quote:Originally posted by George Harris: If Joe pardons Trump, I will be looking for the next sunrise in the west.
Better that, Mr. Harris, then Trump pardoning himself as POTUS 47. That would be fraught with all too many Constitutional challenges than a politically divided nation could handle.
A CNN commentator yesterday noted "Trump is running first and foremost to keep his personal freedom".
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I realize that to throw Hunter a pardon by Joe on his way out (I think he will lose to Trump; the indictments only solidify Trump's support), but I think it would be part of a "National Unity" initiative by Joe - and for which he does not need any "advice and consent" from Congress.
Possibly, Joe's legacy will be that even in defeat, he appeased the best way he could - for both sides.
What Trump will do during his Second Presidency is what he will do. His supporters, like my Sister, will think of him as one of the Five Greatest we ever had. Others will agree with the Scholars he will be close to the bottom (Joe will be there as well).
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Denial of the fact that the Presidential Records Act applies here. There is no “classified information”. No sitting POTUS can reclassify something that is freely declassified by predecessor.
quote:Post ’20 Conspiracies (today’s)
Made up out of whole cloth. Never mind violation of First Amendment rights.
quote:Georgia election (if indictment is handed up)
Making requests is not a crime. The states are empowered to investigate.
quote:Stephanie/Stormy; Trump Organization business funds’ misuse
No such thing. Never mind the absurd claim that it was misuse of election funds, in fact; also made up of whole cloth.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, if either Mr. Harris, myself, or any others around here who have worn the uniform and served, decided "oh it's just a souvenir" and helped ourselves to some classified material, maybe by now we'd be out of Leavenworth.
What gives a Former President exemption from such rules? He is no longer in office, and hence no longer has "need to know", which is the underlying principle for anyone having access to such information.
Honestly, if they are going to nail Trump for something, I hope it's for this. I could care less who he had a romp with and how he paid her off.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I will go to my grave shaking my head regarding the trump cult in this country. And thats exactly what it is--a cult. Now i know how charles manson, david koresh and the like can get followers. Also trump was exactly right when he said he could kill someone on the streets of NYC and his supporters would stay with him. i can think of millions more people one could idolize who would be a more suitable idol than the orange criminal.
Posts: 457 | From: St. Albans, Vermont | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I might have taken some pictures of things prohibited to be photographed while in Nam. I will say that my father and i worked out a system so they could locate me if I got sent to some place where US forces were not supposed to be. Fortunately never needed to use it. I will say that my father had a couple of pictures of Panama Canal locks taken when he happened to fly over it during WW2. His comment was, "What do they think I am going to do? Sell them to the first German I can find."
I have had to sign nondisclosure statement on a few issues on transit projects iI have worked on, Time and place to remain nameless. With one exception these appeared have had the primary purpose of keeping secret something incredibly stupid the owning agency had allowed to be done. In short, I am convinced that many classified are more for the purpose of hiding stupidity and preventing embarrassment than anything else.
Oh, by the way, how about all the various and sundry classified documents Biden had in unsecured locations? Seems to be media amnesia and blindness on that.
Posts: 2945 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
On our respective points, Mr. Harris, what will be interesting is how the case of this E-3 Air Guardsman plays out.
To date, nothing has been brought to the media's attention that he intended to sell what he (allegedly) stole to an adversary; he just wanted to enhance his standing as an "internet influencer".
Now regarding necessity of some classifications, I can recall in a training film how the script said "somebody has just gone wild with a Secret stamp" (followed of course by the stern narrator's voice "that's not your call to make").
However what got me is when I had to ZDK (retransmit) a message classified Secret and already the content was in the papers!!!!
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"That's not your call to make." Exactly. No matter how nonsensical it seems to be. A good example: My yet to be wife was allowed to tell the world she worked for the CIA, but not where. (or doing what.) My comment was, anyone who wanted to know where just had to follow you to work at least once. The building had a sign for one government agency but most of the traffic went through an unmarked door. What was also interesting, after it was known we were planning marriage, my parents got calls from several people in our hometown wanting to know what I was up to, because they had had people that would not identify themselves as to who they were or why they were asking coming around asking questions about me. At the time I was a just out of Nam 1LT looking for a job in the DC area. (Anyone having the urge to prosecute a 76 old woman with advanced Alzheimer's for revealing a jiblet of top secret information over 50 years ago can just have at it if they like making fools of themselves.)
As to our E3 in question, guess he hadn't figured out that trying to puff up your own self-importance is one of the best ways to look stupid.
