WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE INDICTMENT

submitted by [deleted] from (d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net)

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]passionflounder 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Selective enforcement considering the fact that classified docs were found with others but not pursued. Justice has become politically weaponized and a lot of regular folks have become so brainwashed to hate Trump that they support it. Very dangerous times.

[–]StillLessons 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. They are enforcing rules which presidents have ignored for decades. Because the other presidents were less volatile and less willing to rock the boat, nobody felt the need to stop them the way they feel a desperate need to stop Trump. Trump doesn't need to be "a good guy" to realize that what they are charging him with is no worse than what presidents have done for a very long time.

The "truth" about Trump is now hidden, because his enemies have projected on to him all of society's worst labels. He has become the "vehicle for all evil" - the perfect Goldstein character from 1984 - this is the purest of caricature.

People hate "Trump" because "Trump" is the equivalent of a witch in the middle ages - the projected fears of the population focused on to the chosen victim. Who is Donald Trump in reality? I honestly do not feel confident in any answer to this question, either from his supporters or his detractors, because the caricature has so overwhelmingly obliterated the reality of who this man is and what he did and continues to do.

[–]Alphix 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

^ Exactly this.

[–]MaiqTheTrue 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It’s a weird thing. The government is clearly trying to insinuate that Trump has important classified documents. The problem is that their behavior absolutely proves that whatever documents he actually had were unimportant. No competent government would allow national security secrets to linger unsecured while arguing with lawyers. That went on for over a year before the raid. If it was me with a military secret, they wouldn’t waste time asking “pretty please”, because they don’t want those kinds of documents in the open. Thus it’s clear that whatever Trump actually had, the security system was absolutely fine with him having.

[–]420svg 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Most of the information in those documents got declassified, but the copies of the documents that he had were printed while they were still classified. Hell, whatever is in them I'm sure you could easily find with a few Google searches.

[–]MaiqTheTrue 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most reports I’ve read were fairly vague. One said “plans to invade a country,” with the country unspecified. But, the military has contingency plans for literal everything, so it could just as easily be plans to invade Ireland or Canada or Burkina Faso. They’re not saying, I suspect, because absent the knowledge that we have plans to invade every country on Earth, the general public will mentally insert some scary enemy state into that mention. But if it were plans to invade an enemy state, it would not be reasonable for the security state to allow those documents to be out in the wild where anything could happen.

[–]UncleWillard56 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Where's Biden's and Clinton's? How do you expect anyone to think you're not favoring one party over another if you don't apply the law equally between the two? Done with both parties. Call me when there's a viable and sane third party that will represent "we the people."

[–]Credit2Saidit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that, irrespective of everything else, it sets a very bad precedent.

[–]SoCo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Notice how there is no charges about possessing classified documents? One charge leads you to assume assume that is what it means, but really it is just about having any information relating to the national defense and sharing it with others. The incidents of telling people of documents, or thumbing through one while someone watched, seems quite weak and dependent on if they were shown or told of any contents. The provided context doesn't specifically show crossing that line, by its self.

Similarly, the obstruction charges and accusations of intent to hide/conceal documents didn't include any actual evidence provided, just assumptions of vague actions and projections of intent. He asked his lawyer protected legal advice about legal options related to his privileges and duties to the legal requests/threats. He called someone briefly, before that person moved a box.

The rest was the prosecutor's filling in the blanks with the most nefarious assumption possible and stating it as fact. This form of gaslighting we are all very very tire of and have tolerated too much of over the last several years already.

It is Schrodinger's indictment, because to think a crime happened, you must assume every box had the desired documents in them. Someone moving a box is not criminal and boxes can contain other stuff. The literal criminal conspiracy charges being waged in court against multiple people here, based presumably entirely on the prosecutor's made up assumptions and projected motivations, without even knowing what was in the specific box, seems wildly insanely and obviously professionally out of line.

You must be careful not to say confidential documents, because that isn't what these charges are about specifically, just specific documents the archivist wanted. It was the prosecutor, who likely technically overstepped the law in filing a subpoena for all confidential material, as he didn't list all the relevant legal statutes governing document possession after leaving the presidency, nor special privileges related to them. Then he didn't specifically charge Trump with possession of classified documents. So it seems all the talk of classification markings and repetitive scary talk, more than half the indictment, was just for looks to sway the public.