Scrutable

tenchboy wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 27, 2022 6:58 am

used british english 'alternative' rather than merkin english 'alternate': obvious fake by someone on this side of the water (or from here over there) (or maybe Wilenchick is from over here) (or maybe

Interesting use of british english 'alternative' rather than merkin english 'alternate'

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:49 pm

It's not clear whether this is J6th or stealing secret documents related yet, but it seems the FBI raided Mar-A-Lago with a warrant to search Trump's safe.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:58 am

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:49 pm

It's not clear whether this is J6th or stealing secret documents related yet, but it seems the FBI raided Mar-A-Lago with a warrant to search Trump's safe.

Destroying presidential documents could be relatively easy to prove and bar him from office. Fingers crossed.

I keep coming back to this: based on the stuff they HAVEN'T gone after, either this is the greatest overplayed hand ever or there is something very dramatic we don't know about.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:58 am

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 08, 2022 11:49 pm

It's not clear whether this is J6th or stealing secret documents related yet, but it seems the FBI raided Mar-A-Lago with a warrant to search Trump's safe.

Destroying presidential documents could be relatively easy to prove and bar him from office. Fingers crossed.

The statute governing the willful and unlawful removal or destruction of presidential records, though rarely enforced, carries significant penalties including: fines, imprisonment and, most notably, disqualification from holding current or future office.

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:15 am

The statute governing the willful and unlawful removal or destruction of presidential records, though rarely enforced, carries significant penalties including: fines, imprisonment and, most notably, disqualification from holding current or future office.

Because Mr. Trump is widely believed to be preparing to run for president again in 2024, that unusual penalty raised the prospect that he might be legally barred from returning to the White House.

Specifically, the law in question — Section 2071 of Title 18 of the United States Code — makes it a crime if someone who has custody of government documents or records “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies or destroys” them.

If convicted, defendants can be fined or sentenced to prison for up to three years. In addition, the statute says, if they are currently in a federal office, they “shall forfeit” that office, and they shall “be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

On its face, then, if Mr. Trump were to be charged and convicted of removing, concealing or destroying government records under that law, he would seem to be ineligible to become president again.

But there was reason for caution: The law briefly received a close look in 2015, after it came to light that Hillary Clinton, then widely anticipated to be the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, had used a private email server to conduct government business while secretary of state.

Some Republicans were briefly entranced with whether the law could keep Mrs. Clinton out of the White House, including Michael Mukasey, a former attorney general in the administration of George W. Bush. So was at least one conservative think tank.

But in considering that situation, several legal scholars — including Seth B. Tillman of Maynouth University in Ireland and Eugene Volokh of the University of California, Los Angeles — noted that the Constitution sets eligibility criteria for who can be president, and argued that Supreme Court rulings suggest Congress cannot alter them. The Constitution allows Congress to disqualify people from holding office in impeachment proceedings, but grants no such power for ordinary criminal law.

Stranger Mouse wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 7:25 am

Read this Popehat thread from the top but this got my attention. Worth noting Popehat nearly always plays this stuff down

https://twitter.com/popehat/status/1556 ... XnSeJPUnSA

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:23 pm

Incredible when you think about it. Not only is the FBI raiding a former president's property, we don't even know which of his many crimes it's for.

Little waster wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 3:24 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:23 pm

Incredible when you think about it. Not only is the FBI raiding a former president's property, we don't even know which of his many crimes it's for.

There’s just so many options on my bingo card.

I think I’m going with a banker of “fraudulently claiming hush-money paid to sex workers as legitimate business expenses” permed with “distributing naked images of Alex Jones wife without consent” and “giving nuclear codes to known FSB operatives in exchange for a family-sized bucket of fried chicken products” and a wild-card of “illegal possession of endangered animal organs for the ineffective treatment of sexual dysfunction”.

TBF nothing and we mean nothing is off the table here.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:23 pm

Incredible when you think about it. Not only is the FBI raiding a former president's property, we don't even know which of his many crimes it's for.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:45 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:23 pm

Incredible when you think about it. Not only is the FBI raiding a former president's property, we don't even know which of his many crimes it's for.

Meanwhile, the GOPs position is "imagine, if they can get warrants to search a billionaire* former President's house, they could get a warrant to search your house!"

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 6:45 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 12:23 pm

Incredible when you think about it. Not only is the FBI raiding a former president's property, we don't even know which of his many crimes it's for.

Meanwhile, the GOPs position is "imagine, if they can get warrants to search a billionaire* former President's house, they could get a warrant to search your house!"

WFJ wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:05 pm

I'm struggling to understand what he would keep and why. Something that could be used as blackmail material?

WFJ wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:05 pm

I'm struggling to understand what he would keep and why. Something that could be used as blackmail material?

dyqik wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:38 pm

WFJ wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 8:05 pm

I'm struggling to understand what he would keep and why. Something that could be used as blackmail material?

It's known that he took classified documents that he did not declassify while in office.

Quite possibly it includes documents describing his own actions - e.g. that several hour chat with Putin.

monkey wrote: ↑

Tue Aug 09, 2022 9:52 pm

Or flush it down the toilet.


Edit: Actually, there's probably pictures because he didn't flush.