"No such law exists"

Tinkerpeach said:
Trump isn't being charged under the PRA, he is being charged under the Espionage Act.

Only six charges do not fall under the espionage act and they are all the same with different wording relating to the charge that he hid documents.

Nothing about the charges relate to the PRA.
Click to expand...

Which is appropriate.

The laws Trump broke are under the Espionage Act and not the PRA.

Arguing that the PRA applies and under the PRA Trump can do what he wants are simply lies.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
Were they classified under the law?

The law says no.
Click to expand...

They were classified. There is a process for declassification and Trump knew that. It involves all the depts that use the documents Do you really believe Trump or any other president could think docs into and out of classification? Do you really?" The law says they were classified.
 
Nordberg said:
They were classified. There is a process for declassification and Trump knew that. It involves all the depts that use the documents Do you really believe Trump or any other president could think docs into and out of classification? Do you really?" The law says they were classified.
Click to expand...

There is no law dictating declassification therefore no criminal charges can be brought for that.

Which is why none were.
 
QP! said:
You are so stupid you are denying cooperation agreements are entered into pre indictment or any charges being filed.

You are so stupid you are denying some people are given immunity and are NEVER charged for doing the same crime others did who are charged because they are cooperating witnesses.


You say i am dumb because i am telling you the above happens and exists and is normal in law, simply because you are so stupid and do not know this happens and thus you think you are right.


You are not. You are stupid.
Click to expand...

So you are actually trying to argue that you can make a plea deal by going back in time. Gotit. :laugh:
 
Doc Dutch said:
So you think Trump's DOJ was corrupt? Or are you just running away again, Tink?
Click to expand...

There was already a lot of corruption in the DOJ. Trump was trying to clean it up, but was only partially successful. It was a bigger problem than Trump thought. Pay attention, ya dumb Sock Drawer.
 
QP! said:
On NARA websites and through the links to the PRA cited within which are copied to you each week, you ignore and then tell the same lies again.
Click to expand...

Title 18, Title 44, and the Constitution of the United States are not lies.
NARA has NO authority to limit the authority of the President (or ex Presidents).
 
QP! said:
Which is appropriate.

The laws Trump broke are under the Espionage Act and not the PRA.

Arguing that the PRA applies and under the PRA Trump can do what he wants are simply lies.
Click to expand...

Title 44 is not a lie. Title 44 DOES apply.
The Constitution of the United States is not a lie.
Trump broke no law. He is authorized to retain any document he wishes.
 
Nordberg said:
They were classified. There is a process for declassification and Trump knew that. It involves all the depts that use the documents Do you really believe Trump or any other president could think docs into and out of classification? Do you really?" The law says they were classified.
Click to expand...

Trump does not have to declassify anything, Nordbutt.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
There is no law dictating declassification therefore no criminal charges can be brought for that.

Which is why none were.
Click to expand...
Lies.

The courts have established in the only 3 precedent cases, all prompted by Trump idiocy, that unless the process of declassification is followed, no Trump (POTUS) words (statements on news 'i declassified this') or writings (twitter...I declassified this) actually result in declassification.

A POTUS statements or writing or thoughts are NOT enough if NOT followed thru with instructions to the various departments to, to take the steps to declassify.


It was Trump himself who sent his WH lawyers and Mark Meadows to argue that his words or writings were not enough to declassify when he immediately got FOIA requests for that material and he did not want to give it over. So the Trump WH and Meadows argued 'it was not enough' and won in court.
 
QP! said:
Lies.

The courts have established in the only 3 precedent cases, all prompted by Trump idiocy, that unless the process of declassification is followed, no Trump (POTUS) words (statements on news 'i declassified this') or writings (twitter...I declassified this) actually result in declassification.

A POTUS statements or writing or thoughts are NOT enough if NOT followed thru with instructions to the various departments to, to take the steps to declassify.


It was Trump himself who sent his WH lawyers and Mark Meadows to argue that his words or writings were not enough to declassify when he immediately got FOIA requests for that material and he did not want to give it over. So the Trump WH and Meadows argued 'it was not enough' and won in court.
Click to expand...

cite those cases.
 
QP! said:
Lies.

The courts have established in the only 3 precedent cases, all prompted by Trump idiocy, that unless the process of declassification is followed, no Trump (POTUS) words (statements on news 'i declassified this') or writings (twitter...I declassified this) actually result in declassification.

A POTUS statements or writing or thoughts are NOT enough if NOT followed thru with instructions to the various departments to, to take the steps to declassify.


It was Trump himself who sent his WH lawyers and Mark Meadows to argue that his words or writings were not enough to declassify when he immediately got FOIA requests for that material and he did not want to give it over. So the Trump WH and Meadows argued 'it was not enough' and won in court.
Click to expand...

Trump doesn't have to declassify anything, dumbass.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
cite those cases.
Click to expand...

Who the fuck do you think you are talking to.

I don't fucking work for you.

i've cited them numerous times before and to you but you do not read and when you do you do not comprehend what you read. Because you're stupid.
 
QP! said:
Who the fuck do you think you are talking to.

I don't fucking work for you.

i've cited them numerous times before and to you but you do not read and when you do you do not comprehend what you read. Because you're stupid.
Click to expand...

lol, you are a joker which is why you can't cite them now.

Go away with your lies.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
lol, you are a joker which is why you can't cite them now.

Go away with your lies.
Click to expand...

I can and have cited them, many times.

But you get what you give. When i asked you to cite your claims and you could not you told me you did not work for me and to GFYS, as your reply. So i love that the same response back to you, gets you so rustled now. You cannot take what you give and that makes me happy.
 
QP! said:
I can and have cited them, many times.

But you get what you give. When i asked you to cite your claims and you could not you told me you did not work for me and to GFYS, as your reply. So i love that the same response back to you, gets you so rustled now. You cannot take what you give and that makes me happy.
Click to expand...

But you can't now for some reason?

It takes 10 seconds to copy and paste.

So go ahead.

Prove me wrong.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
But you can't now for some reason?

It takes 10 seconds to copy and paste.

So go ahead.

Prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

What would it prove? Nothing. All that matters is what is proved in court. I'd wager on it, but Trumpers hate making bets on Trump. LOL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top