An Indictment of the Indictment - Razör Rants
(odysee.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (21)
sorted by:
The President has full declassification authority.
Full.
Complete.
Total.
Bill Clinton used this same authority.
They have no case. Trump will be fine.
But of course a doomer like you would pretend not to know things.
That is not how this works.
A former President cannot just magically say any documents he has are declassified.
There is a specific process they need to go through.
And you think you are privy to more information on how this works than President of the United States Donald Trump?
Peace. All will be well.
onetruephilosoraptor is a DeSantis shill with TDS that’s now apparently not above supporting transparent persecution of his political rivals. There is case law precedent concerning Clinton doing something similar that explicitly states documents the president takes on the way out of office is considered his personal property. To say otherwise would be to subsume some authority regarding declassification that is above the fucking president, which yea surprise, there isn’t, and courts have refused to say there is.
Oh, let's give him some credit. He's not "supporting" the persecution, he's just accepting that it's not persecution because Trump really did do all this stuff and oh well, that's just the law, don't'cha'know. Such a shame. By golly, I guess that means we'll all have to vote for DeSantis when Trump goes to jail for this totally legitimate, if unfortunate, indictment!
You are not even looking at the legal issues at the heart of the case.
I have said time and time again I don't support any selective prosecution.
Regardless of what any of us thinks about this case, various lawyers who have extensive knowledge in this domain state there is potentially a strong case here against Trump unlike the Bragg case.
Why don't you look at what different lawyers have to say about this before you attack me with irrelevant ad-hominems?
Please look at these various analyses about this case:
https://archive.is/agqao
https://archive.is/fOZ4u
https://archive.is/eaSU5
Please go look at what Jonathan Turley, Andrew McCarthy and Judge Napolitano have to say on this case.
This is Andrew McCarthy's take: https://archive.is/agqao
This is Jonathan Turley's take: https://archive.is/fOZ4u
This is Judge Napolitano's take: https://archive.is/eaSU5
Don't take this the wrong way but why on Earth would you listen to any of those people?
The Grand Jury who submitted this indictment were PURPOSEFULLY NOT INFORMED ABOUT PREVIOUS PRECEDENT.
You need to understand what that means and then you'll completely understand what is happening.
Jonathan Turley: Says Alvin Bragg's case against President Donald Trump is "legally pathetic."
Andrew McCarthy: Defends three-letter agencies. Swamp.
Judge Andrew Napolitano: Fired by Fox News for being based, learned his place, cringe since. Betrayed Donald Trump numerous times.
Why do you take the easy road?
"You don't have to work hard to be negative. You don't have to work hard to be a pessimist. You don't have to reach a certain level of consciousness in order to be negative. We all can easily do it. Being optimistic and positive is what takes work."
Rush Limbaugh