Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[YGIFS 19460]

Wait a minute, the Corvette has a doors that open and closes?  This is all news to me.

[tx 3 putt 78848]

4 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

I would pay well in excess of 9.95 if @Brisketexan does it.

I’ll throw in two tamales and make a mess of fresh pico 

[The Dog 44888]

 

[Red Five 41804]

I have heard so many times during the last week about how "Hillary did the exact same thing and wasn't indicted" or "Biden has thousands of boxes everywhere and he's never been raided". I would really like to think that the vast majority of people saying these things are like Lindsey Graham, and it's just pure gaslighting. But probably not.

[Brisketexan 107063]

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I have heard so many times during the last week about how "Hillary did the exact same thing and wasn't indicted" or "Biden has thousands of boxes everywhere and he's never been raided". I would really like to think that the vast majority of people saying these things are like Lindsey Graham, and it's just pure gaslighting. But probably not.

No, the vast majority of Americans are just that fucking stupid.  And they believe that their stupidity is superior to intelligence, knowledge, or facts.  They believe in their own stupidity above everything else.

Which is why we are turbofucked.

[Biff Tannen 46252]

1 hour ago, Red Five said:

I have heard so many times during the last week about how "Hillary did the exact same thing and wasn't indicted" or "Biden has thousands of boxes everywhere and he's never been raided". I would really like to think that the vast majority of people saying these things are like Lindsey Graham, and it's just pure gaslighting. But probably not.

I still hear my FIL saying "Golly gee, that Biden sure seems to be senile!  It seems like he has classified documents everywhere!"

[tx 3 putt 78848]

7 minutes ago, The Dog said:

 

[tx 3 putt 78848]

It’s too easy a case, open and shut since he’s 100% not guilty. We know that all lawyers only value a true challenge. Lawyers want no part of easy money 

[Red Five 41804]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

No, the vast majority of Americans are just that fucking stupid.  And they believe that their stupidity is superior to intelligence, knowledge, or facts.  They believe in their own stupidity above everything else.

Which is why we are turbofucked.

It gets very disheartening, watching so many people look into a camera and confidently declare that 2 + 2 = 149. 

[royiv 9916]

Just watched this asshole get stuffed into a government Suburban and leave the Miami Airport with a gigantic motorcade and it makes me think about how the taxpayers are still paying massive bills on his behalf because he can't stop criming.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13645]

Trump's gonna have to pay for legal counsel with a briefcase full of cash like it's a drug deal

[tx 3 putt 78848]

6 minutes ago, royiv said:

Just watched this asshole get stuffed into a government Suburban and leave the Miami Airport with a gigantic motorcade and it makes me think about how the taxpayers are still paying massive bills on his behalf because he can't stop criming.

hmm, his Secret Service detailed is paid for, but note the rest of his show ?

[royiv 9916]

2 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

hmm, his Secret Service detailed is paid for, but note the rest of his show ?

I guarantee that Bush, Carter, Clinton and Obama don't require a motorcade of dozens of vehicles when they move around. Plus they don't have to be shuttled to court appearances for criminal proceedings. This guy is infinitely more expensive to the taxpayer than other former presidents.

[tx 3 putt 78848]

5 minutes ago, royiv said:

I guarantee that Bush, Carter, Clinton and Obama don't require a motorcade of dozens of vehicles when they move around. Plus they don't have to be shuttled to court appearances for criminal proceedings. This guy is infinitely more expensive to the taxpayer than other former presidents.

[Doc Sam Beckett 5911]

44 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Wait a minute, the Corvette has a doors that open and closes?  This is all news to me.

 

[The Dog 44888]

41 minutes ago, Red Five said:

 I would really like to think that the vast majority of people saying these things are like Lindsey Graham, and it's just pure gaslighting. 

It is - they know the law(s) that are in play here but are deliberately misrepresenting it for political gain. They know the overwhelming majority of Americans don't have a clue what the law actually says on this and they are preying on that ignorance. 

[The Dog 44888]

 

[Neonmoon 38130]

34 minutes ago, royiv said:

Just watched this asshole get stuffed into a government Suburban and leave the Miami Airport with a gigantic motorcade and it makes me think about how the taxpayers are still paying massive bills on his behalf because he can't stop criming.

