Post New

File this under "things you don't want to hear your former lawyer say".

Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb spoke with CNN's Erin Andrews and said the evidence against Trump is solid, noting that records will demonstrate that the former president knew the correct process for declassifying documents. Cobb said evidence will show that Trump willfully moved the documents to obstruct the investigation and had his lawyers file a false affidavit (among other misrepresentations) on his behalf: "I think this obstruction case is a tight case, and, yes, I do think he'll go to jail on it."

Cobb said he wouldn't charge Trump with espionage were he in the Special Counsel's place, but wouldn't rule it out.

Anyone else think the Special Counsel will indict before Georgia's AG, Fani Willis?

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2023/05/19/flo...

He deserves it.

If he had some classified stuff, and didn't sell it to the Chinese, Saudis, Russians in exchange for big money and luxurious haven, well, I can't sympathize for the man. I'd been proud of him for doing as I suggested.

Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb spoke with CNN's Erin Andrews and said the evidence against Trump is solid, noting that records will demonstrate that the former president knew the correct process for declassifying documents. Cobb said evidence will show that Trump willfully moved the documents to obstruct the investigation and had his lawyers file a false affidavit (among other misrepresentations) on his behalf: "I think this obstruction case is a tight case, and, yes, I do think he'll go to jail on it."

-------------------------

Modified to point out the obvious analogy revealing biased system of justice....

Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb spoke with CNN's Erin Andrews and said the evidence against Hillary is solid, noting that records will demonstrate that the former Secretary of State knew the correct process for protecting classified documents. Cobb said evidence will show that Hillary willfully deleted subpoenaed documents to obstruct the investigation and had provided false testimony before congress (among other misrepresentations) on her behalf: "I think this obstruction case is a tight case, and, yes, I do think she will be given a pass.

If reelected, would an imprisoned Trump get special visitation privileges?

I'm skeptical either will indict. It's a political hot potato, and you definitely want a case that is so tight that a conviction is a forgone conclusion. Otherwise he (and his followers) will scream about harassment and persecution. I don't think they have the cohones to pursue. In the case of GA, it's been 3 years, and I heard the tape within a month of the election. They have him dead-to-rights. But crickets.

bighairymike: Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb spoke with CNN's Erin Andrews and said the evidence against Hillary...

Short version: you're wrong.

Slightly longer version: the differences between Clinton and Trump are intent and obstruction.

And Clinton DID NOT delete subpoenaed documents. