Who Put Classified Docs in Trump’s Desk

No one has yet provided an answer to WHY Trump had the docs and refused to turn them back over to the govt when asked nicely and subsequently by subpoena.

He clearly was aware he had the documents since they were stored in multiple places (storage room, his office and his office desk at least). The whole he didn’t pack the boxes so he didn’t know he had them was a lie. Unless someone other than him was moving the docs around without his knowledge. If that’s the case, did those people have proper clearances. Or did he allow people without clearance to have access to classified docs?

His lawyers admit that the docs were classified (they are bound by Fed R Civ P11 to not “lie” in pleadings). They also admit his defense of declassification is a lie since they concede the docs were classified and the special master they want appointed has to have top secret sci clearance.

So once again, WHY did he have the docs and refuse to give them back?

Since “people are saying” Trump didn’t pack his own boxes and move them to Mar a Lago, who put some of the classified docs in Trump’s desk? “People are saying” Trump was unaware of the presence of the docs because they were just stuck in boxes, so how did docs with secret and top secret cover jackets get into his desk? “People are saying” the documents, if there were any, were locked in the basement, so how did any documents get from the locked closet to Trump’s office?

“People are saying” Trump would have turned the docs over if the Archives and DoJ asked, so why were the documents still in his possession after many written requests and a subpoena? “People are saying” Trump’s, through his lawyers informed the DoJ no further classified documents were at Mar a Lago after the June DoJ visit, so how did the DoJ within hours find hundreds of pages of classified documents in boxes and in Trump’s desk?

Just asking some questions that people on the internet want to know the answers to. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

WAIT TILL THE FBI RELEASES PHOTOS OF MICHELLE OBAMA'S WARDROBE!!! YUUUGE SURPRISE!!! Originally Posted by bambino

That is off topic bambino...been a few changes since you last posted. Staying on topic is something we are emphasizing around here.

Now ya know...don't say you haven't been warned. Originally Posted by WTF

I been saying them documents aint what the demsare drooling for! Be careful here!!
Those docs ARE the proof of the STOLEN election and cover up. Also in those docs is info bout clinton emails and hunters laptop. dems are shitting themselves desperately trying to get those papers.
dems better invest heavily in kleenex and charmin-- bahahahahahhahahahah

Best yallve uncovered is a time magazine --bahahahahhahahahhaa omg and wtf

President Trump comments on the staged photo: "They took documents and they put 'em all over the floor. And then they deceptively put out that picture. And a lot of peoplethink that when you walk into my office I have confidential documents or whatever it may be - all declassified - but I had confidentialdocuments spread out all over my floor like a slob.... it's so dishonest.... they put ‘em therein a messy fashion, and then they took a picture, and they released it to the public."

Still didn’t answer the simple question,

why did he have them? Why take take them? Why hide them?

Trump is getting his ass handed to him every day on this. And he keeps coming back for more.

Every time he squeals, the GOP’s chances to take the House shrink.

If he was smart, he’d STFU. But noooooooooo….

Nevermind reports that he watched it all on closed circuit TV.

If he was smart, he’d STFU. But noooooooooo…. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

That's if he's a Republican. My belief all along has been that he never switched sides.

That's if he's a Republican. My belief all along has been that he never switched sides. Originally Posted by Tiny

He sure spent like a drunken sailor or around some parts of the country they call it a drunken Ronnie.

The funniest thing about this is I read Melania or what her name had to buy new panties because the FBI might have touched them and she said nobody touches her panties not even Diaper Don and he is not allowed in her bedroom. He got it once and never again, probably shit himself and is to frigging old.

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checkin...oxes-of-files/

Bradley Moss, a Washington-based lawyer who works on national security cases, said the cases of Clinton and Trump are significantly different.

“Trump took properly marked hard copy classified documents from the White House, shipped them to Florida, and stored them in an unsecured location at his residence,” Moss said.

The presence of classified information in Clinton’s emails was less obvious.

“The e-mails were never marked as classified because these were communications from unclassified government accounts,” Moss said.

In three instances, email chains included information with classification markers. It was never clear that Clinton was aware of the presence of that marked information, or if the classification marking was clear.

Marked information is not to be confused with emails containing unmarked information that could be deemed classified. That is a looser definition, and one that can be applied retroactively. Thomas Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University, said in one case, an email in one chain forwarded a front-page New York Times story about a drone strike. Under its rules, the CIA called that classified, Blanton said.

When classified information was clearly involved, Blanton said Clinton’s “briefings were on a different system, a classified Blackberry that was managed by State Department IT people.”

Clinton’s emails included moments when staffers wrote that for them to go into more detail, they would need to switch to a secure classified State Department system.

Moss cautioned that while some documents at Mar-a-Lago were clearly marked many questions remain, such as “where the records were originally located, who boxed them up, when Trump became aware of the existence of the records at Mar-a-Lago, and what, if any, efforts Trump took to rectify the situation once he was informed.”

The answers to those questions, he said, would help determine if anyone could be held criminally liable, and whether Trump himself faces any legal risk.

As for the personal emails that Clinton erased, the FBI said its investigation might have found some of them. Overall, the agency said it was reasonably confident that there was no intentional misconduct. Originally Posted by WTF

All because the FBI said they would be coming and gave Hillary time to destroy the evidence.

The funniest thing about this is I read Melania or what her name had to buy new panties because the FBI might have touched them and she said nobody touches her panties not even Diaper Don and he is not allowed in her bedroom. He got it once and never again, probably shit himself and is to frigging old. Originally Posted by Hdtown

Their are stories reporting those rogue agents smelled them and one agent put a pair on his head. Even more reports that many pairs of her panties are now missing. Guess those panties and the "framed" time magazine is the big evidence dems are talking about. Keeps getting better ever day. lolling

From "The Dangers of Trump-Prosecution Syndrome", by David Rohde, writing in the New Yorker:

...Stephen Gillers, a professor of legal ethics at New York University, cautioned me that a successful prosecution of Trump would likely need to demonstrate that his reckless handling of classified information caused actual harm—such as adversaries learning about American intelligence methods. Trump’s lawyers would argue that he was merely guilty of carelessness. Trump himself, of course, would make the case that he was being politically persecuted. “I don’t think a jury would convict him without proof of harm. I’m not sure I would,” Gillers said. “He’s a sloppy guy, and he couldn’t let go of the Oval Office, so he dumped a lot of stuff into boxes—souvenirs of his Presidency.”

Gillers added that, fairly or unfairly, prosecuting a former President requires meeting a higher legal and political threshold. “It has to be one-hundred-per-cent irresistible as a matter of law,” he said. “There can be no fact, no event, no piece of evidence that could support any room for ambiguity.” A former Justice Department official I spoke with on Friday agreed. “The jury could say, ‘Who cares?’ ” he said. “I don’t know that it’s that easy or straightforward.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily...ution-syndrome

Why do Democrats defund police, accuse them of racism, but love and support the FBI?

Why do Democrats defund police, accuse them of racism, but love and support the FBI? Originally Posted by RedPilled

Your avatar shows a remarkable resemblance to Ron DeSantis

Your avatar shows a remarkable resemblance to Ron DeSantis Originally Posted by Tiny

Blasphemy

The evidence that dems are trying to get so bad is evidence on the stolen election hunter biden and hillarys emails. When they get that they will replace with forged docs to try and finally set-up Trump