I bet Trump uses every last cent

https://thepointsguy.com/2017/02/how-former-presidents-fly/

Quote

Travel for former presidents and no more than two of their designated staff is actually covered by taxpayer dollars, thanks to the Former President's Act (FPA) of 1958. In 1969, the General Services Administration (GSA) took control of determining the travel costs and capped annual appropriations at $1 million per president and $500,000 per president's spouse. In order for travel to be funded by the GSA, travel needs to be related to a function dealing with their capacity as a former president — pure leisure travel does not make the cut.

Before you get too outraged at those figures, consider this: In the fiscal year 2015, only former Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush used official travel funds, which totaled just $66,000.

 

[Underdog 29257]

1 hour ago, tx 3 putt said:

Welp it’s all over boys, they tried …..

 

How many hours/days she stand in front of a mirror practicing how to pronounce “appropriations” and which staff member spelled it out for her? 

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

So we're just going to get this scene at 2:33 with some no name lawyer and Cannon allowing it all, right? 

 

[Biff Tannen 46252]

1 hour ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

So we're just going to get this scene at 2:33 with some no name lawyer and Cannon allowing it all, right? 

 

Gimme a break, we're both lawyers!

[deech 2404]

I will state this as someone who is as anti-Trump as they come:

Hillary's email server was unconscionable.  She knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.  I believe her having the server was likely be a clear violation of the law, but I am no criminal law expert.  I believe there were enough articles written at the time of the various laws she would have violated in conducting government business like that on a private email server.   

HOWEVER

Trump did something totally different.  He stored highly secretive documents including documents containing intelligence sourced information in a fucking toilet at Mar Lago where every foreign agent known to man would have been actively working as it was a target rich environment.  He was asked nicely to return these documents several times.  Then legally they demanded he return the information.  His attorneys said they returned all the documents they had under oath after conducting a diligent search and still the government found more.  Then to figure out who had access to the rooms where this highly sensitive information was stored, they requested electronically stored videos so they could pin point exactly who had access to the various rooms where these documents were stored and he had the fucking pool guy flood the room.

 

So in summary I can buy the argument that Hillary should also have been prosecuted for some of the bullshit she pulled.  But their actions are not equal, similar, or in the same fucking ballpark.  Trump's actions are hundreds if not thousands of times worse.  

[tx 3 putt 78848]

Mar a lago is a damn fortress, except for the Chinese and Russian agents that easily con’s their way into the place 😂😂😂

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

7 minutes ago, deech said:

I will state this as someone who is as anti-Trump as they come:

Hillary's email server was unconscionable.  She knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.  I believe her having the server was likely be a clear violation of the law, but I am no criminal law expert.  I believe there were enough articles written at the time of the various laws she would have violated in conducting government business like that on a private email server.   

HOWEVER

Trump did something totally different.  He stored highly secretive documents including documents containing intelligence sourced information in a fucking toilet at Mar Lago where every foreign agent known to man would have been actively working as it was a target rich environment.  He was asked nicely to return these documents several times.  Then legally they demanded he return the information.  His attorneys said they returned all the documents they had under oath after conducting a diligent search and still the government found more.  Then to figure out who had access to the rooms where this highly sensitive information was stored, they requested electronically stored videos so they could pin point exactly who had access to the various rooms where these documents were stored and he had the fucking pool guy flood the room.

 

So in summary I can buy the argument that Hillary should also have been prosecuted for some of the bullshit she pulled.  But their actions are not equal, similar, or in the same fucking ballpark.  Trump's actions are hundreds if not thousands of times worse.  

The whole email server thing is not Hillary issue, it's a full government one. That practice started with Powell and Bush, was never made explicitly illegal, so has become a standard practice (which I think is wrong). Time to move on from that. 

[Biff Tannen 46252]

1 hour ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

The whole email server thing is not Hillary issue, it's a full government one. That practice started with Powell and Bush, was never made explicitly illegal, so has become a standard practice (which I think is wrong). Time to move on from that. 

Not to mention it also happened with Ivanka and Jared, if I'm not mistaken.

