[...]
Did President Obama take Presidential records to Chicago after he left office?
No. When President Obama left office in 2017, NARA took physical and legal custody of the records of his administration in accordance with the Presidential Records Act. NARA made arrangements to move the roughly 30 million pages of paper Presidential records of the Obama administration to a federally acquired, modified, and secured temporary facility that NARA leased in Hoffman Estates, IL, which meets NARA’s requirements for records storage and security. NARA moved the records to Hoffman Estates because of the intention of President Obama to build a Presidential Library in the Chicago area.
Subsequently, former President Obama decided not to fund, build, endow, and donate a physical Presidential Library to NARA (his foundation is building a privately operated Presidential Center that will not have archival storage for any Presidential records). Instead, the Obama Foundation agreed to help pay for the cost of digitizing the unclassified paper records and for the cost of moving the classified and unclassified records from NARA’s temporary facility in Hoffman Estates to other NARA-controlled facilities (for which NARA otherwise would have to pay). A September 2018 Letter of Intent from the Obama Foundation to the Archivist of the United States addresses Obama’s commitment to paying for these costs; but it in no way suggests that Obama had physical custody of any Presidential records. As NARA stated in September 2022, neither former President Obama nor his foundation “had possession or control over the [Presidential] records” of his administration.
[...]
Did Presidents before Nixon have total control over their records?
Prior to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which first applied to President Reagan, all of the official records of the White House were considered the personal property of the President (from Presidents Washington to Carter). Presidents Hoover through Carter chose to donate their records to NARA, along with the Presidential Library buildings where they are stored.
While these Presidents had control over their personal papers, they lacked control over the classification status of any records that were classified. The classification status of the information in the papers remained under the control of the U.S. Government.
The Nixon records, including the Watergate tapes, were seized and transferred to NARA in 1974 by a federal law, known as the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act (PRMPA), 44 U.S.C. 2111, note. In response to the Nixon issue, Congress enacted the Presidential Records Act in 1978 to change legal ownership of Presidential records from the President to the United States Government, which took effect at the beginning of the Reagan administration.
Did NARA provide archival assistance to the Trump Administration during the transition of records at the end of his administration?
Yes. As explained in NARA’s April 23, 2023, press statement, NARA’s General Counsel sent a letter on February 10, 2023, to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, clarifying a prior response he had given to the Committee. The letter explained that NARA did send staff members to the White House in the final weeks of the Trump Administration to assist with the move of the physical records (including artifacts), which was similar to the assistance that NARA had provided to the White House during the three previous Presidential transitions.
[...]
What are “Presidential records” under the Presidential Records Act (PRA)?
"’Presidential records’ means documentary materials created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.” "
https://www.archives.gov/press/press.../2022/nr22-001
https://youtu.be/7KRceywz-rU
This video from Legal Eagle on YouTube breaks it down in pretty simple terms and talks about why Pence and Biden aren’t facing the same legal issues.
All about the cover up now really. As the saying going, it’s always worse than the crime itself.
Last bit sounds familiar... as old Boris is finding out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
another rioter gets jail time, at first i thought it was a lengthy sentence but after reading further what the sh*tbag done to that cop he's lucky it's not 20 years :agree:
Capitol rioter who shocked police officer with stun gun is sentenced to over 12 years in prison (msn.com)
the big vile Pumpkin should be remanded in custody, rikers will do :agree:
Trump faces four criminal counts as six co-conspirators listed in January 6 indictment – live (theguardian.com)
Unfortunately these are Federal charges so it would most likely be Terre Haute or the lovely surroundings of ADX Florence.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haymaker
good he can get a cell next to El chapo :greengrin
as long as he never gets to enter the White House again
Must not make a rhyming joke about anyone entering his White House while in prison.
https://twitter.com/ryanair/status/1...dxJXScFNwz8V4A
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
🤣👏Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
ain't this true
https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.n...7Q&oe=64CFCC6A
The latest indictment is unbelievable. I just listened to a podcast of it all and it beggars belief how the hell he is leading the polls.
The republican party is now basically a cult.
The Republic Party is divided, there's those who think Trump is a charlatan and those who think he's being persecuted. The problem is that those who think he's being persecuted are firmly behind Trump and those who think he's a crook are all divided amongst other potential candidates.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee
The poll of polls for Republican nomination are as clear as I've ever seen for them in opposition, he'll walk it and then unbelievably favourite for the white House
Trump53.4%
DeSantis15.6%
Ramaswamy6.9%
Pence4.4%
Haley3.0%
Scott2.9%
Christie2.6%
Hutchinson0.7%
In some ways I get why people vote for folk like Trump etc but I really despair about the fact they genuinely think that they give a flying **** about anyone but themselves and care about them, mental
Americans are so entrenched. Loads decide what they watch on TV, music the listen to and beer they drink on political lines. There's many the same in the uk but not the same percentage. When boris got charged for his covid parties they slid down the polls. Republicans seem more entrenched after he's been indicted
https://i.ibb.co/HVJQCxY/USPRISONDENT24-LRGR.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
You think he'll get prosecuted. He's surely guilty looking at the information yesterday, I can't see it thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Even if he is prosecuted, there is no law in the US preventing him from campaigning for presidency from his jail cell. It's completely insane. But in the US, you're not allowed to vote behind bars. But you're allowed to vote for somebody who is behind bars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
as expected fourth indictment for the orange one https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...election-video
Arrest warrant has been issued, sheriff confirms mug shots will be taken 😆
Agreed, an utterly insane situationQuote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
And there is no power to pardon for this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stairway 2 7
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Trump has just been hit with a RICO charge from the state of Georgia which carries a mandatory 5 year prison sentence with no option of suspension or parole. Will be interesting to see how he tries to squirm his way out of this one.My bet would be more unhinged rants on social media over communist judges and juries or some nonsense.
