The “lock her up” crowd…

Tinkerpeach said:
31 of them are, 6 are not.

And as I have stated before, the espionage act is a very specific law, it is not broad whatsoever so the burden of proof becomes even higher for Smith.

Although I can see why he used it because filing charges under the PRA would have gotten him nowhere.

Now what is interesting is that according to precedent new laws override existing laws and what Trump is charged with does fall under PRA rules meaning that it will overrule the espionage act.

Smith is going to have to prove in a court of law that the records Trump had were not only used to try and damage the nation but that they actually did.

About 10 of the charges are going to rely on Trumps intent to use them to hurt the nation, the others are going to have to be proven to actually have harmed the nation in some way.

That is a tough thing to prove in a court of law.

Showing a document to a friend isn't really going to cut it.

So these 31 charges are essentially meaningless, they won't stand up, it's the other six that are going to be problematic for Trump. Trump's defense has to prove that he had a legal right to them, Smith has to prove he didn't.

Whatever the jury decides will ultimately end up in the Supreme Court however.
Click to expand...

What 6 are not dependent on the espionage act?

Can’t answer?
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you seem a bit dense.....yes, I support prosecution reform......the exact opposite of what progressives support.....I would only limit the office of prosecutors to those who feel it is proper to prosecute.....no soft on crime lib'ruls......
Click to expand...

Seems like you agree with me then. Welcome comrade. We both want 'no soft on crime' prosecutors which means Trump gets charged with all his various crimes.

Agreed.
 
Flash said:
And the right-wing wants to defund the FBI.
Click to expand...

And the military.

The right wing has completed shifted to outflank the far left. They are the biggest supporters by far, to defund law enforcement and the military.

I'll take it.
 
QP! said:
And the military.

The right wing has completed shifted to outflank the far left. They are the biggest supporters by far, to defund law enforcement and the military.

I'll take it.
Click to expand...

If Americans lived in a vacuum, that might work, but we don't. In a world without American military support, the world would quickly be run by people like Putin, Xi and Kim. Will you take that too?
 
Doc Dutch said:
If Americans lived in a vacuum, that might work, but we don't. In a world without American military support, the world would quickly be run by people like Putin, Xi and Kim. Will you take that too?
Click to expand...
Do you believe America has the best equipment and best military?

7uvpyv.jpg


Because if you do, then the US does not ALSO have to spend more than the next 10 combined.

If my military is better than yours in equipment and quality i just need to spend as much as you, maybe slightly less even and i will still have an advantage.

So ya, I think you can cut the US Military 50% and still spend more than the top next 3 combined and fix SS issues for the foreseeable future and give everyone full MC4A, like the rest of the first world has.

But again ask the republiclowns as they are the ones wanting to defund the military and law enforcement, more than the left.
 
QP! said:
Do you believe America has the best equipment and best military?

https://i.imgflip.com/7uvpyv.jpg

Because if you do, then the US does not ALSO have to spend more than the next 10 combined.

If my military is better than yours in equipment and quality i just need to spend as much as you, maybe slightly less even and i will still have an advantage.

So ya, I think you can cut the US Military 50% and still spend more than the top next 3 combined and fix SS issues for the foreseeable future and give everyone full MC4A, like the rest of the first world has.

But again ask the republiclowns as they are the ones wanting to defund the military and law enforcement, more than the left.
Click to expand...

Tech costs money. China has more active military, but they are ill-trained and equipped. Look at the Russian military performance in Ukraine to see what an ill-trained, ill-equipped military looks like.

That said, some equipment and tech is forced on the military by Congress. You can guess why.
 
Jarod said:
What 6 are not dependent on the espionage act?
Click to expand...

The six charges relating to obstruction.

Trump is facing 31 counts of violating the Espionage Act through “willful retention” of classified records, plus six counts — including obstruction of justice and false statements — stemming from his alleged efforts to impede the investigation. Nauta was also charged with six felonies related to the alleged cover-up.
Click to expand...

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/...nsealed Friday,locations after he left office.

Did you not read the indictment?
 
Jarod said:
Thanks I wanted you to share where you plagiarized your comment and I wanted it on the record.
Click to expand...

Poor attempt at backtracking.

Don't make me embarrass you even more.

You need to realize that everything I post is researched first so be more careful when you challenge me in the future because you will lose.
 
Doc Dutch said:
Tech costs money. China has more active military, but they are ill-trained and equipped. Look at the Russian military performance in Ukraine to see what an ill-trained, ill-equipped military looks like.

That said, some equipment and tech is forced on the military by Congress. You can guess why.
Click to expand...

You seems to be making my case.

Or are you arguing the military can afford no cuts and needs to spend as much as the next 10 combined despite them being human asset heavy and largely useless, as Russia is proving?
 
QP! said:
You seems to be making my case.

Or are you arguing the military can afford no cuts and needs to spend as much as the next 10 combined despite them being human asset heavy and largely useless, as Russia is proving?
Click to expand...

I'm saying yes, there can be cuts, but not half like you are pushing. Tech costs money. China and Russia equip their soldiers with rifles and ill-fitting uniforms. We equip ours with Night Vision and drones operated from the other side of the planet.