[deech 2404]

Just now, SmokeyTheBear said:

The whole email server thing is not Hillary issue, it's a full government one. That practice started with Powell and Bush, was never made explicitly illegal, so has become a standard practice (which I think is wrong). Time to move on from that. 

Sure it's a Hillary issue.  If you want to say that it is also a Powell and Bush issue.  That's fine.  I believe I read that Ivanka or some others in Trump's admin did some private email stuff as well.  Arrest them all.  

[Jatrain 288]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

No, it's really not dumb.

State laws vary widely.  I wouldn't dare practice in California with all their fucked up laws and byzantine codification, except for patent law before the USPTO, which I am entitled to practice nationwide.  Same with NY.  Same with Louisiana.

Although a lot of federal legislation is necessary, there is value to federalism and letting a state fuck itself up all it wants to.

Again, the point of local counsel is not to have someone that is admitted to the Florida bar, it's having someone with an office in the district, so that the judge can get someone to court on short notice (often in order to barbecue their ass).  

This was on display in the Kari Lake trials in Arizona.  Local council being basically a divorce lawyer plus the out of state elections attorney not having a clue as to AZ rules led to multiple entertaining instances of a frustrated judge lecturing council on the local rules.  
 

At one point Lake’s literally rested their case and then had to beg the judge to walk it back. 
 

 

 

[Underdog 29257]

Has Kim K passed the bar yet?  Maybe he's delaying in order to hire her on when she passes the bar. 

[TwiceHorn 32132]

31 minutes ago, deech said:

I will state this as someone who is as anti-Trump as they come:

Hillary's email server was unconscionable.  She knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.  I believe her having the server was likely be a clear violation of the law, but I am no criminal law expert.  I believe there were enough articles written at the time of the various laws she would have violated in conducting government business like that on a private email server.   

HOWEVER

Trump did something totally different.  He stored highly secretive documents including documents containing intelligence sourced information in a fucking toilet at Mar Lago where every foreign agent known to man would have been actively working as it was a target rich environment.  He was asked nicely to return these documents several times.  Then legally they demanded he return the information.  His attorneys said they returned all the documents they had under oath after conducting a diligent search and still the government found more.  Then to figure out who had access to the rooms where this highly sensitive information was stored, they requested electronically stored videos so they could pin point exactly who had access to the various rooms where these documents were stored and he had the fucking pool guy flood the room.

 

So in summary I can buy the argument that Hillary should also have been prosecuted for some of the bullshit she pulled.  But their actions are not equal, similar, or in the same fucking ballpark.  Trump's actions are hundreds if not thousands of times worse.  

I agree that whether to prosecute Hillary was a close question and that what she did was selfish and reckless.

I think she just wanted private email on a blackberry and didn't think through or even really understand the potential consequences of that as far as placing national defense information and state secrets in a very insecure location.

Does that absolve her of criminal liability?  No.  Does it mean she should or should not have been prosecuted?  I dunno, tough call.  I am reasonably certain that if she was prosecuted, she'd get and deserve a sweetheart deal like Petraeus got.  And what he did was worse and he damn sure should have known better.

Further, I agree that what Trump has done is a whole other level.  And it is so consistent with exactly what makes him unfit for the presidency or any other public office really, that basically a) demands prosecution and b) a conventional (i.e. what everyone else would get) penalty.

 

[deech 2404]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I agree that whether to prosecute Hillary was a close question and that what she did was selfish and reckless.

I think she just wanted private email on a blackberry and didn't think through or even really understand the potential consequences of that as far as placing national defense information and state secrets in a very insecure location.

Does that absolve her of criminal liability?  No.  Does it mean she should or should not have been prosecuted?  I dunno, tough call.  I am reasonably certain that if she was prosecuted, she'd get and deserve a sweetheart deal like Petraeus got.  And what he did was worse and he damn sure should have known better.

Further, I agree that what Trump has done is a whole other level.  And it is so consistent with exactly what makes him unfit for the presidency or any other public office really, that basically a) demands prosecution and b) a conventional (i.e. what everyone else would get) penalty.

 

I do not consider her that naive.  Historically she's never been naive.

