Obviously, its about personal records. Why else would he take them home? They can charge him with whatever. Clearly Trump thinks he is intitled to them as personal and the Supreme Court will agree; as they already have previously. Also, what nuclear secrets does Trump have? Or are you lying like Rex?
Also, maybe you are legally ignorant because you don't like to read, but Grand Jurys do not get to hear from the defense lawyers. That is not how they work. So you can keep saying "Trumps lawyers havent made that case" well duh. They havent gone to trial..... Though I agree they might never will because a good chance this hunk of political BS gets thrown out.
I mean, when that little girl got on the news and was all excited about indicting trump, we kinda all knew where it was headed. I think my biggest beef is that those that look at this as some kind of big win for America can’t really see the forest for the trees.
You really don't know what you're talking about. There is not a single expert in Federal law outside of MAGA la-la land who thinks the Presidential Records Act is a valid defense against the charges. Not Jack Smith, not Merrick Garland, not Bill Barr. As it stands, trump's own legal team urged him to make a deal with the DOJ to avoid indictment, but he chose instead to follow the advice of one Tom Fitton, a fool who heads a gaggle of right wing hacks collectively known as "Judicial Watch". You REALLY think Jack Smith would have brought this indictment if it was so easily dismissed by the "socks" case? You REALLY think Jack Smith would not have reviewed all court case precedents concerning "personal" records? Here, I'll break it down for you: 1- The "socks" case concerned which of "presidential records" Clinton could have legally claimed as "personal". It did not deal at all with official records that are not "presidential records". As Judge Jackson said within that very ruling you're so fond of posting the courts have never deemed that the PRA meant that the president could deem anything he wants as a personal record. 2- A "presidential record" is defined within the law: "The term "Presidential records" means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President". donald trump is being charged for stealing, possessing, and conspiring to conceal records that were generated outside of those boundaries and are NOT presidential. 3- donald trump has not been charged with violating the PRA, anyway. Like I've said, even if someone deems their child porn to be "personal" it is still illegal to possess it. In this case, what donald trump stole is illegal under the Espionage Act for a private individual to possess. 4- donald trump doesn't believe his own bullshit, anyway. The audiotapes and transcripts of conversations with his aides after he left office bemoaning his failure to declassify documents while in office proves what lawyers call "consciousness of guilt".
I will say this, though. Even though trump is OBVIOUSLY guilty, as declared in so many words by the likes of Bill Barr, Karl Rove, Chris Christie, and several others of his previously staunch defenders, I am not at all confident that he will be convicted by a jury. All it takes is one magat to stalemate a jury, and we know, again OBVIOUSLY, that magats have absolutely no allegiance to facts or subscription to truth. We also know that a magat, Aileen Cannon, was suspiciously assigned as judge to preside over this case and have seen that she will pervert the law in trump's favor, no matter how much the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals slaps her down. But I do have confidence in the American people, that they will never again allow that traitorous orange scumbag, who has endangered our military and intelligence personnel with his theft, to see the inside of the White House. We shall see.
Let me break it down for you. Who decides what information is personal? The PRESIDENT.... You know, because he can classify or declassify whatever he wants. I would say I feel sorry for you guys in being strung along, but you do it to yourself.
Can you even read? In two simple steps even YOU should be able to understand: 1) The charges against donald trump under the Espionage Act DO NOT REQUIRE those documents to be classified. The charges don't depend on classification WHATSOEVER. So every time you say that donald trump "declassified" those documents you're both lying, because we both know he didn't, and spewing irrelevant bullshit because the Espionage Act doesn't mention classification status AT ALL. and 2) donald trump only has the discretion to declare PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS as personal. He can not validly declare that OFFICIAL RECORDS outside the scope of PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS, such as the many he stole, as "personal". Your "socks" case doesn't mean what you think it means because, frankly, you're not curious enough to take the time to understand its full context and, frankly, you're not very bright. And, once again, do you think Jack Smith is stupid or something? Or that Bill Barr and Karl Rove and Merrick Garland are stupid or something? You honestly think Smith would have indicted your scumbag traitor if the charges could be as easily dismissed as your dumbass defense would mean?
Not only that, you are perfectly fine that a man who took an oath to protect this country declassified (not that he actually did) extremely sensitive intelligence information, information whose divulgence would endanger our national security and military readiness, and then left them hanging around haphazardly at Mar a Lago for many visitors to see? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU? Are you even an American? Only enemies of this country would defend a traitor as you do.
