• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

READ: The Justice Department's response to Trump's request for a special master

Its an odd thing where the prosecution thinks having a neutral party examine evidence central to the case is a bad thing.
1. Why open the door to the defense demanding in every evidentiary case that a special master be appointment?
2. There has been so much deceit in this matter on Trump's part that he shouldn't be unduly rewarded by winning a delay.
3. There is no evidence that the FBI is being less than impartial in this matter and can't adequately look over the documents.
 
he declassified all of them. It will be fun to see someone from the DOJ, CIA, or KGB state the process involved for a president to declassify documents.
 
50% of the country, supported Hillary. Actually Hillary WON the popular vote in 2016. Follow the example of her supporters and choose a person who is less controversial to try to win the next elections.
Why do you imagine there are 50 STATES and we are not like Europe?
 
Oh, NOES! He moved documents he declassified around.
Amazing how some of these suffering from TDS make such declarative statements regarding the crimes supposedly committed by the FPOTUS.

Like the Espionage Act, there is a reason this has never been applied to a POTUS.
 
You don't determine that from a picture, you determine that from a catalog of documents. You don't guess, you make sure; the prosecution nor the plaintiff get the benefit of the doubt.


LMAO... I guess we will see at the hearing tomorrow...
 
You got 50% opf the country that supports Trump. How you gonna deal with that? Does the left really think

We may have that on 11-9
Trump got 70 million votes to Biden's 80 million votes, in the last election.

The number of votes received doesn't mean that Trump voters support him violating the Espionage Act or any of his other criminal acts. While die-hard cultist, like you, would give him a pass if he went on TV and ate a live baby, others would not.
 
Why do you imagine there are 50 STATES and we are not like Europe?

Your response makes no sense. I responded to your point that 50% of the country support Trump. I said that even a higher percentage of the country supported Clinton. SO WHAT? And I prefer to count people than states because riots do not come from things like states. They come from people!
 
We are gonna hear his response soon enough


The last thing I heard from him was complaining the way the evidence against him was laid-out on the floor or some such.

Not a very substantive defense.
 
Fox News turned on Trump. Fox is no longer the Fox News of yesteryear. I use them but also have numerous other conservative influencers and commentators that I have ready access to.

I've noticed some of the bolded, too. That might speak to their opinion as to which way the wind is blowing . . .
 
Stay on topic, please. Your post has nothing to do with the OP.
heh heh that is rich. Look who's the "On Topic Mod" now.
I mean you were just literally crying about that a few posts ago.
Poor thing.
 
Because you don't give partiality to the prosecution or the plaintiff and asking the prosecution to sift through possible attorney client privilege papers shouldn't happen. Regardless of any claimed Executive privilege.


There is plenty of evidence that the FBI has been less than impartial in the past meaning its motives are suspect, especially in claiming documents damaging to the agency itself.
 
Amazing how some of these suffering from TDS make such declarative statements regarding the crimes supposedly committed by the FPOTUS.

Like the Espionage Act, there is a reason this has never been applied to a POTUS.

I've read the Espionage Act but don't recall seeing anything about former president OR presidents being exempt. Can you point that out for us?
 
Oh, NOES! He moved documents he declassified around.
An you have proof they are declassified? I call that fake news.
If it had been excuse one from DJT for why he had them, maybe, but it was like the fourth excuse?
Show the proof or stop babbling this brook of bullshit.
 
Oh, NOES! He moved documents he declassified around.
The DoJ filing makes a compelling case that Trump's after-the-fact declassification was fiction, and deep down you know it.

The filing also made the case that "moving them around" was for the purpose of hiding them, which is another crime.

The only real question is why you cultists stick by this criminal who puts our agents and operatives in danger, with no regard for the country, while scamming money from supporters like you?
 
Amazing how some of these suffering from TDS make such declarative statements regarding the crimes supposedly committed by the FPOTUS.

Like the Espionage Act, there is a reason this has never been applied to a POTUS.
A sitting POTUS not a FPOTUS.
And in the past we didn't have FPOTUS' that did this shit.
 
What does this post have to do with this thread?
 

The only privilege that could possibly apply here is attorney-client privilege.
 
Re-read my post. You just repeated what I posted.

And? Virtually EVERY search warrant executed that retrieves documents could potentially contain attorney-client privilege material. Are you suggesting EVERY one of them should have a special master?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…