My In- Laws on John's side loved Cracker. They are lifelong Jersey Shore residents.
The ones I've been in were old and dirty ! (along I - 95 ).
I really like Bob Evans, and the one in C - U was very nice, clean, food good !
current events thread
- Thread starter bung23
- Start date
My In- Laws on John's side loved Cracker. They are lifelong Jersey Shore residents.
The ones I've been in were old and dirty ! (along I - 95 ).
I really like Bob Evans, and the one in C - U was very nice, clean, food good !
You may have missed President's recent WIN in the NY State Appeals Court, where he WON 5 - 0 and reversed the $ 550,000,000 fine and EVERY fine imposed by the trial Judge !
OR
The 17 Wins at the United States Supreme Court.
How are you doing in your arguments versus an Appellate Court or the United States Supreme Court ?
Inquiring minds are curious.
Canada recognized this the other day !
I work in house now, but in fact in private practice had quite a bit of success arguing at the appellate level (it's probably what I'm best suited for as an advocate). The Q&A with the judge panel was always engaging.
Are you licensed to practice in DC ? How hard would it be ? Pass the DC Board, temporally rent a suite at the Trump Hotel in DC.
Rack up the dough re me !
My Sister passed the Bar in NJ and NY ! She successfully argued her passing in NY before the Review Board !
A friend was before the SEC for various charges in NYC/NJ. His Attorney charged him $ 400,000 to represent my buddy, cash FIRST !
But he never spent a day in Court or Prison !
The simple fact is that the sole classification authority in the US government rests in the person of POTUS and those he delegates. So all a president has to do is decide something in unclassified, and it is. And it would be very difficult after the fact to prove that a former president did not make that determination prior to taking information out the door with him/handling it in a fashion inappropriate for the handling of classified information. So in that sense, it's essentially a non-issue for the FBI because prosecution is a non starter. Depending on the nature of the material, there may be issues if the items constitute official records, which belong to the US, but as far as stuff under the Esionage Act, which I'm guessing is what they're ostensibly looking at with Bolton, I don't think there's much to be done about an ex-president who has something that was once labeled classified. For anyone else, simple possession of it after leaving a national security position puts one in jeopardy.
Typically when a book is published by someone talking about their experiences that involved a lot of access to classified information, the manuscript is reviewed by the relevant executive branch entity, usually looking out for "classification by compilation" but also for saying something that should not have been said. If Bolton went through that process properly then he should have no issue personally with his book, even if was a spill.
I do not believe anyone is accusing him of a con, but maybe I am wrong. My impression is that he may have taken and used classified information to sell a book to make money. The highly politicized DOJ under Biden gave him a pass. Was that because he yelled from the mountain top "orange man bad"? Who knows.
You are willing to bet heavy someone that is not currently charged with a crime will not be convicted. Sorry amigo, that is not going out on a limb.
The first paragraph is comically incorrect. We live in a nation of laws, no President can declassify document by whim without actually denoting said declassification via something in writing (would be an Executive Order). There are also procedures aside from the "President decreed it" that authorize declassification, so the authority doesn't rest solely with the President. The argument you are making would have been laughed out of every court in existence (Trump never got such a ruling from one of the most favorable judges he could have ever drawn). I criticized engineers and you responded negatively (and God knows I don't give a f--- if you hate every lawyer ever born, but you do nothing to disabuse me of my idea that your profession is composed of people who are incredibly assured of the rightness no matter how little they actually know).
Here's the actual procedure for Presidential declassification (from Congress.gov):
Executive Order
The President has the authority to declassify documents in the public interest that originated in any department or agency of the executive branch. One example is Executive Order 14040, Declassification Reviews of Certain Documents Concerning the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001, signed by President Biden on September 3, 2021. This executive order directed government departments and agencies that originated records pertaining to September 11 to conduct declassification reviews to disclose as much of this material as possible in the public interest.
Moving back to the issue at hand, your dead wrong assessment of "can't prosecute the President" was clearly directed to separating Bolton from Trump. Sorry I don't have my head up my *** like the sycophants here when I see clown takes like that.