Posts: 2945 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MontanaJim: I will go to my grave shaking my head regarding the trump cult in this country. And thats exactly what it is--a cult. Now i know how charles manson, david koresh and the like can get followers. Also trump was exactly right when he said he could kill someone on the streets of NYC and his supporters would stay with him. i can think of millions more people one could idolize who would be a more suitable idol than the orange criminal.
All your post consists of is ad hominem, appeal to emotion and false comparisons. With all due respect, is that all you live for?
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Gilbert B Norman: Mr. Helfner, if either Mr. Harris, myself, or any others around here who have worn the uniform and served, decided “oh it’s just a souvenir” and helped ourselves to some classified material, maybe by now we’d be out of Leavenworth
What gives a Former President exemption from such rules? He is no longer in office, and hence no longer has “need to know”, which is the underlying principle for anyone having access to such information…
False comparison between POTUS and service members; also spurious quotations.
Trump, as POTUS, has the Presidential Records Act apply to him, which includes whatever formerly classified material he brought with him at his discretion that cannot be re-classified by Biden (which would be illegal in and of itself). Also, the National Archives has no authority here.
False citation of “rules” to boot. Applying this new, alleged (false) standard to Trump alone has to mean that all living predecessors must be held to it, which they are not. Never mind such material being (actually) illegally in the hands of former vice presidents.
quote:Honestly, if they are going to nail Trump for something, I hope it’s for this. I could (not) care less who he had a romp with and how he paid her off.
So you want him “nailed” for something that is not a crime. Got it.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
To close, let's have a "we report, you decide"; which was the more controversial election; Hayes-Tilden'76, or Trump-Biden '20?
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Fani fabricated them all, more like; again, nothing in there is a crime.
And we are getting more evidence that the grand jury system is tainted; fewer and fewer will now trust it, since the grand jury system was intended to help the defendant and not the prosecutor.
Also coming out is Obama appointee Tanya Chutkan and her familial ties to communists in Jamaica.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Act 22 cited in the Georgia indictment charged Trump with conspiracy for encouraging supporters to watch hearings broadcast on One America News Network.
“Georgia hearings now on [One America News Network]. Amazing!” the president tweeted.
“This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy,” the indictment read.
Act 100 of the indictment faulted the president for encouraging supporters to tune into Newsmax.
Act 101 listed another tweet that encouraged supporters to tune into the Right Side Broadcasting Network as an act of “conspiracy.” …
That is quite the redefinition of “conspiracy”, indeed.
quote:Act 38 of the criminal indictment charged Giuliani for retweeting a “Patriot Call to Action” that encouraged voters to call their members of Congress to advocate for their cause.
The tweet stated, “Georgia Patriot Call to Action: today is the day we need you to call your state Senate & House Reps & ask them to sign the petition for a special session. We must have free & fair elections in GA & a this is our only path to ensuring every legal vote is counted @realDonald Trump.”
“This was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy,” the indictment read.
So calling on people to call Congressmen, which is perfectly legal, is “conspiracy”.
Redefining non-crimes as crimes, particularly when such redefinition attacks the First Amendment, is egregiously criminal in and of itself.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
How say he invite, in the interest of fairness and balance, his "followers" to read the lead Editorial appearing in The New York Times today.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
We are looking more and more like some banana republic or other country led by some want to be dictator which has prostituted the press and the court system to prosecute their opposition and ignore any illegal acts of their compatriots. Their first success was electing an incompetent "community organizer" as president mainly by labeling anyone opposing as "racist" to squelch anyone pointing out his inadequacies. Now the concept of the Democrat Party and the media whih for the most part is essentially their lapdog is to try to get people to lookie lookie at Trump to try to obscure the multitudinous malfeances of Joe Biden, ete al. More and more I see current of the office as a geriatric nincompoop who, or his handlers or puppetmasters, has made some of the worst decisions in the country's history. While I may have pulled the lever for Trump in 2016 as the least bad, he proved himself far ahead of both his 2016 competition and the current White House occupant. As this point I do not see Biden or any of the potential Democrat party alternatives that my gag reflex would allow me to vote for.
Posts: 2945 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
First, a thanks to the Barista who got WiFi "up and running" on my phone.
Yesterday. On the "jam-packed" train from Munich, I was seated with three English speaking, university graduates, Georgians (2 gals, guy).
We talked at their invitation, politics. They are aware of Trump's bombast that he'd end The War in 24 hours, resulting in Ukraine’s fall. They all said they're fearful Trump is going to win, and if that being the case, to Putin "we're next".
