General Discussion

NewsCenter28

(1,837 posts)

5. Indeed

Reply to Freethinker65 (Reply #2)

Tue Nov 15, 2022, 12:51 AM

Nov 2022

Such bullshit, to say the least.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

77 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Washington Post has a story up that raises many questions about if 45 indictment is forthcoming [View all] NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 OP

Since when does it matter why you committed at crime at indictment time? MLAA Nov 2022 #1

While it is not H2O Man Nov 2022 #59

Good point. MLAA Nov 2022 #75

I agree. Look at the threat to national security that resulted. live love laugh Nov 2022 #62

So if a President (or former President) does it, it's not illegal. Freethinker65 Nov 2022 #2

Indeed NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #5

That's not what the article says at all. OP got it wrong. Link to full article here, no paywall. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #57

Bullshit. He wanted to monetize our national security. nt Ilsa Nov 2022 #3

Our esteemed AtTorNey GenERaL doesn't believe that-n/t NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #7

That's not what the article says. Ocelot II Nov 2022 #13

Lemme try robbing a bank just to prove I can. See how that works out. unblock Nov 2022 #4

Yes I robbed the bank. fightforfreedom Nov 2022 #66

You're reading too much into this. VMA131Marine Nov 2022 #6

That headline is wrong. Possession of the documents is the crime; the motive is irrelevant. Ocelot II Nov 2022 #8

Exactly. It says that right there in the article. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #46

Correct. Straw Man Nov 2022 #77

It's clearly still stealing and obstruction. C_U_L8R Nov 2022 #9

If I rob a bank, not because of the money, but for the thrill blogslug Nov 2022 #10

JFC. He is going to get away with this, too. No one wants to hold him responsible for anything. LonePirate Nov 2022 #11

I'm shocked. What a fucking joke CentralMass Nov 2022 #12

Did you read the whole article? The thread title is incorrect. Ocelot II Nov 2022 #14

The OP is intentionally misrepresenting the article and the headline. No where did they say that JohnSJ Nov 2022 #16

Now this is going to be mis-quoted for months as "proof" nt AZSkiffyGeek Nov 2022 #17

Of course. I posted a link to the full article w no paywall. But sadly that won't matter emulatorloo Nov 2022 #60

The American Way. Ask Bill Barr. Americans don't read. Solomon Nov 2022 #69

Why don't you read the whole article? OP's summary is not great, and they leave out key points emulatorloo Nov 2022 #49

That is NOT the WP headline, and why the OPs interpretation is misrepresenting it makes me JohnSJ Nov 2022 #15

Knew attacks on me would be forthcoming NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #18

No one is 'attacking you'. But your OP is very misleading and totally misrepresented the article. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #21

Disagree, it was intentional as he doubles down by grantcart Nov 2022 #45

Why did you misreport the what the WP article says? Show us in the article where it says a crime JohnSJ Nov 2022 #23

OK, title ammended NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #26

DU requires you to use the original title, which is 'Investigators see ego, not money ... emulatorloo Nov 2022 #29

Your argument falls flat on it's face NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #32

Its not 'my argument.' It is in the WAPO article, whose meaning you have twisted beyond recognition emulatorloo Nov 2022 #37

That's actually only true in LBN, not GD ... just saying (nt) Hugh_Lebowski Nov 2022 #36

Thanks for the correction. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #40

Thank-you. As for Guilani, that was dropped by Manhattan-based Federal prosecutors from the JohnSJ Nov 2022 #30

OK, you're welcome! NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #42

But those tweets are nothing to do with motive, and therefore your OP, at all muriel_volestrangler Nov 2022 #64

And for the record, it is clear that having these documents was related to espionage and treason NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #22

You're a little all over the place here dpibel Nov 2022 #27

No! It is the OP who is intentionally misrepresenting what the article and headline says. JohnSJ Nov 2022 #19

You are misrepresenting the article and the DOJ's position completely. Please self delete. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #20

It is called flame bait, and then accuse anyone who points out that he is misrepresenting what JohnSJ Nov 2022 #24

See below quote from the article NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #28

Nobody's mad at you, I'm disturbed because you are misinterpreting the article by ignoring what it emulatorloo Nov 2022 #31

OK, thank you so much for engaging. NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #33

Why I believe the case will be prosecuted is because they have testimony from witnesses and JohnSJ Nov 2022 #41

I am not mad at you personally, I had an issue because the headline and article did not JohnSJ Nov 2022 #35

Thanks a lot, man, and I clarified where I was coming from in a post above NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #51

Perhaps your criticism would be better aimed wnylib Nov 2022 #74

Three important paragraphs the OP left out: The crime is taking the documents. Trumps motive emulatorloo Nov 2022 #25

I think they are floating this excuse iemanja Nov 2022 #44

Correct Meowmee Nov 2022 #68

Maybe it means that deRien Nov 2022 #34

More like they don't have smoking gun proof he did iemanja Nov 2022 #39

I feared this would be the case iemanja Nov 2022 #38

There nothing in the article that indicates the DOJ has decided not to prosecute. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #43

Then why is DOJ floating this story? iemanja Nov 2022 #47

I would second that question NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #53

DOJ truly doesn't leak. Dunno who is floating this story. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #58

Motive DOES make a difference when it comes to Espionage charges, no? Cetacea Nov 2022 #61

The DOJ already has testimony from trump's lawyers, that he was told he needed to return the JohnSJ Nov 2022 #48

And that makes him a criminal in our eyes iemanja Nov 2022 #50

I don't know who floated this story. Also, it isn't criminal in our eyes, it is a violation of law JohnSJ Nov 2022 #54

Link to full article no paywall. One can see OP's summary is poor and leaves out important parts. emulatorloo Nov 2022 #52

Fanni Willis NewsCenter28 Nov 2022 #55

I agree, and I read the full article. I have a subscription to the WP JohnSJ Nov 2022 #56

Really wondering about this story. EndlessWire Nov 2022 #63

Just read full article. chriscan64 Nov 2022 #65

I must remind everyone, there were multiple charges listed on the warrant. fightforfreedom Nov 2022 #67

Another prediction? USALiberal Nov 2022 #70

If you read the article it said nothing about not prosecuting him... brooklynite Nov 2022 #71

DU in a nutshell: "How To Play The Telephone Game" emulatorloo Nov 2022 #76

But money is a big part of his ego... kentuck Nov 2022 #72

As has been stated repeatedly in this thread, the crime isn't based on the motive Ocelot II Nov 2022 #73