As for Bolton, his book was approved by a Trump Admin review, then the Trump Admin had some hack do a second review (several matters were flagged). He published anyhow, good for him. And for those of us who understand the criminal code, good luck establishing "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" when he actually got clearance that was later sought to be revoked. That argument is going nowhere. (My guess is that they are hoping he has something beyond the "book stuff.")
Any which way, I won't be responding. Your beliefs as stated here are unsupported by facts and reality almost every time I see them, and there's no way I'm going to ever disabuse you of them.
It's as if he didn't just get raided by the FBI. Usually that's a horrid sign ... here I'm guessing much less so.
Separately, I'll try not to intervene in this circle jerk going forward. The Bolton takes were too much and too stupid.
It's quite possible that Trump's enemies are a bit more astute about the law than he is, hence the fact he won't successfully prosecute any of them. Maybe he's better at politics than them tho!
It's quite possible that Trump's enemies are a bit more astute about the law than he is, hence the fact he won't successfully prosecute any of them. Maybe he's better at politics than them tho!
Victimhood! Poor Trump everyone conspires against him and you followers buy that nonsense.
This was all covered in the past. Trump tried to stop hm in the courts from writing his book, and failed. After it was published Trump tried
alleging that it was classified information, he failed once again. This is RETRIBUTION by Trump and his half-wit Cabinet and law enforcement appointees.
Except in extreme cases, the President of the U.S. does not need external approval to declassify something.
All the President has to do it declare that a document is declassified, and it is so. Formal procedures apply to everyone but the President. One caveat is for compartmented information that is beyond Top Secret in which other statutes apply such as information that falls under the Atomic Energy Act.
Following a formal process for clarity is the norm to ensure that documents are properly stamped and the classification is widely understood. I think its reckless not to follow a formal procedure, but it is not against the law.
(I'm an expert on handling classified material, btw).
Last edited:
A president can issue an EO, but I don't think he's bound to. I was briefed many times on the handling of classified information, and a topic came up in one of the sessions about a situation where a former president (not Trump, btw) revealed information that we were using, conveyed to us by the appropriate government authority that it was specifically classified. Someone asked in the briefing, did the president commit a security breach when he said that? The answer was ~"no, his effective declassification trumps our classification". Went on to elaborate that you can't limit POTUS executive powers, things like diplomacy and coordination with allies during war time happen in real time. I think there are a few things for which there is a statutory declassification process, some DOE stuff, but I'm unsure how far the statutes go into into that whole process for other material. That's how the administrative process went, anyway. I can't say that there hasn't been a court ruling since that time that would have made that former president's action illegal if repeated today.
I haven't the foggiest clue if Bolton did anything illegal or not. I have no expectation he'll go to jail, and hope he doesn't unless he's done something to warrant it. It'll be interesting to watch how it's handled if the book is the main issue. If it is, sounds like it might be best to just drop it with the review discrepancies. It could indeed be a fishing expedition, which would suck. But maybe they actually know something. It'll all play out eventually.
I don't think I've responded to anything you've said that wasn't in response to something I've said in years, but if I have it has been infrequent. I'm quite happy to be ignored.
Last edited:
Maybe. We'll see what happens in time. I'm not sure they're that dumb to pick the book as a hill to die on, but one never knows. Like the poster I was responding to said, lets see what the evidence is/what the charges are.
It's a bigger deal, in most cases, that a Judge is convinced to sign off on search warrants, unless he/she is corrupt,
LOL, you're right. Stupidity and malice often seem to be the hallmarks of everyone inside the beltway.
Nothing I buy is more expensive than it was before Trump took office with the exception of one of my vehicles. Inflation is well under control and I can wait for all the tariffs to bring factory work back to the states, including high quality USA made furniture other than Lazy Boy trailer stuff. The deficit cannot be fixed by cuts only and/or raising taxes on corporations and individuals. The deficit gets smaller with a much larger economy and the addition of better paying jobs. Bringing manufacturing back to the states provides a huge assist with the wage gap, eliminating supply chain issues in times of crisis and depending on foreign manufacturers to supply parts for national defense.
The Democrats break standards. Repubs always played nice and all that did was empower Dems to go further. You can’t do that with children.