For over a century, the US was protected by two oceans. We didn't need an army or navy. We built one after the Democrat Wilson got us into WWI then it was dismantled. We built another one when the Democrat Roosevelt got us into WWII. Truman and the Democrats decided to keep the military they built after WWII. That's when the Democrat Truman got us into Korea. Later the Democrats Kennedy and Johnson got us into Vietnam. After the Republican Reagan ended the Cold War, our military was largely dismantled.

One of the few things Trump did correct was to give our NATO allies a kick in the ass. Sure, he was like a bull in a china shop, but one reason our allies have such small militaries is because American taxpayers are carrying the load for them. I'm fine with pulling our troops out of Europe and Asia, but only fucking morons and moonbats believe leaving a power vacuum is a good thing.

We should downsize our military in coordination with our allies upsizing theirs. Unless you support Russia and China, then you'd just want the US to downsize.
 
Doc Dutch said:
I'm saying yes, there can be cuts, but not half like you are pushing. Tech costs money. China and Russia equip their soldiers with rifles and ill-fitting uniforms. We equip ours with Night Vision and drones operated from the other side of the planet.

For over a century, the US was protected by two oceans. We didn't need an army or navy. We built one after the Democrat Wilson got us into WWI then it was dismantled. We built another one when the Democrat Roosevelt got us into WWII. Truman and the Democrats decided to keep the military they built after WWII. That's when the Democrat Truman got us into Korea. Later the Democrats Kennedy and Johnson got us into Vietnam. After the Republican Reagan ended the Cold War, our military was largely dismantled.

One of the few things Trump did correct was to give our NATO allies a kick in the ass. Sure, he was like a bull in a china shop, but one reason our allies have such small militaries is because American taxpayers are carrying the load for them. I'm fine with pulling our troops out of Europe and Asia, but only fucking morons and moonbats believe leaving a power vacuum is a good thing.

We should downsize our military in coordination with our allies upsizing theirs. Unless you support Russia and China, then you'd just want the US to downsize.
Click to expand...

ya i don't care it is 50%. It is the republi'clowns' pushing the most cuts. I am just agreeing with them and welcoming them to the progressive side.

But even at 50% cut they are still vastly outspending the number 2 and in fact the top next 3. So if we cannot outspend the top next 3 at 50% and still not dominate something is wrong with us. Tech expense or not.
 
QP! said:
ya i don't care it is 50%. It is the republi'clowns' pushing the most cuts. I am just agreeing with them and welcoming them to the progressive side.

But even at 50% cut they are still vastly outspending the number 2 and in fact the top next 3. So if we cannot outspend the top next 3 at 50% and still not dominate something is wrong with us. Tech expense or not.
Click to expand...
That's because the Party of Trump wants to weaken the US and the West the let Putin run all over Europe and China in the Pacific. I can see why you agree with them.
 
Doc Dutch said:
That's because the Party of Trump wants to weaken the US and the West the let Putin run all over Europe and China in the Pacific. I can see why you agree with them.
Click to expand...

Oh so you are back to saying we are so useless that even if we are given a budget that is greater than the next top 3 combined we stand no chance and will get 'run over'?

Nice.

Is it possible i just have more faith in our military than you and do not think they are garbage who if you start them with more money than the next 3 combined can easily beat back. contain, control, any of them?

I happen to think the US would still easily beat the top 3 combined but those 3 would never combine, so realistically we only have to beat one of them.

That you think Russia would just run over us, with a budget that is more than the next 3 combined, is really sad. You seem to really hate,... no better yet, think our military is crap both in strategy and execution that with more money than the top 3, Russia would run us over when they cannot run Ukraine over currently.
 
QP! said:
Oh so you are back to saying we are so useless that even if we are given a budget that is greater than the next top 3 combined we stand no chance and will get 'run over'?

Nice.

Is it possible i just have more faith in our military than you and do not think they are garbage who if you start them with more money than the next 3 combined can easily beat back. contain, control, any of them?

I happen to think the US would still easily beat the top 3 combined but those 3 would never combine, so realistically we only have to beat one of them.

That you think Russia would just run over us, with a budget that is more than the next 3 combined, is really sad. You seem to really hate,... no better yet, think our military is crap both in strategy and execution that with more money than the top 3, Russia would run us over when they cannot run Ukraine over currently.
Click to expand...
No, but obviously you are as far Left as Trumpers are far Right.

I think you are clueless about our military and what's involved. You're the type that believes if the US turns our guns into plowshares the world would be safe for children and other living things.

OIP.R-xf7sTuvVSxxb3DV7H_GQHaLK
 
Doc Dutch said:
No, but obviously you are as far Left as Trumpers are far Right.

I think you are clueless about our military and what's involved. You're the type that believes if the US turns our guns into plowshares the world would be safe for children and other living things.

...
Click to expand...

N'ah man i just don't think the US military is as useless as you do.

If we are starting from scratch and tell the US they are getting the money of the top 3 combined... and then the US and top other 3, including Russia get to build their militaries, you believe Russia (any one of them) will walk right thru us. That we won't stand a chance against Russia and the others.


So i am curious, what multiple of the money others get do you think the US needs before they do not just get walked thru?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top