I wonder if prosecutorial discretion overrules a judge’s decision? I have no idea but the judge in Hunter’s case says it is closed ORAL ORDER: Having reviewed the parties' submissions (D.I. 272, 274, 276) and in the absence of binding precedent, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to the Executive Grant of Clemency signed by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. on December 1, 2024, Defendant Robert Hunter Biden has been pardoned for, inter alia, the offenses for which a jury rendered a verdict in this case (D.I. 275). As such, all proceedings in this case are hereby terminated. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 12/3/2024. (mdb) (Entered: 12/03/2024)
I disagree with most of what JMDZ says, but in this example he is 100% right. I’ve dealt with both family and friends with addiction and it’s pretty unbearable mentally and financially for everyone. That doesn’t admonish Hunter from being a crackhead making horrible decision after horrible decision but after seeing this from the inside a number of times the root cause is usually trauma whether it’s external like PTSD or childhood of trauma from parents.
Yeah, I really didn't get that angle. "...just because he's pardoned, doesn't mean we can't go forward with the case..." I mean...I don't claim direct experience with presidential pardons, but I'm pretty sure that's about exactly what it means. Had me scratching my head...
According to the Presidential Records Act Trump could take any documents he wanted when he left office. Those documents ceased to be US government property, they became Trump's personal property. Obama has spent years going through the 3 million pages of documents he took (and he might still be doing so). There is no formal process.Trump had to go through to declassify documents. The Presidential Records Act supercedes the Espionage Act which came before it.
The Presidential Records Act does not authorize the president to take any documents that he wants. In fact, it provides that the documents are the property of the US government and must be sent to the archives. My assumption is that you are relying on a case in which a court (not sure whether it was the SCOTUS or a lower court) determined that certain documents of Bill Clinton (his personal journal if I correctly recall) were personal and were not subject to the Act. Obama did take a number of documents (none of which were classified by the way) for the purpose of writing his memoirs after receiving permission from the Archives. If you actually believe that the Presidential Records Act authorizes a departing president to take any documents that he chooses please cite the applicable provision of the Act including the verbatim statutory language.
Now that he's done this super super crazy one for tax violations and a gun registration error..... ......it will probably be more run-of-the-mill stuff. Like hiring a hooker and secretly filming her have sex with your brother-in-law, in order to blackmail him. Or maybe he'll do a more reasonable pardon, like for a personal political operative who set up a fund for the sole purpose of stealing 10s of millions of dollars from supporters. Ya know- normal stuff.
The issue of declassification by POTUS is still an unsettled question since it has never been before the SCOTUS. It may be that the POTUS has to go through an official process to document what he has declassified. It may also be that the POTUS does not need to submit something to a GS-15/SES that constrains him in his official duties. We can argue about it all day but until the SCOTUS takes the case and rules one way or the other, we are just speculating.
Who cares? Do you think you're going to convince anybody here that an ex-POTUS (regardless of party), who would have had (at least) at one time the ultimate authority to de-classify any document he/she wanted, should be prosecuted for the Presidential Records Act (which is not even a criminal statute) when the president's son cheats on taxes and a gun application (among other things) and gets a free pass to any federal crimes committed in the past 11 years known or otherwise? Dude, just give it up. You keep repeating the same BS here over and over and have been for years. You haven't convinced one single soul and you're especially not now. You're bringing down the collective IQ of the forum by taking these foolish positions.
For most, yes, including babay biden. It's certainly not a disease, IMO. The one big example are cigarette smokers. Did they choose their addiction, or are they helpless diseased victims? I understand accountability is passé and everyone is a victim now. I just don't always agree with that sentiment. Anyway, this is off topic and this thread is salty egough without this convo. Good day!
I was responding to a specific post and by the way Trump wasn't prosecuted for violating the Presidential Records Act and I never suggested that he should have been. As far as Hunter Biden is concerned individuals who file delinquent tax returns and pay all their back taxes along with interest and penalties are almost never prosecuted for criminal tax evasion. Similarly lying on a federal firearms application about drug dependence is also almost never prosecuted. If his name was Hunter Smith rather than Hunter Biden and his father wasn't the POTUS and former vice president Hunter Biden would have never been prosecuted for those offenses in the first place.
If/when someone you loves experiences it, you will learn. Not talking about cigarettes and caffeine here. Your opinion on this is consistent in that it reflects a lack of life experiences.
That swoosh is my point sailing over your ignorant head. How about you stick to topics you actually know something about?
On tape… See, that’s the difference. I can admit Joe does wrong crap. To you, your Orange God is unassailable.
