General Discussion

Straw Man

(6,955 posts)

77. Correct.

Tue Nov 15, 2022, 03:14 PM

Nov 2022

The motive aspect is only relevant in that it could have led to new avenues of investigation and potential additional charges i.e. had he already sold documents and to whom, etc.

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