That is the R talking point. It funny that you said that they are, while the house opening said that they are still trying to prove it. Interesting....
More info on the Hiden Crime Family
- Thread starter GhostOfMatchesMalone
- Start date
Not answering the question son? C'mon man...MAN UP for ONCE. Try it....trim that "man" bun and answer the question!
You still think the laptop is Russian disinformation?
And I don't know what "the house opening" means and neither do you.
Sure, but if you deviate too far from the cornerstones of Trump's platform you really aren't a true conservative anymore, you're a RINO. Trump had a ridiculously high endorsement performance last cycle and rec'd more legitimate votes than any other candidate in Presidential history. He sort of is the party right now.
I've answered this question. Barr lied about his priorities to get the job, then did nothing, and worse subverted Trump at every pivotal moment. He's a DS hack, and he's showing his ass bigly right now.
Did I ever say that it was? I always said investigate Hunter.
I meant House investigation
Well what I have noticed is that ANYONE that disagrees with Trump is called a RINO, even DeSantis is being called a RINO. Can you name one person that disagreed with Trump and you don't consider a RINO?
Because he did a bad job, that makes him not a Republican? That is the dumbest stuff I ever heard. He is a Republican. Trump made him AG because he was a Republican.
He only went against Trump on the 2020 election and that's AFTER he looked into it. He didn't disagree or subvert Trump, he just didn't find any evidence to back those claims. So he actually started out having Trump's back.
The nature of the case isn't the most critical element (even though these are very similar, the only difference being NARA asking/not asking for records back), the precedent set by the ruling is, that's sort of how legal precedent works. You use it to interpret the meaning of laws.
Her ruling was clear.
Please read this, second time I've posted it. This was the losing attorney in the Sock Drawer case, he's with Judicial Watch. He seems to be pretty convinced it applies here, I'd listen to him before your favorite MSNBC hose on the issue.
Opinion | Trump’s Boxes and Clinton’s Sock Drawer
A president chooses what records to return or keep and the National Archives can’t do anything about it.
www.wsj.com
I'll even break it down for you so you don't have to read all 500 words, I know that's alot to ask. In summary, at the end of his/her term, the President has the sole authority of classification - personal or Presidential. Whatever he leaves behind are considered Presidential records for NARA to manage, whatever he takes are considered personal and he has every right to have them. NARA has no authority to argue that classification and demand ANYTHING back, period.
This is why every former President is in possession of "classified documents" and nothing is ever done. This whole thing is lawfare designed to change a Presidential election. The corrupt leadership of the FBI and DOJ are screwed if Trump is President again and they know it.
*****Read the opinion and tell me what I don't understand (and remember, the DOJ made the argument that the President is the sole determinant of classification):
"In defending NARA, the Justice Department argued that NARA doesn’t have “a duty to engage in a never-ending search for potential presidential records” that weren’t provided to NARA by the president at the end of his term. Nor, the department asserted, does the Presidential Records Act require NARA to appropriate potential presidential records forcibly. The government’s position was that Congress had decided that the president and the president alone decides what is a presidential record and what isn’t. He may take with him whatever records he chooses at the end of his term.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson agreed: “Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office,” she held, “it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records.”
Judge Jackson added that “the PRA contains no provision obligating or even permitting the Archivist to assume control over records that the President ‘categorized’ and ‘filed separately’ as personal records. At the conclusion of the President’s term, the Archivist only ‘assumes responsibility for the Presidential records.’ . . . PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President.”
I lost because Judge Jackson concluded the government’s hands were tied. Mr. Clinton took the tapes, and no one could do anything about it."
Last edited:
He's not a conservative because if his ideological beliefs and lack of action on things he had direct influence over. Trump was not happy with him long before the election integrity issue, although that was the final straw.
This isn't hard.
And I haven't gone full RINO on DeSantis yet, but I'm worried based on who he's surrounded himself with. And plenty of people don't like/endorse/agree with Trump on everything and they aren't RINOs. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are the first two that come to mind.
So there's nothing on the laptop tying Hunter to dad's business "dealings"?
I just can't with this.
I am more consistent than anyone on the planet, son. You are a very poor liar.
The archivist was Judicial watch, not NARA. NARA never wanted or tried to get those documents. NARA ruled that were personal and belonged to Clinton. Judicial watch tried to force the courts to get NARA to go get them. So yes the archivist can't classify records.The nature of the case isn't the most critical element (even though these are very similar, the only difference being NARA asking/not asking for records back), the precedent set by the ruling is, that's sort of how legal precedent works. You use it to interpret the meaning of laws.
Her ruling was clear.
Please read this, second time I've posted it. This was the losing attorney in the Sock Drawer case, he's with Judicial Watch. He seems to be pretty convinced it applies here, I'd listen to him before your favorite MSNBC hose on the issue.
Opinion | Trump’s Boxes and Clinton’s Sock Drawer
A president chooses what records to return or keep and the National Archives can’t do anything about it.
I'll even break it down for you so you don't have to read all 500 words, I know that's alot to ask. In summary, at the end of his/her term, the President has the sole authority of classification - personal or Presidential. Whatever he leaves behind are considered Presidential records for NARA to manage, whatever he takes are considered personal and he has every right to have them. NARA has no authority to argue that classification and demand ANYTHING back, period.
This is why every former President is in possession of "classified documents" and nothing is ever done. This whole thing is lawfare designed to change a Presidential election. The corrupt leadership of the FBI and DOJ are screwed if Trump is President again and they know it.
