From: Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.trump,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: How Many People Do You Personally Know Who Have Died Mysteriously? How About In Plane Crashes Or Car Wrecks? Bizarre Suicides? - Joe Biden Is Being Protected - He IS Cogent Enough To Stand Trial
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 17:49:50 -0600
Organization: UTB
In article <vfmgri$k60r$15@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
>
> On 2024-10-27 05:09, Skeeter wrote:
> > In article <vfk6d0$3ut1t$4@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
> >>
> >> On 2024-10-26 18:22, Skeeter wrote:
> >>> In article <vfk440$3ul20$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2024-10-26 17:21, Skeeter wrote:
> >>>>> In article <vfjthm$3tldt$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-uh@nope.com says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2024-10-17 20:52, AlleyCat wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 16:36:29 -0700, Alan says...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Tell us the law, where Biden was allowed to have documents when he was neither VP NOR President, but Trump wasn't, when
> >>>>>>>>> HE was no longer President.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Tell us the law that allowed Trump to do the same.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> But but but Trrrrummmmmp!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is NOT about Trump, and whatever Trump did, does NOT exonerate Biden, you pansy-ass pussy, invoking Trummmmp!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "I need to go back and make sure that I take note of a word that you used, 'exoneration,'" Hur said. "That is not a
> >>>>>>> word that is used in my report and that is not a part of my task as a prosecutor."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "I did not exonerate him," Hur said. "That word does not appear in the report."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "It's clear from Hur's sweeping 388-page report THAT HE DID NOT COMPLETELY EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT, as Nadler claimed
> >>>>>>> Tuesday."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Not completely exonerated, means he broke the law.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nope.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Innocent until proven guilty": heard of it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Unless it's Trump right?
> >>>>
> >>>> Nope.
> >>>>
> >>>> But Trump was investigated, evidence was presented to a grand jury and
> >>>> an indictment was returned?
> >>>
> >>> Was that a question?
> >>
> >> Nope. Just a typo.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hur found evidence that Biden WILLFULLY RETAINED CLASSIFIED MATERIALS AFTER HE LEFT THE OBAMA WHITE HOUSE. He also
> >>>>>>> uncovered some examples of Biden SHARING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION with his book author.
> >>>>>> And Trump deliberately wilfully took (and retained when requested to
> >>>>>> return) far, FAR more classified documents.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So why the double standard?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So since Trump did it that makes it ok for Joe? So Joe approves of what
> >>>>> Trump did.
> >>>> They didn't do the same thing.
> >>>
> >>> Nope. Joe is guilty and you know it. He wasn't supposed to have them
> >>> period.
> >>
> >> But then Trump "wasn't supposed to have them, period"...
> >>
> >> ...and he did it DELIBERATELY.
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> "mens rea": look it up.
> >>>
> >>> No.
> >> I'll help:
> >>
> >> 'mens rea | ?menz 're? |
> >>
> >> noun Law
> >>
> >> the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a
> >> crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused. Compare with
> >> actus reus: a mistaken belief in consent meant that the defendant lacked
> >> mens rea.'
> >
> > So Joe is just as guilty.
>
> Nope.
>
> Accidental is different that deliberate.
You don't "accidentally" take classified documents. Joe was wrong and
protected.