Cocaine found in white house .

[the annoying thing]

It's no different. You are implying they hid some video to protect hunter.
Don't lie.
I pinged you again.

I never implied that and the only thing you can ping is your hand .
They also found marijuana in the white house 2 times in fact. And it's Amazing how they never found who that belonged to either

 

[Boris Norris]

I never implied that and the only thing you can ping is your hand .
They also found marijuana in the white house 2 times in fact. And it's Amazing how they never found who that belonged to either

You're a liar. You've been pinged so stop sooking and not be a coward.

 

[pjmret]

I never implied that and the only thing you can ping is your hand .
They also found marijuana in the white house 2 times in fact. And it's Amazing how they never found who that belonged to either

because the white house has hundreds of visiters all the time maybe? duh

you're a moron.

 

[mark francis]

No dabs or DNA links any democrat or republican but why would a Democrat plant it there?

I think we know who owns it. ,

Leftists admittedly smoke pot and party with cocaine but if cocaine is found they will deny everything.

 

[mark francis]

It surprises me as much as there's no video of trumps staff taking classified docos.

Trump had more right, according to a 2012 court judgment, to take whatever he wanted from records when he left the WH, but that is not true for dirty Democrats like Hillary and Biden.

 

[mark francis]

It's no different. You are implying they hid some video to protect hunter.
Don't lie.
I pinged you again.

Government employees will hide incriminating evidence of Democrats who commit crimes because they know Democrats can hurt them financially if they expose the crimes of favored Democrats like Hunter or Joe.

 

[mark francis]

because the white house has hundreds of visiters all the time maybe? duh

you're a moron.

That's what Democrats do. The FBI knows two bombs were planted in DC on Jan 5 and they know who planted them but there have been no arrests. The whole informed country knows the FBI lied to FISA courts so they could commit worse-than-Watergate illegal spying on Trump and his associates, but there have been no arrests. Why? Because the crooked mob Trump referred to as the swamp protects itself from criminal prosecution for the crimes it commits.

 

[pjmret]

Government employees will hide incriminating evidence of Democrats who commit crimes because they know Democrats can hurt them financially if they expose the crimes of favored Democrats like Hunter or Joe.

blah blah blah.

all you do is whine about democrats, you never prove anything. lol.

you're so predictably stupid

 

[pjmret]

That's what Democrats do. The FBI knows two bombs were planted in DC on Jan 5 and they know who planted them but there have been no arrests. The whole informed country knows the FBI lied to FISA courts so they could commit worse-than-Watergate illegal spying on Trump and his associates, but there have been no arrests. Why? Because the crooked mob Trump referred to as the swamp protects itself from criminal prosecution for the crimes it commits.

who planted the bombs? how do you know they know? lol

you conspiracy morons are amusing.

 

[pjmret]

Trump had more right, according to a 2012 court judgment, to take whatever he wanted from records when he left the WH, but that is not true for dirty Democrats like Hillary and Biden.

no the 2012 court ruling doesn't give trump the unilateral right to take any documents he wants, moron.

But legal experts say Trump’s description of the law — which isn’t mentioned in the charges against him — is wrong and contrary to its very purpose, while the 2012 legal case involving Clinton isn’t a sound comparison to Trump’s current legal predicament.

CLAIM: The Presidential Records Act gives a president the right to take any record when leaving office and declare them personal.


THE FACTS: That’s a flagrant misreading of the law, legal experts say.

The law, which took effect in 1981, requires the preservation of White House documents as property of the U.S. government.

Jason R. Baron, a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration, said that the notion that a president could declare any record as personal goes against the “very reason” the law was created. NARA is the federal record-keeper and the agency that repeatedly sought the documents kept by Trump
The law, he and other experts note, clearly distinguishes between “presidential records” and “personal records.”

“The definition of ‘personal records’ is narrow, clear, and functional: it includes only records of a ‘purely private or nonpublic character’,” Peter Margulies, a professor at Roger Williams University’s School of Law in Bristol, Rhode Island, wrote in an email. “Any record that touches on information relevant to presidential decisions on foreign policy or national security is a presidential record. Period, end of story.”

Josh Chafetz, a professor at Georgetown Law, agreed, saying there’s “simply no way” the records described in the indictment against Trump could be considered “personal” under the act’s definitions.



you're a legal moron. lol

 

[pjmret]

Trump had more right, according to a 2012 court judgment, to take whatever he wanted from records when he left the WH, but that is not true for dirty Democrats like Hillary and Biden.

CLAIM: A case involving Bill Clinton keeping audio tapes in a sock drawer proves that Trump’s actions were legally sound.

THE FACTS: The case in question involved very different documents and experts say it isn’t the parallel Trump makes it out to be.

In Judicial Watch vs. NARA, a conservative activist group sued for access to audio recordings of wide ranging interviews Clinton did with historian Taylor Branch during his time in the White House. Clinton was reported to have stashed the cassettes in his sock drawer.

The Washington, D.C. based organization had argued the audiotapes were “presidential records” that the agency should provide under the federal public records law, but U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson ultimately dismissed the case, ruling NARA didn’t have the authority to seize the records from Clinton and hand them over.

David Super, another professor at Georgetown Law, argues the 2012 Clinton case has “absolutely nothing to do with” the charges Trump currently faces.

For one thing, the court didn’t dismiss the case because it found that Clinton was entitled to keep the tapes, Super said. Jackson simply ruled that NARA could not turn over the tapes as public records because they were owned by the historian and not government property.


you're a legal moron. lol

 

[mark francis]

who planted the bombs? how do you know they know? lol

you conspiracy morons are amusing.

I don't know who planted the bombs. All I have read in the media is that someone did and the FBI knows who did it but has not arrested anyone. It looks like the bombs were just props used by Democrats to make their fake sedition conspiracy theory seem real.

 

[pjmret]

I don't know who planted the bombs. All I have read in the media is that someone did and the FBI knows who did it but has not arrested anyone. It looks like the bombs were just props used by Democrats to make their fake sedition conspiracy theory seem real.

ah, you don't know anything, but you know the fbi is wrong. lol

 

[mark francis]

no the 2012 court ruling doesn't give trump the unilateral right to take any documents he wants, moron.

You are no lawyer. Bill Clinton was given freedom to keep whatever documents he wanted by that court ruling.

 

[mark francis]

CLAIM: A case involving Bill Clinton keeping audio tapes in a sock drawer proves that Trump’s actions were legally sound.

THE FACTS: The case in question involved very different documents and experts say it isn’t the parallel Trump makes it out to be.

You can say that, but you cannot prove that.