Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

I wouldn’t be surprised if he was giving his opinion. He is very close to Trump. But if Trump is taking his legal opinion that’s on Trump.

This also seems like a legal opinion.

So who @judicialwatch has 30 years of experience litigating these cases?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

I wouldn’t be surprised if he was giving his opinion. He is very close to Trump. But if Trump is taking his legal opinion that’s on Trump.

This also seems like a legal opinion.

He needs to be investigated and prosecuted for falsely impersonating an attorney and falsely dispensing legal advice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

I wouldn’t be surprised if he was giving his opinion. He is very close to Trump. But if Trump is taking his legal opinion that’s on Trump.

This also seems like a legal opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

I wouldn’t be surprised if he was giving his opinion. He is very close to Trump. But if Trump is taking his legal opinion that’s on Trump.

This also seems like a legal opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

I wouldn’t be surprised if he was giving his opinion. He is very close to Trump. But if Trump is taking his legal opinion that’s on Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Which name is better, Crooked Hillary or Deranged Jack Smith?

“Deranged Jack Smith” is a terrible nickname when “Cracker Jack” is right there. He’s lost a lot of heat off his fastball.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

He certainly seems to be giving legal advice here. I’m an English major just like Fitton and would never give anyone legal advice.

“It was a totally unforced error,” said one person close to Trump who has been part of dozens of discussions about the documents. “We didn’t have to be here.”
Trump time and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisers who urged him to cooperate and instead took the advice of Tom Fitton, the head of the conservative group Judicial Watch, and a range of others who told him he could legally keep the documents and should fight the Justice Department, advisers said. Trump would often cite Fitton to others, and Fitton told some of Trump’s lawyers that Trump could keep the documents, even as they disagreed, the advisers said.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,’” said Fitton. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”
Several other Trump advisers blamed Fitton for convincing Trump that he could keep the documents and repeatedly mentioning the “Clinton socks case” — a reference to tapes Bill Clinton stored in his sock drawer of his secret interviews with historian Taylor Branch that served as the basis of Branch’s 2009 book documenting the Clinton presidency.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/06/14/trump-indictment-classified-documents-settlement/

Anonymous wrote:

Which name is better, Crooked Hillary or Deranged Jack Smith?

“Deranged Jack Smith” is a terrible nickname when “Cracker Jack” is right there. He’s lost a lot of heat off his fastball.

Which name is better, Crooked Hillary or Deranged Jack Smith?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In 2001 Judicial Watch asked for the tapes Clinton had in his home recorded during his 8 years in office. The Bush DOJ refused to enforce the PRA and these tapes were never released nor are they in his library. Why thy double standards for Trump?

Judicial Watch is not legitimate, esp when it comes to Trump.

Judicial Watch is a joke. That Fitton dude isn't even an attorney yet keeps presenting himself as if he was one, and should be investigated for it.

He doesn’t present himself as a lawyer. I have met him numerous times and he never once made claims he was a lawyer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perhaps the mob should have attacked another building in a different jurisdiction then?

So they weren't outraged when Smith indicted him in SDFL? Who does Lindsey think she's kidding?