[tx 3 putt 78848]

Didn’t bill Barr and trumps DoJ investigate Hillary, looking for anything to charge her for ?

[Genco 3059]

[jimmyjazz 47373]

Yes, they investigated and found no criminal intent.  That doesn't mean they didn't find or corroborate the evidence, though.

Hillary may not be naive, but even at the time she was old and probably technologically inept.  That said, she's also really smart, and I find it hard to believe she didn't understand at some level that she was mis-handling classified information.

[TwiceHorn 32132]

18 minutes ago, deech said:

I do not consider her that naive.  Historically she's never been naive.

I consider that an issue of tech savvy.  I have seen nothing to indicate that Hillary has any understanding of those issues.  I think she may have understood at some superficial level that her own email wasn't as secure as government email, but not what that really meant.

Otherwise, I agree.  

[TwiceHorn 32132]

24 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yes, they investigated and found no criminal intent. 

Just using this as an illustrative point.  Criminal intent is not something that exists or does not exist in some binary state machine.

They didn't find any evidence of criminal intent, which in this case would probably require knowledge ahead of time of classified/defense information and the intention to remove it from secure locations.

You can think she had it or didn't have it, and same with Trump.  But because she's not a complete blabbermouth fool, the investigative record was devoid of any evidence of it.  And without the evidence for a factfinder to infer or conclude that she had criminal intent in a judicial proceeding, there's no case.

Finding and nailing down that evidence is what takes so long with these investigations, and many times the investigators come up empty, even when the defendant is a known scumbag.  Thankfully, Smith was able to find such evidence and nail it down before bringing this indictment.

Edited June 12, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Beau Vine 55901]

Whoa.

 

[jimmyjazz 47373]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Just using this as an illustrative point.  Criminal intent is not something that exists or does not exist in some binary state machine.

They didn't find any evidence of criminal intent, which in this case would probably require knowledge ahead of time of classified/defense information and the intention to remove it from secure locations.

You can think she had it or didn't have it, and same with Trump.  But because she's not a complete blabbermouth fool, the investigative record was devoid of any evidence of it.

Finding and nailing down that evidence is what takes so long with these investigations, and many times the investigators come up empty, even when the defendant is a known scumbag.  Thankfully, Smith was able to find such evidence and nail it down before bringing this indictment.

Understood, as you understand that was my attempt of saying "they investigated and didn't go any further", or something like that.  I probably should have kept it simple.

[TwiceHorn 32132]

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Understood, as you understand that was my attempt of saying "they investigated and didn't go any further", or something like that.  I probably should have kept it simple.

Yes, the point wasn't directed at you, just trying to illustrate it for the board.  Seems a lot of board inhabitants believe that just because they believe it (w/r/to criminal intent), infected with a healthy dose of Trump hatred (which isn't wrong, but absolutely must be set aside for purposes of analysis), then it must be an easy case to prove and any prosecutor that didn't bring it within weeks or months of the occurrence must be some kind of pantywaist fascist-enabler.

Edited June 12, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Biff Tannen 46252]

1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

Whoa.

 

Prediction:  Nikki Haley will be completely off the radar within 6 months and we will never hear from her again.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34108]

21 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Whoa.

 

actually, no, those two things cannot both be true you lying cunt

[Sawbonz 28263]

26 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

The whole email server thing is not Hillary issue, it's a full government one. That practice started with Powell and Bush, was never made explicitly illegal, so has become a standard practice (which I think is wrong). Time to move on from that. 

It’s been a long time since I read about it  but I don’t believe Powell and Bush explicitly had their aids remove the top secret headers etc from docs so they could be downloaded from the secure site and uploaded to a personal server for their convenience. There was knowledge that she shouldn’t be doing it and she didn’t give a fuck. Also she refused to do the “mandatory” training on handling classified e documents where they went over all the do’s and don’t’s, but we would probably all skip shit like that if we could get away w it

 

 

but all that’s baby shit alongside what this dude is doin

[tx 3 putt 78848]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

It’s been a long time since I read about it  but I don’t believe Powell and Bush explicitly had their aids remove the top secret headers etc from docs so they could be downloaded from the secure site and uploaded to a personal server for their convenience. There was knowledge that she shouldn’t be doing it and she didn’t give a fuck. Also she refused to do the “mandatory” training on handling classified e documents where they went over all the do’s and don’t’s, but we would probably all skip shit like that if we could get away w it

 

 

but all that’s baby shit alongside what this dude is doin

or removed documents with hopes of being offered the Nixon ‘deal’ of $18 mil to return them 

[fuggled 576]

55 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

Didn’t bill Barr and trumps DoJ investigate Hillary, looking for anything to charge her for ?

