• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The Trump Presidency 15

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does anyone know if Trump actually declassified it? Would someone be able to get it via FOIA if he did? Who is the holder of the information? Based on my years around this stuff, it's not as simple as saying "ok that information is declassified".
 
Segnosaur said:
Thing is, even if the Kush claimed "Trump said I could talk to the Saudis", they'd still probably have to provide some documentation explicitly stating that the material (at that point) declassified.
Click to expand...

If everyone just chose to remain silent, and it went to trial, it isn't on them to provide an affirmative defense. The prosecution can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt if they don't actually know if it was allowed or not.
 
slyjoe said:
Does anyone know if Trump actually declassified it? Would someone be able to get it via FOIA if he did? Who is the holder of the information? Based on my years around this stuff, it's not as simple as saying "ok that information is declassified".
Click to expand...

He doesn't have to declassify it. He can simply allow the Saudis to have it at his whim.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

Liberal Hollywood is Racist at the highest level, and with great Anger and Hate! They like to call themselves “Elite,” but they are not Elite. In fact, it is often the people that they so strongly oppose that are actually the Elite. The movie coming out is made in order....

....to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence, and then try to blame others. They are the true Racists, and are very bad for our Country!
Click to expand...

I like how he doesn't even explain just how "Liberal Hollywood" is supposed to be racist. As usual, when he's justifiably accused of something (such as being racist), he responds by blaming someone else. It's always someone else that's responsible, or they have done something far worse than the thing he absolutely did not do.
 
BobTheCoward said:
An honest discussion begins with the lack of evidence that a crime was even committed. You have a bunch of nice stuff (like a person would be motivated to commit crimes for their benefit), but you don't have something indicating a crime rather than usual scumbaggery.
Click to expand...

How the **** do you know if a crime has been committed if you don't investigate it? Jesus Christ.

ETA: I'm sorry, that's on me. I shouldn't have got sucked in.
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Looks like a good guess. I checked out the WP entry. Does Trump think the hunters are supposed to be the good guys?
Click to expand...


I also didn't see anything in the trailer to indicate that the hunters are liberals. It's from the same production company that produced the Purge franchise, so it's likely the same rich vs. poor theme as that series, rather than liberal vs. conservative.
 
BobTheCoward said:
If everyone just chose to remain silent, and it went to trial, it isn't on them to provide an affirmative defense. The prosecution can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt if they don't actually know if it was allowed or not.
Click to expand...

So just assume no evidence will be found, and don't even start an investigation unless you can already prove someone is guilty?

If there's solid evidence that Kushner gave classified info to MBS, then he better have an affirmative defense or he's going to jail. In this case, if Trump wants to pull Kushner's nuts out of the fire, yes, he can say he authorized it, even if he didn't actually know anything about it. If that's what an investigation comes up with, then Trump takes ownership of it -- something that won't happen without an investigation. Someone needs to take ownership and explain why it happened.
 
WilliamSeger said:
If there's solid evidence that Kushner gave classified info to MBS, then he better have an affirmative defense or he's going to jail. In this case, if Trump wants to pull Kushner's nuts out of the fire, yes, he can say he authorized it, even if he didn't actually know anything about it. If that's what an investigation comes up with, then Trump takes ownership of it -- something that won't happen without an investigation. Someone needs to take ownership and explain why it happened.
Click to expand...
And if Trump DOES say "I authorized it", he would need to provide evidence that that was the case. (The official presidental records act would require it.) If Trump says "I authorized him to give classified information to the Saudis" and can't provide evidence that he did, Trump would be breaking the law.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

Liberal Hollywood is Racist at the highest level, and with great Anger and Hate! They like to call themselves “Elite,” but they are not Elite. In fact, it is often the people that they so strongly oppose that are actually the Elite. The movie coming out is made in order....

....to inflame and cause chaos. They create their own violence, and then try to blame others. They are the true Racists, and are very bad for our Country!
Click to expand...
He's been watching fox again.
 
plague311 said:
How the **** do you know if a crime has been committed if you don't investigate it? Jesus Christ.

ETA: I'm sorry, that's on me. I shouldn't have got sucked in.
Click to expand...

One example is a victim comes forward and says something like, "I was robbed."

It is complicated by the lack of a victim coming forward.

But I don't think I used the word know. That doesn't represent my position.
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
So just assume no evidence will be found, and don't even start an investigation unless you can already prove someone is guilty?

If there's solid evidence that Kushner gave classified info to MBS, then he better have an affirmative defense or he's going to jail. In this case, if Trump wants to pull Kushner's nuts out of the fire, yes, he can say he authorized it, even if he didn't actually know anything about it. If that's what an investigation comes up with, then Trump takes ownership of it -- something that won't happen without an investigation. Someone needs to take ownership and explain why it happened.
Click to expand...

You are quoting a post unrelated to an investigation and thinking it is about an investigation.

An affirmative defense is unneeded, because you can't win the case as a prosecutor if you literally have no information if it was or wasn't allowed disclosure.
 
BobTheCoward said:
You are quoting a post unrelated to an investigation and thinking it is about an investigation.

An affirmative defense is unneeded, because you can't win the case as a prosecutor if you literally have no information if it was or wasn't allowed disclosure.
Click to expand...

Ok [/bob]
 
quadraginta said:
And I don't disagree with any of that. I'm not sure what you think I said that led you to believe I did.

My only point was about the question of legality of Kushner's passing intel. There's a lot of legal cover for him by virtue of his daddy-in-law as far as state secrets are concerned. I'm not saying it's right, just that it's there.

Nothing more than that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how evidence of a bribe in exchange for classified intel is legal because Trump had the legal right to OK the intel leak.

What's with this business of normalizing bribery and corruption (not necessarily you)?
 
slyjoe said:
Does anyone know if Trump actually declassified it? Would someone be able to get it via FOIA if he did? Who is the holder of the information? Based on my years around this stuff, it's not as simple as saying "ok that information is declassified".
Click to expand...

Who cares?

Jesus people, he took a million dollar bribe to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom