Posted on Jul 15, 2024
Judge dismisses Trump's Florida classified documents case
386
7
5
4
4
0
Posted 4 mo ago
Responses: 1
I will readily admit I am not educated enough in law to understand the legal argument and decision here. I will trust the judge's judgment even if I remain skeptical.
But I will say that this is a shame.
Pretty much everything surrounding the EXECUTION of this case has been fraught. However, this was the only case with any actual legal merit, IMHO. No, I am not saying it is a shame because I want someone to "get Trump." I say it is a shame because if anyone *did* "get Trump," *this* is the one case that would have been legitimate to do so on. The other three (including the NY case which *did* "get" him - but is likely to be overturned) were nothing more than lawfare. This case had a clear and legitimate crime. Now, whether that crime could be proven is another story. Whether Trump was able to successfully argue legal authority for those documents remained to be seen. But at least the charges here were not manufactured out of thin air or cobbled together by dubious interpretations of the law.
I understand, and even agree with, the case being tossed out if it was executed illegally - as I similarly commented a day or two ago about the Alec Baldwin case. But I think it is a shame that the case is being tossed out due to failed execution, not due to actual innocence.
Yes, yes. He is innocent until proven guilty, and that is the case here. So, yes, you can claim it was tossed out due to innocence, as the prosecution could not prove guilt. I won't argue with you. But, just like OJ, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.
I rambled a bit, but don't know how to clean it up. Sorry about that.
But I will say that this is a shame.
Pretty much everything surrounding the EXECUTION of this case has been fraught. However, this was the only case with any actual legal merit, IMHO. No, I am not saying it is a shame because I want someone to "get Trump." I say it is a shame because if anyone *did* "get Trump," *this* is the one case that would have been legitimate to do so on. The other three (including the NY case which *did* "get" him - but is likely to be overturned) were nothing more than lawfare. This case had a clear and legitimate crime. Now, whether that crime could be proven is another story. Whether Trump was able to successfully argue legal authority for those documents remained to be seen. But at least the charges here were not manufactured out of thin air or cobbled together by dubious interpretations of the law.
I understand, and even agree with, the case being tossed out if it was executed illegally - as I similarly commented a day or two ago about the Alec Baldwin case. But I think it is a shame that the case is being tossed out due to failed execution, not due to actual innocence.
Yes, yes. He is innocent until proven guilty, and that is the case here. So, yes, you can claim it was tossed out due to innocence, as the prosecution could not prove guilt. I won't argue with you. But, just like OJ, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.
I rambled a bit, but don't know how to clean it up. Sorry about that.
(2)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
It all boils down to Jack Smith was not appointed, there were no checks and balances in making him the Special Prosecutor. They can certainly appeal, but that is a pointless effort. They can also work to assign an appointed individual, but that would also be pointless. This case should not have gone this far in the first place. It was purely political and should have been handled discreetly.
(1)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SFC John Davis 1st one thing (but that may be my phone or service). Second one got me there. Thanks!
(0)
(0)
Read This Next