It was actually Trump's State Department and the GOP-led Senate Judiciary Committee that investigated.  They found "no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/us/politics/state-dept-inquiry-clinton-emails.html

[tx 3 putt 78848]

2 minutes ago, fuggled said:

It was actually Trump's State Department and the GOP-led Senate Judiciary Committee that investigated.  They found "no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/18/us/politics/state-dept-inquiry-clinton-emails.html

Sounds like the antifa woke mob let her walk !!!! 

Edited June 12, 2023 by tx 3 putt

[Sawbonz 28263]

1 minute ago, tx 3 putt said:

or removed documents with hopes of being offered the Nixon ‘deal’ of $18 mil to return them 

CNN showed a graphic this morning that only 48% of all Americans polled agree with the indictments. It just bottles the mind

[Rimbo 27109]

1 hour ago, deech said:

I will state this as someone who is as anti-Trump as they come:

Hillary's email server was unconscionable.  She knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.  I believe her having the server was likely be a clear violation of the law, but I am no criminal law expert.  I believe there were enough articles written at the time of the various laws she would have violated in conducting government business like that on a private email server.   

HOWEVER

Trump did something totally different.  He stored highly secretive documents including documents containing intelligence sourced information in a fucking toilet at Mar Lago where every foreign agent known to man would have been actively working as it was a target rich environment.  He was asked nicely to return these documents several times.  Then legally they demanded he return the information.  His attorneys said they returned all the documents they had under oath after conducting a diligent search and still the government found more.  Then to figure out who had access to the rooms where this highly sensitive information was stored, they requested electronically stored videos so they could pin point exactly who had access to the various rooms where these documents were stored and he had the fucking pool guy flood the room.

 

So in summary I can buy the argument that Hillary should also have been prosecuted for some of the bullshit she pulled.  But their actions are not equal, similar, or in the same fucking ballpark.  Trump's actions are hundreds if not thousands of times worse.  

Hillary's email server was wrong, but I don't think we can attribute to malice where stupidity will cover the bill.

Most people don't understand basic email security. If they knew what I knew about email, nobody would ever use it. I still use it because i just don't fucking care who knows about things I email.

[Red Five 41804]

"If the indictment is true". Fuck off.

 

[Rimbo 27109]

1 hour ago, deech said:

I do not consider her that naive.  Historically she's never been naive.

You give her too much credit

[C-Man 27850]

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Not to mention it also happened with Ivanka and Jared, if I'm not mistaken.

 

1 hour ago, deech said:

Sure it's a Hillary issue.  If you want to say that it is also a Powell and Bush issue.  That's fine.  I believe I read that Ivanka or some others in Trump's admin did some private email stuff as well.  Arrest them all.  

Jared was using WhatsApp to conduct government business without oversight. I'm sure that's how he worked with MBS. That's also the way Jimmy Dunne reached out to the dude with the PIF to start the PGA-LIV negotiations.

 

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

CNN showed a graphic this morning that only 48% of all Americans polled agree with the indictments. It just bottles the mind

Pretty sure I saw a similar poll, maybe it was the same one that showed 61% said the indictments do not change their opinion of DOTARD.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

6 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

Hillary's email server was wrong, but I don't think we can attribute to malice where stupidity will cover the bill.

Most people don't understand basic email security. If they knew what I knew about email, nobody would ever use it. I still use it because i just don't fucking care who knows about things I email.

Some billion dollar companies don't understand digital security in general. It's something that most people put a willful blind eye to because it's all too complex. And government has a tendency to lag behind in adoption due to those misunderstandings or cost concerns.