For his entire term, Trump exhibited a contemptuous, I-don't-give-a-crap attitude towards security and classifications. Not at all surprising that classified docs could be his Waterloo. --He tore up documents at the White House, Mar A Lago, and on AF One. His staffers would dig through the trash, then break out the scotch tape to reassemble the pieces. --He revealed highly classified documents to Russian officials in the Oval Office, forcing the CIA to extract a key asset. --On 2 occasions, he posted classified information on Twitter. --Multiple and flagrant exposure of classified information at Mar A Lago, to awe his sycophants/guests/random spies in the neighborhood with his power and influence.
Barr says Trump is no victim, 37-count federal indictment is 'very, very damning' For the Trump apologists, what do you think about what Bill Barr is saying Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Barr — who served as Trump’s attorney general from February 2019 to December 2020 — said “this idea of presenting Trump as a victim here, a victim of a witch hunt, is ridiculous.” “He was totally wrong that he had the right to have those documents,” he said. “Those documents are among the most sensitive secrets that the country has.” Barr added that Trump’s claim that he had complete authority to declare any document “personal” is “facially ridiculous.” Barr also denied Trump was the victim of a “witch hunt,” which the former president had repeatedly claimed. “Yes, he’s been a victim in the past,” Barr said “Yes, his adversaries have obsessively pursued him with phony claims, and I’ve been at his side defending against them when he is a victim,” he added. “But this is much different. He’s not a victim here.”
That is the fear. A juror gets seated that just ignores all the evidence regardless of how solid it is.
The problem with Barr is he’s full of crap. He never defended Trump against “phony claims”, unless he’s referring to the Mueller investigation, in which case Barr simply lied to the American people with his summary version of the investigation. Not that it matters, as even if Barr told the truth the Trumpers would be parroting the same bs about “witchhunts”, just as they ignored Barr’s “straight shooting” about Trumps election lies. They will also ignore this. Guess that makes Mr. Barr Mr. Irrelevant.
So, Barr is a credible source now and he didn’t mishandle anything to do with the Mueller report? Asking for a friend.
I very much agree that cannot have indictments based on political leanings, and if this action is fit for an indictment of Trump, it must be fit for an indictment of a democratic leader. A system based on justice simply cannot operate in any other way. The tricky part is determining exactly when the system is treating both sides equally. If Trump is indicted, must we also indict a democrat to satisfy our vital criterion of fairness? This clearly cannot be so, so we have to consider what is our standard for an indictable offense. It must be possible that the combination of actions and evidence in this case is unique among modern political scandals, so how can we know that this indictment does not meet our criteria for fairness? In the end, this indictment could be evidence of a corrupt judicial system, but it could also be evidence of a corrupt politician.
It's really all of the above. Trump is a jackass who broke the law and made the job for the Justice Department as easy as possible as far as giving them material to legally come after him. Also, the Justice Department unfairly targeted him in the first place and this is the fallout.
It's very telling that those that cry 'political hit job" the loudest somehow fail to prove, or even suggest that Trump is innocent of the charges. The recent Republican leaders failure to respond to their own legal subpoenas suggest that the "party of law and order" firmly believes that said laws are for others to obey.
The standards the DOJ has used to determine whether or not to indict in these types of cases has been pretty consistent through the years. Nobody is crying it's unfair that Pence wasn't charged. We shouldn't cry about Trump being charged. How each reacted is completely day and night. One cooperated and allowed the FBI full access to search for more. One lied to everyone, including his own lawyers, to hide the fact he had the documents.
Well let's see... 1. was attempted to be framed for Russian collusion by the opposition party. A story they spawned themselves, without any evidence of Trump ever doing it. 2. was impeached twice by the opposition party and acquitted each time (first time ever in history) 3. was accused by the opposition party of threatening GOP senators that their heads would "be on a pike" if they voted to convict him (not true) 4. now the first president to have ever been indicted; twice in a span of a few weeks, the first one even makes Chuck Schumer skeptical. The second literally just happened with the current sitting president, his own vice president and his opposition candidate in 2016. Oh and he just happens to be leading several polls for the 2024 Election. It kinda seems like they're coming after him. I think Trump is at the point where he's willing to die as a political martyr in prison than give in to the state. That is saying a lot for someone who could just retire and do nothing and still live a very lavish life.
Though I think it's a mistake to frame Trump as some "hero" here, this post does an excellent job of presenting optics and trust issues with this indictment in the context of the last seven years.
And even though Trump is legally presumed to be innocent, the two posts above totally confirm my point ... their complaints are about nothing but optics and political postures. Of course the evidence put forth in the indictment press conference perhaps precludes any other take. Their position becomes.... Trump committed crimes but he can because 1) he's a Pub 2) he's a candidate 3) he's a former Pres. 4) it has never happened before 5) whatabout others. None of these absolve one from being prosecuted if proven guilty.
Well, let's take a look at Joe Biden. Is he a hero? 1. lied about graduating in the top half of his law school class (actually finished ranked 76th out of 85) 2. lied about having three degrees from college (had only one degree) 3. lied about being named most outstanding political science student 4. lied about having a full scholarship 5. plagiarized several campaign speeches word-for-word during his 1988 run for president and kept lying to the media about it after he was exposed 6. committed plagiarism when he was in law school. He was given an F. 7. withheld $1 billion from Ukraine until they fired the prosecutor who was investigating the company (Burisma) his son worked for, yet had zero experience in their field of expertise. 8. millions of dollars pouring into family accounts from China and Ukraine. 9. lied to us about Hunter's laptop And I could keep going and going. So yes, Trump is very flawed as a politician, but he's obviously being targeted at the same time. Biden can't be trusted. He is a career serial liar, yet he'll skate, because he's such a hero?
Technically correct. But if you want to normalize fishing for shit against political rivals until something sticks, you do you. As I've said a couple of times, nothing is wrong with this indictment in a vacuum. It's looking at the big picture regarding both recent history and the foreseeable future.
