Yeah unfortunately this kind of thing is not uncommon. You see this kind of radicalization in other areas too, like Islamic terrorism.
With every post on this topic you display wanton ignorance. State Department policy allowed Hillary to decide what emails to retain and which not to. She didn't violate any laws or government policies with what she did. Joe Biden returned all the documents immediately after they were found as did Pence. That's how you don't get charged. You don't hide them in a bathroom from your own lawyers. Trump admitted they weren't declassified on the audio tape they have of him but that doesn't matter with national security documents. They can't be retained or kept outside of a SCIF for any reason.
No it's not, because it was scheduled to be done as routine maintenance before the investigation was known, and before the request was made. At least know the basics of the case before you go making a fool of yourself with all these false statements. And again, she didn't wipe a server clean. She deleted emails from it. Only the selected emails were deleted from the server. Wiping a server means taking it back to factory settings. No data at all, and most importantly: for that reason. FACT IS, Hillary turned over more than 55,000 pages of emails, and > 33,000 emails and her server. If she scrubbed the server, there wouldn't have been 55k emails on it. And here's another big difference: Classified email correspondence is a million miles away from classified documents, most of which literally cannot be made into electronic copies, even more of which are not allowed to be.
On Fox, Turley said the indictment was devastating, but that it doesn’t matter because his supporters won’t believe it. Damn, I agreed with him.
What have you seen in the last 8 years to make you think Trump wasn't that stupid? He exudes stupid every waking moment of his life. But good on ya for bending to the facts.
This isn't the OJ trial. Even though it's in Florida, a Federal jury is not going to be made up of a bunch of yayhoo rubes. To reiterate: The indictment was handed down with full knowledge of the jurisdiction, and possibility of Trump judge, so the standard of proof, the high level of crime, and the slam-dunk level of certainty to convict (99.97%) had to all be intact even given those conditions. Sure, you never know when one crazy plant might land on the jury, but they account for that. Jack Smith is a bulldog and an ace. He's a war crimes prosecutor. He's going to be the smartest, most capable guy in the room. Anything is possible, but there should be zero expectations that Trump won't be found guilty on all counts.
This is true that she was not well informed, but saying she gamed the system seems to imply that she knew what to do, and purposely asked people she knew were too incompetent to give her the right answers, to give her cover for doing the wrong thing. I don't think that's possible to assume, and definitely not possible to prove. More generally, except for a few friends who are actual IT professionals, I am basically the IT person for everyone I know. At work and in personal life. And in my experience, the most empowered executives, the highest up the chain of command, know the least about IT. This is most true in government (where I worked for 5-6 years), because public servants come from myriad backgrounds, very few of them IT-related. I have no problem believing that Hillary, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Karl Rove, etc., have no real understanding of how email works, beyond type, send & read. Which is why they all screwed up with their handling of email servers and classified emails. But EVERYONE understands how paper works. Maybe more than any other profession, politicians understand how confidential hard copy documents work. There is no grey area for Trump's intentional criminal stealing and criminal misuse of the most highly classified documents that exist, nor in his criminal obstruction after the fact.
Even if he is convicted, as much as he may deserve a federal pound me in the ass prison, he will get a country club or even house arrest instead; iow special treatment the rest of us would not get for the same crimes.
Maybe we could send T to the front lines on Russian side and J on the Ukrainian side. Equal rule of law. Let them fight it out
You know what? Let's pretend you're right. Hillary intentionally misused classified emails, and then destroyed them to erase the evidence. Let's pretend that happened. *The FBI did a FULL years-long investigation into it. They even re-opened it and investigated again in 2016, which directly lost her the EC count. *The FBI found NOTHING criminal, NOTHING censurable, and NO questionable intent. *The FBI found NOTHING to suggest that Hillary benefitted in any way from her alleged mishandling of classified emails. So, even if we pretend you are right about all of it - without any shred of proof - there is nothing there to prosecute. There are mountains of evidence to prosecute against Trump. If you want to pretend that's the only difference, then so be it. That's why Trump is being prosecuted and Hillary wasn't. Not because of a weaponized DOJ or FBI, and not because of anything to do with the 2024 election. It's because, like in everything else, Hillary is a lot better than Trump at misusing classified materials. There. Satisfied? Can you knock off the nonsense now?