So much for "things 1100 miles from The Front".
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Mr. Harris, I 'm afraid anyone unfamiliar with the views you and Mr. Helfner hold, could look at that statement and conclude it was directed towards someone other than your intent.
quote:Originally posted by George Harris: We are looking more and more like some banana republic or other country led by some want to be dictator which has prostituted the press and the court system to prosecute their opposition and ignore any illegal acts of their compatriots.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:A second Trump term “would be different from the first, and much worse,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, a former German government official who is now with the German Marshall Fund in Berlin. “Trump has experience now and knows what levers to pull, and he’s angry,” he said.
Mr. Kleine-Brockhoff said he remembered talking with then-Chancellor Angela Merkel the night she returned from her first meeting with Mr. Trump as president. As usual, she was “all about managing the man as she had managed dozens of powerful men,” he said. “But no one will think” they can manage “Trump Two.”
As it can be seen from my Dateline, "over there" is presently my "over here".
While I'm not about to suggest "they're lining up" to talk with me about anything, some talk is simply unavoidable.
My "on the ground consensus" is that the article is "on mark".
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Funny they throw around the term “worse” without saying what was “bad” in the first place. The EU, which is an imperialist project designed to empower Germany at the expense of its other member states but the USA particularly, need things to go “worse” for their goals, and I speak as one who is outraged at what they have done to Ireland.
Well, back on topic: Some on the left find Trump’s Fulton County GA mugshot unnerving, particularly after all the phony mugshots that depict him with a defeated look on his face.
posted
Well Mr. Helfner, at least Donald John and his cohorts were not required to change into that "Orangewear" and have "full frontal and sides" taken.
Also regarding the EU, the Republic chose to stay in; a handy time to have pulled out would have been when the Brexit initiative moved forth, but obviously, they held their best interests were to stay in.
Funny, how when I was "over", I did not meet a Brit who was particularly happy about how things have turned out. Just think, an economy as sick as any in Europe, and the inconvenience of having to have a passport, instead of a simple EU ID, now to travel to Salzburg or anywhere else on the Contiment.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
IMI (repeat) THESE ARE JOURNAL COLUMNISTS
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes; the same Journal whose editorial board demanded “a five-word Constitutional amendment: ‘There shall be open borders’” three years after I graduated high school (cf. “The communists are further reproached for desiring to abolish countries and nationality” from the Manifesto).
The Republic of Ireland staying in the EU served the interests only of the political class. Control of its borders was ripped away by their foreign masters also; I also do not see how that is in the country’s interest any more than foreign fishing boats in Irish waters per the so-called Common Fisheries Policy, or so many other collectivist abuses.
quote:What will be the attitude of communism to existing nationalities?
The nationalities of the peoples associating themselves in accordance with the principle of community will be compelled to mingle with each other as a result of this association and thereby to dissolve themselves, just as the various estate and class distinctions must disappear through the abolition of their basis, private property.
The WSJ editorial board aligns itself with this goal of the communists directly via their demand for an open borders amendment.
Edit #2: To drag us back on topic, former RNC chairman Michael Steele appeared on MSNBC and fearmongered the notion that Trump may suddenly make himself “president for life” if re-elected.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr.Helfner, while not sure what this is all about, it certainly appears that Trump could not accept he lost the Election and was prepared to try to suspend the Constitution that determined he lost.
He certainly had it drilled into him at an early age that "you never lose".
On that point, the high note of that s%&tshow otherwise referred to as a Debate (I had just gotten back from overseas and can't promise anyone as to my state of mind) was Gov. Christie praising Vice President Pence for putting the Constitution first, even though that document would have him unemployed two weeks later.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not accepting an election loss per se is not a crime any more than seeking verification of election results after a highly-unusually-conducted election. If the former were criminal, then people like Hillary Clinton and Stacey Abrams should have been indicted if not subsequently convicted.
Going back to CNN and their old mendacious headline, Trump clearly stated, rather than say the Constitution must be terminated to guarantee him an undeniable win (CNN guilty of putting words in his mouth), that the act of committing fraud woud enable the termination of the Constitution by the fraudsters, since it would be the first stage of a coup du publique. Hopefully it is not too late to heed that warning.
PS. What Christie praised Pence for is the opposite of what the Constitution says. Not to mention, Pence denied the people the day in Congress he openly promised them on 01/04/2021, to wit:
quote:“I know we all have got our doubts about the last election. I want to assure you that I share the concerns of millions of Americans about voting irregularities. I promise you, come this Wednesday, we will have our day in Congress!”
