Just speaking in public it’s not. It’s not illegal to say all kinds of nonsense in a press conference or talk show or whatever.
Once you’re in court it’s a different story. That’s why Trump’s lawyers often say something completely opposite in front of a judge than what they’d say in front of Tucker Carlson.
The problem for Trump’s team is that after lie #10,000 the only people who are going to believe it are the diehard cultists. The people they don’t need to convince, really.
But not as erudite as what you find in a toilet stall.
I’m pretty sure that they don’t believe anything. It’s the home team. “If the home team can win by filling the ball with helium and get away with it then good on them.” That’s the start and end of the matter.
My humble guess is that they went in and secured Trump’s handwritten notes. Maybe they didn’t get those in the earlier exchange. Apparently, even Executive Post-It notes are official documents.
-I don’t have any proof, but it sings…
Ah, David. You’re a man after my own heart.
Melania in the tanning salon with the candlestick!
Before he got banned from Twitter, security researchers discovered that they could get into his account by guessing (on one occasion) “yourefired” and (on a later occasion) “maga2020!”.
You really think he used the right ‘youre’?
The Slate article posted by TroutMan makes several interesting points. The one that caught my eye is the requirement that to obtain a search warrant, the affiant has to provide probable cause to the judge that the matter sought in the search warrant was recently at the location to be searched. That leads to this bit of speculation in the article:
Argh! I need brain bleach!!!
I am not a lawyer and I’ve read (I believe it was) Andrew Weissman saying effectively the same thing. However, my feeling would be that you might be able to make an argument like, “I have a witness saying that it was in the house in April, just before the suspect left the state for the summer. The witness affirms that, during the suspects absence, no one is allowed into these rooms, that they are locked, and only the suspect has a key. We have other witnesses who all confirm that the suspect has not returned to the state at any time since April.”
So I’m not sure that I’m personally 100% sold on the “recency” argument, but certainly they would need to know and be certain that the materials exist and can be found successfully.
No, no, it’s the murder weapon, not a sex toy.
Come on. You’ve been paying attention. You know who they’re referring to, right?
A point I made to a MAGA earlier was that if you have a Presidential Records Act, a law aimed at the President for the keeping of his or her records, it’s OK to criminally charge those ex-Presidents who break that law.
Not really interested in debating this proposition here, but it sure made some heads froth on the Book of Faces.
I think it’s simpler than that. The PGA will no longer play tournaments at TFG’s courses, and that’s a fairly sizeable loss of revenue for him. Since the PGA also won’t do business with the Saudi golf league (and I think has threatened not to do business with any course that does with the Saudis … I think, maybe?), the Saudis need a place to play, and TFG needs a new source of revenue. It’s a marriage made in Perdition.
They’re doing the best they can.
Or the bowl, for that matter.
Oh, they’ll be comforted by their fellow travellers on the RWNJ message board I look at from time to time. Over there, the belief is that the Presidential Records Act is unenforceable, and thus null and void, because the Constitution has nothing to say about such an act. Basically, it’s the same thing they used in arguing against abortion.
I’m pretty sure that the US has tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of statutes; the subject matter of which is not mentioned in the Constitution. Of course, they never mention those.
Another development.
I then quote the Constitution on Treason, cite the Founder’s familiarity with Cromwell, and note that raising a rabble and sacking the Capitol was precisely what the Framers had in mind and it was precisely what Trump did, and they get mad about that, lol.
Even if there is not such a currently active mole, I welcome and encourage speculation along these lines, because of how it will serve to inflame Trump’s paranoia and further isolate him within his ever-shrinking circle. I very much enjoy the mental image of the man slumping angrily through a gold-plated bunker, shifting his bleary eyes from one minion to the next, uncertain which one — or more than one — may be his betrayer. It’s delicious.
Especially when the felony-level charge and multi-year incarceration associated with the crime of destruction of records was signed into law by Trump himself, as a posturing threat against one H. Clinton related to her email server. You should ask your MAGA to resolve the paradox of a records-protection law being meaningless and unenforceable when said law was personally christened by their infallible worm-god.