I was initially very sceptical if he would ever see the inside of a jail cell but given the sheer volume and severity of the numerous cases against him, I think it's almost certain he will spend the rest of his life in prison (based also on his age of course).Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
The concern here is what happens then? He's already gone a pretty long way to destroying anything left of American democracy and decency. But the forces he's unleashed aren't going away. I actually fear what comes after him. That's not to suggest for a second that he shouldn't be prosecuted, more that Trumpism as a insane hard right philosophy has set root in America. And the next person to pick up the mantle might be smarter and even more ruthless than him.
It usually starts with lots of upper case rants when pressing buttons on his keyboard. What a mess the US is in.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
Does it really matter what happens to Trump? There will still be the billionaires pushing a far-right agenda, Mercer, Murdoch, the various hedge funders - their greed is insatiable and given their power perhaps unstoppable. They choose wilful idiots like Trump and "Boris" as the absolute guff they spout means no one looks at them.
Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk
That's also true in the UK I believe - Bobby Sands became an MP while he was in prison.Quote:
Originally Posted by HarpOnHibee
I wouldn’t worry too much, he isn’t going to win from jail. It’s hard to see a path for him to win at all looking at the electoral college.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think laws were passed just after that to prevent anyone in prison standing for electionQuote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
That will be why they keep arresting former SNP leaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by McD
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
THIS is the sort of utter morons Trump appeals to https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...c1109ee9&ei=58
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...c800458bd6.jpg
I’m beginning to think he’ll pull out the running. His legal troubles are going to last the entire length of the campaign and more and more, he is going to be told he can’t just keep talking nonsense without landing in jail. And what is a Trump speech if it isn’t complete nonsense. He won’t be able to open his mouth without incriminating himself.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Biden is rightfully staying quiet on this and letting the Justice Department do their job. I do wonder if he’ll offer him a pardon (on the Federal charges) if found guilty on the basis he drops out of the running, maybe politics as a whole. Very much doubt this but could be happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Zero chance this happens because it would look like admitting defeat to Trump. Also Trump could never be trusted to keep his end of the deal. And also because it’s the wrong thing to do and Biden would never be forgiven by democrats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lendo
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Yep, Trump would be crowing from the rooftops that Biden (and by extension the democrats) had capitulated to him
I've listened to podcasts detailing the indictments in full and its unbelievable!!!
Beggars belief how supposedly intelligent people still continue to back this guy. He's basically a cult leader so I can understand where his support comes from but its all the republican party who continue to back him that baffles me.
Exact same here, when long after it became clear he was a wrong 'un, virtually the whole Tory party continued to publicly back Johnson. "Winner."Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee
I have a friend who moved to the US in the 70s. I always thought of him as being highly intelligent. He's a Trump supporter. I can hardly talk to him these days, and certainly not about politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee
It always brings home to me how shallow and materialistic people are.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroxburnHibee
The fear of being even just a little bit poorer allows folk to tolerate all sorts of stuff that should be unthinkable.
I'm not mad on the extreme ends of the left/right spectrum but I have respect for reasonable people and politicians who I just happen to be on the other side to on various issues (my standpoint can vary from left to right wing depending on the subject). What I just don't get is how the aversion to having to pay a higher tax rate (or to have to cut public spending if you're that way inclined) can suddenly make you tolerate the likes of Johnson's wanton lawbreaking all over the shop, Trump's blatant disregard for democracy and the American constitution or arguably Tony Blair and the wars he has on his conscience.
:agree: It would be good if the MSM treated the 'all taxation is theft' brigade as the extremists they are. MSM's quick enough to brand the 'all property is theft' lot as wild-eyed terrorists, but roll out the Tufton St fanatics on Politics Live, Newsnight and the rest as if they're normal human beings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
i listened to a GOP candidate Chris Christie this morning on CNN, former Governer of New Jersey, https://www.bing.com/videos/rivervie...917&ajaxhist=0 i thought he talked very well, decent and you would think there's still 'normal' Republicans that would vote for him instead of that utter lunatic Trump, he would probably get some Dems voting for him as well i would think or maybe he's just not nasty enough for the majority of Trumps groupies.
Ok. Not Trump, but Trump's party.
https://t.co/6pGj4N8O5u
Quote:
A guy in North Carolina believes that Beyoncé is "satanic," that the 1969 moon landing may have been fake and that there's a ruling class of secretive reptiles.
This guy is Mark Robinson, the leading GOP candidate to be the state's next governor.
the big man mountain self reported at 215lbs :rolleyes:
https://thespun.com/nfl/everyone-sai...-were-released