That day never came, thanks to Mr. Pence.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by irishchieftain: The Republic of Ireland staying in the EU served the interests only of the political class. Control of its borders was ripped away by their foreign masters also; I also do not see how that is in the country’s interest any more than foreign fishing boats in Irish waters per the so-called Common Fisheries Policy, or so many other collectivist abuses.
One Irish man I was working with at the time of Ireland's entrance into the EU said they should change their name to the "Republic of Esau." Recall the Bible story how Esau sold his birthright as oldest son for a good meal. (Genesis Chapter 25, particularly verse 34: "Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright." (KJV)) His feeling was that Ireland had sold their independence for some hope of financial gain. (If your freedom is not more valuable than what is in your wallet, you do not deserve freedom.)
Posts: 2945 | From: Olive Branch MS | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
After reading Maureen's thoughts on this past Thursday's events, lest we forget they could have had him and his accomplices dress up in Orange and have full frontal and side photos taken.
However, lest we not forget this tagline:
CopsPosts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maureen seems more deliberately mendacious than usual in that latest screed. Hopefully Brutus’ curse upon Cassius does not fall upon her next time she feels splenetic, for her sake (Act IV Scene II).
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Newsweek notes that arresting and indicting Trump is actually not reinforcing Democratic voters, but alienating them.
quote:A majority of Democrat voters who backed President Joe Biden in 2020 think the investigations and criminal indictments against Donald Trump constitute “an interference in the 2024 presidential election,” according to a new poll conducted exclusively for Newsweek.
The Redfield & Wilton Strategies survey reveals a majority in every age group, gender and geographic location, except for the Northeast, think Trump’s ongoing legal difficulties constitute election interference in a major boost to the Republican frontrunner. …
The Redfield & Wilton Strategies poll found an average of 59 percent of Americans believed the four cases are an interference, versus 19 percent who disagreed, while another 22 percent said they didn't know. …
posted
"Real Republicans" - those who hold to the traditional cornerstones - fiscal responsibility, strong foreign policy, conservative values - can take heart from the views held by one Journal columnist and their Editorial Board:
quote:The good news for the party is that this was a solid event, showcasing several capable, qualified and at times inspiring contenders for the Oval Office. Donald Trump chose to duck the debate, and one consequence was that he was largely reduced to an afterthought. The eight participants instead sparred over their own differences—on domestic policy, global involvement, priorities and qualifications.
Nikki Haley was notably adult. The former South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador showed a command not only of policy issues, but of her own convictions. She broke with the others to make a compelling case for Republicans to approach the divisive issue of abortion with more compassion, and to leave the tough particulars to the states. She called instead for federal lawmakers to focus on widely held “consensus” views—on late-term abortions, the merits of adoption, the need for available contraception.
quote:Ms. Haley’s honesty didn’t stop there. “Donald Trump added $8 trillion to our debt,” she said. “You look at the 2024 budget: Republicans asked for $7.4 billion in earmarks. Democrats asked for $2.8 billion. So you tell me who are the big spenders.” Those figures are backed by a Roll Call story last month: “House Republicans have so thoroughly stacked the earmarking deck in their favor in appropriations bills for the upcoming fiscal year that the top Democratic recipient doesn’t even appear in the top 60.”
Then there was the elephant not in the room, as Fox News host Bret Baier put it, meaning former President Trump. “Three-quarters of Americans don’t want a rematch between Trump and Biden,” Ms. Haley said. “And we have to face the fact that Trump is the most disliked politician in America. We can’t win a general election that way.”
All told; "Nikki, Nikki, she's our gal."
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say that such real Republicans so defined eschewed any Murdoch-controlled publications decades ago, particularly now under the dominion of liberal heir Lachlan.
The low-rated debate was also eschewed by such conservatives, mostly for the same reason but also because of the connections of participants to left-wing donors and/or ideology. The biggest strike against the debates would be ignoring the elephant in the room whose name starts with the sixth letter of the alphabet.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, I'm with your thoughts regarding the Debates. "We're here to discuss the issues" in a mature and respectful manner so a voter can determine amongst the several candidates who best will put forth their "personal agenda" should they be elected.
The best one I can recall meeting that end was a V-P debate during 2K between Lieberman and Cheney, where both were seated at a "Meet The Press" or other Sunday talk show stage set discussing the issues. The moderator was "just kind of there".
These Jerry Springer charades with their hooting and screaming audiences do nothing to accomplish those ends. All they do is decide who is the best showman.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Time to "resurrect" this topic in that a jury has been seated and opening statements are to be presented in the matter of People (NY) v. Trump.
Even The Times holds the Felony case against Mr. Trump is weak (the charge, Falsifying Records is generally brought as a Misdemeanor and "the romp", if consensual, is not a crime) and if somehow it results in a conviction, such would likely be overturned on the certain appeal.
Now it is true that this, just like the Georgia case, is a State case. As such, should Donald Trump again be addressed Mr. President come January, he cannot pardon himself should there be an upheld conviction.
And finally, for those who have little or nothing to do with their day, no TV unlike OJ.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The wording of Article II Section 2 says “offenses against the United States” and does not specifically say “federal” anything, to be frank; the Supreme Court has not ever ruled on this, but rather the source of this assertion is the opinion of the Department of Justice, which was not established by the US Constitution.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Helfner, while it appears roundabout, it is the language of Article 2 that empowers the President to establish Departments as he pleases. However of course, Congress funds these Departments, so we are back to a "no tickie, no washie":
quote:He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is nothing in there as to the establishment of infinite executive departments, even by Congress. Certainly nothing in the Constitution about Congress delegating de facto legislative power to those departments (which makes them a mere rubber stamp for an overpowered executive that is not given any legislative power whatsoever by the Constitution, and there is a big reason for that); any executive departments are charged to follow the Take Care clause of Article 2 Section 3 since they are under the command of the POTUS, in addition, and not become a law unto themselves.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
At this time, here are my predictions regarding the outcomes of the several criminal matters pending against Mr. Trump:
S of NY v. Trump; 50-50 chance of conviction. 100% of overturn on appeal. It's simply a weak case arising from a "consensual romp" which, in itself is not a crime, as well as falsification of business records, which is usually a misdemeanor. Had the "hush money" (sorry, Mr. Helfner; but right or wrong, the term is actively used when addressing this matter) been paid out of Mr. Trump's personal pocket without any kind of reimbursement from the Organization, this matter would have never seen the light of day.
US v. Trump; the Defense has maneuvered enough delay tactics such as having the US Supreme Court (five Justices aligned with Trump) rule upon "immunity" so that the trial will not start until after the Elections.
US v. Trump, Nauta, and De Oliveira; this matter in Florida, presided over by a Trump appointed Judge, has too been delayed account a volume of motions submitted by the Defense and, too, will not start until after Election Day.
Trump will win the Election "decisively but not by a landslide" (do not expect another Jan 6 to occur); at that time the Federal charges will be dropped. After all, who does the incoming Attorney General, who presses and withdraws Federal charges at his pleasure, work for?
Oh and almost a postscript: Georgia v. Trump et al will be withdrawn. After all, State level offices are Republican and likely to stay so. Further, sufficient events have occurred regarding this matter to have "persecutorial misconduct" attached to its mishandling.
disclaimer: author's Presidential voting record to date is 7R, 7D, 1I
addendum: author had not read this Journal column prior to posting this material.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Had the "hush money" (sorry, Mr. Helfner; but right or wrong, the term is actively used when addressing this matter) been paid out of Mr. Trump's personal pocket without any kind of reimbursement from the Organization, this matter would have never seen the light of day
That is an absurd assertion on the part of the prosecution. Turning a non-crime into a crime merely due to the opinion of a prosecutor is attainder. And there is still a difference between so-called “hush money” and perfectly legal nondisclosure agreements without which legal confidentiality could not exist and business could not be done.
Posts: 808 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again Mr. Helfner, this is a weak case, and if the Jury from "deep Blue New York County" does convict, it will be quickly overturned on appeal.
After Stephanie/Stormy, what can Mickey Cohen come up with to convince the Appellate Court?
Now on the classified matter, when it was found at "Lake by the Sea", did Trump instantly cooperate (such as did Joe) to return it to the National Archives? Uh, don't think so. This is the one that I think he is most vulnerable to an upheld Appeal on. What if any of us here such as Sgt. Norman, 1st Lt (Capt ?) Harris, Capt. Ocala Mike, or "Chicken" ("Full Bird"?) Col. Pullman, and anyone else who wore the uniform of our country and with a security clearance, had we done same maybe they'd let us out of Leavenworth by now!!!
That's the one I'd like to see him go down for, but alas, it will never come to trial.
Posts: 10666 | From: Clarendon Hills, IL USA (BNSF Chicago Sub MP 18.71) | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