He wouldn’t have pardon powers for state crimes. And Brian Kemp isn’t about to stain his legacy by pardoning the POS.
Wow.... Nobody has to look for anything incriminating against Trump. He has been committing crime in broad daylight his whole adult life. Dozens of crimes he committed literally in real time on live TV. The whole world saw them happen. He's on tape, he's on video. He seems completely oblivious to recording devices, or he is just so arrogant from a lifetime of shirking prosecution, that he thinks it doesn't matter. You can't walk 10 feet anywhere in DC, NY or Mar-a-Lago without tripping over a Trump crime. Nobody has ever had to go looking for any.
Have you never had a real job? I ask, because document retention policy and “wiping” old hard drives is 100% S.O.P. I’ve had to do that with several boring corporate jobs to protect company secrets, had to turn over any “work related” emails relating to projects or contracts that I may have had on my phone or gmail - once a year would certify to that effect. Every large-ish company in America does this to comply with various records laws (or for public accounting purposes for publicly traded co.). Usually there is clear policy from the lawyers about what you must retain vs. destroy depending on the document type (some, such as legal contracts would be “permanent record” and we had a contractor handle long term storage those). Hillary’s email issues were actually related to document retention, THAT was what the 30,000 “missing” emails were supposedly about. Those were the emails which were segregated by the lawyers when they did this “document retention” review. She turned over the emails for record retention, server then gets wiped. S.O.P. I don’t like that she used her own server, and it didn’t sound 100% secure, but it was not a prosecutable crime given precedent nor is there any evidence she “hoarded” any of it like Trump did in physical form. The main concern was potential lack of security. There were 3 emails (out of 10’s of thousands archived) that even had classification marking (and as I recall they were discussing media stories, so it was stupid that they were even classified at all). Yes, technically illegal if you want to reach, but also totally asinine to compare. And I guess you cannot appreciate the irony that it was Trump who called for zero tolerance on classified records. Then he goes on to keep a ridiculous hoard of them at Mar-A-Lago? To then lie about them? Come on man. Speaking of “witch-hunts”, you also realize all of that Clinton stuff was product of the Benghazi hearings, right? An actual politicized witch hunt. Been there done that. Not that I actually think that changes the findings of the Clinton emails, it’s just another absurdity as to the idea Trump has been treated unfairly when he actually commits crimes right out in the open for all to see. Literally stacked on a stage at a country club ball room…
I took that (quite clearly) to mean that you sound like someone who is ready to join some half-ass militia and storm a local Capitol building, or try to hang Mike Pence, or attack Paul Pelosi with a hammer, or try to kidnap and murder Gretchen Witmer. And that will get you into trouble you don't want.
It's literally your tribe, your people who you subsidize by voting for Trumpers and by carrying his water like you do. You think you're off the hook for all the violence because you only put the violence-inciting pols in office?
How is it not possible to get her removed? Especially when a higher court determined she interfered with the original investigation. 11th Circuit Says a Judge Should Not Have Interfered With the FBI's Review of the Mar-a-Lago Documents (reason.com)
They do have some video and some audio. But it's been theorized from the optics of text messaging and other movements that Mark Meadows has flipped and is singing like Beverly Sills.
They were ready to indict in Fulton Co a couple weeks ago, but then multiple people about to be indicted with him flipped on him. Now the case has expanded to a RICO case, involving multiple states. This has added weeks to their timeline. Self-pardons aren't a thing, and wouldn't pass the courts, but the right wing shills on the SCOTUS have no interest in the law, so they would likely uphold the made-up self-pardon. Regardless, he'd not have to pardon himself. He'd just fire the DOJ (or discontinue it altogether), and instruct the new AG to drop the case. And drop the Jan 6 indictment. Not as straight a line to cancelling the cases in GA and NY, but he'd be able to pressure them to shut down, too. And we would name himself dictator for life, and we would never have a democracy again. At least not in our lifetime.