*****Read the opinion and tell me what I don't understand (and remember, the DOJ made the argument that the President is the sole determinant of classification):
"In defending NARA, the Justice Department argued that NARA doesn’t have “a duty to engage in a never-ending search for potential presidential records” that weren’t provided to NARA by the president at the end of his term. Nor, the department asserted, does the Presidential Records Act require NARA to appropriate potential presidential records forcibly. The government’s position was that Congress had decided that the president and the president alone decides what is a presidential record and what isn’t. He may take with him whatever records he chooses at the end of his term.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson agreed: “Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office,” she held, “it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records.”
Judge Jackson added that “the PRA contains no provision obligating or even permitting the Archivist to assume control over records that the President ‘categorized’ and ‘filed separately’ as personal records. At the conclusion of the President’s term, the Archivist only ‘assumes responsibility for the Presidential records.’ . . . PRA does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President.”
I lost because Judge Jackson concluded the government’s hands were tied. Mr. Clinton took the tapes, and no one could do anything about it."
It is not accurate to label this as a government case. The government was on the side of the judge. The government NEVER wanted those tapes. The conservative-republican led Judicial watch wanted those tapes.
That is not true. Trump was praising him until after the election.
SO now DeSantis is a potential RINO LMAO.
Cruz/Paul was before he won, after he won, they were full MAGA.
No..a 100% RINO, son. Let me educate you. When it looks and quacks like a duck...guess what it is?
Engrish please. Could you care less? Or are you not an American. Seriously, how did you pass remedial English? UF grad? Seriously?
It's slangEngrish please. Could you care less? Or are you not an American. Seriously, how did you pass remedial English? UF grad? Seriously?
No, it's just an incorrect use of the expression.
It should read...I could not care less.
It means you don't care.
I could care less would mean that you do care and you are capable of caring less.
It's not slang...it was a mistake by a person who regularly fouls up the English language.
Tucker wants to know why Hunter wasn't charged with FARA violations. It's a fair question, even though @RayGravesGhost believes he got what he deserved, being the criminal he now is.
Well thats how the streets talk. They also talk in double negatives.
As I said before, we have some cultural/age differences.
Has tucker ever questioned why Mike Flynn was pardoned for his FARA violations by donald trump?
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/9/14868680/trump-adviser-michael-flynn-foreign-agent-turkey-lobby
Disgraced Trump adviser Mike Flynn admits he worked as a “foreign agent” for the Turkish government
It turns out Flynn’s ties to foreign governments don’t stop at Russia.
By Jennifer Williams@jenn_ruth Mar 9, 2017, 4:30pm EST
Flynn’s contract ended on November 15, just three days before Trump appointed him national security adviser.
Still, the disclosure that Trump’s top campaign adviser on all issues of national security and foreign policy was receiving money to lobby on behalf of a foreign power all the way through Election Day is another black eye for Flynn, who has the rare distinction of having been fired by two US presidents (Barack Obama ousted him because of his mismanagement of the Defense Intelligence Agency). The FBI is also continuing to probe Flynn’s communications with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the aftermath of the election.
Trump was never happy with Barr for being all talk. He hates the man and still claims he “fired” him.
They do not and did not have a good relationship.
“Bill Barr was a coward. Bill Barr didn’t do what he was supposed to do. I fired him. And he has great hatred,” Trump said in a Fox News interview aired Monday. “And that’s OK, because some people do. And some people love me very much.”
Trump, Barr feud reaches fever pitch
The escalating feud between former President Trump and his one-time Attorney General Bill Barr is reaching a fever pitch, with Trump’s indictment on federal charges last week adding accelerant to w…
thehill.com
Yea, that’s sort of where the business dealings issue started. It’s all over the emails on the laptop.
But your “research” somehow let you down again.
Your reading comprehension is way off here. And your incorrect clarification of the definitions of who is who is irrelevant.
Judicial watch was suing to force Clinton to hand over the tapes to the Archivist, or NARA. They wanted this information to someday be available to the public (once declassified) and part of the historic record of the Clinton presidency.
And no one ever said the gov’t was on the side of the judge. NARA pushed back against the FOIA request from Judicial Watch. They are a federal agency so the DOJ acted as their lawyer (federal agencies don’t Call Saul, they use gov’t lawyers). The govt was arguing on NARA’s behalf who did not want to compel Clinton to hand over the tapes. The Judge ruled in favor of NARA and the DOJ.
Which brings me full circle to the main point - this case set the precedent that the President has the sole authority to define what is personal and what goes into the official Presidential record. Jackson was abundantly clear about that, which is why you’re trying to argue about everything else. If Trump said those files were personal, they were personal…full stop. Everything he left behind was to be filed into the Presidential records by NARA.
I sincerely hope your reading comprehension is better than you display here. If not life has to be a struggle for you.
No. In that case Judicial watch was acting as the archivist. NARA attorneys come from where?
I'm telling you that you are misinterpreting her ruling. Her ruling was not the same as Trump because NARA decided that Trump had documents that he shouldn't have.
Most liberals feel exactly the same. THANK YOU for being honest, finally
Lying when the truth would work better. I wonder what kind of person YOU are? I think I know 100%.
If you read the PRA, I believe, unless I am misunderstanding it, it is actually the President and not the Archives that ultimately decides which documents the Archives gets.
Yes, he is 100% a potential RINO.
Opinion | Don’t Be Fooled. Ron DeSantis Is a Bush-Cheney Republican.
It is simply wrong to attribute the pathologies of today’s Republican Party to the influence of Donald Trump alone.
Ron DeSantis lines up business leaders to raise money for 2024 presidential run
The DeSantis bundler list, which was first provided to CNBC, includes business leaders from industries ranging from real estate to finance.
See post 370 ITT.
You're 100% right, according to the liberal judge in the Clinton Sock Drawer case.
