Lock him up indictment FL
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Only in the “history” textbooks in places like FL and TX. |
Anonymous
Actually, a hallmark of banana republic is to let a criminal serve as the head of state, and not enforcing laws. Which is where we were when Trump was president. So, it's a step up. |
Anonymous
|
In 1968 Lyndon Johnson gave an aide classified documents to hide from the incoming Nixon Administration. Why wasn't he Indicted like Trump?
https://theintercept.com/2022/08/11/trump-fbi-mar-a-lago-classified-documents-lbj/ |
Anonymous
Not going to look it up, because I don’t believe that if some case was not prosecuted in 1968, it somehow follows that Trump can’t be prosecuted 55 years later. I do take you what-about-ism as an admission that you know Trump is guilty. |
Anonymous
The Nixon administration dropped the ball? |
Anonymous
For those who don’t want to read the article, I’ll summarize. LBJ found out via an informant that the Nixon campaign was allegedly circumventing US foreign policy and actively discouraging peace accords in Vietnam because they didn’t want LBJ to get credit for ending the war. LBJ had some of the alleged conspirators (US citizens) surveilled, which proved the allegations were true. However, it was obvious Nixon was going to win the election, so LBJ and his advisors decided that if the American public learned what they’d been up to, it would shake public confidence in the Nixon administration so badly that Americans were better off not knowing. LBJ asked an aide to hold all of the documentation of the surveillance instead of giving it to the incoming Nixon administration. The aide kept it all until LBJ’s death, when he donated it to LBJ’s presidential library in a sealed envelope with instructions not to open until 50 years later, 2023. The library actually opened the envelope in the 1990s. The article states, “What the Johnson administration had done was, in a sense, ‘legal,’ given that there were essentially no laws governing the U.S. surveillance state before reforms in the 1970s. Nevertheless, everyone involved was aware that what they’d done could be seen as scandalous.” So no one was prosecuted because there was no specific law broken and there were no allegations of wrongdoing. |
Anonymous
Also no one knew about it until LBJ was dead and you can’t prosecute a dead guy. |
Anonymous
Ask Edgar Hoover and whoever the AG was at the time. It has no relevance to today. |
Anonymous
|
I'm glad someone read the article and summarized it (most like by AI... wink). What the article failed to mentjon was that the Presidential Records Act wasn't passed until 1978, ten years after this crime. However, the espionage act (passed in 1917) did exist in 1968.
In Trumps case, Smith used the PRA to raid Mar-A-Lago, yet prosecuted under the espionage act. Confusing, but still illegal according to Jack Smith but crickets... |
Anonymous
The AG at the time was John Mitchell who went on to be convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury. 😆 |
Anonymous
So if a prosecutor suspects that drugs are in a house and gets a search warrant after which the officers discover piles of dead bodies in addition to the drugs, what do you think should happen? |
Anonymous
| In 106 years of the espionage act, not one President has been brought up on this charge. I will use the words so eloquently said by Director Comey in 2016 about classified information on a private server; "no reasonable prosecutor would file charges" |
Anonymous
Trump would sell out America in two seconds. We all know he's guilty. |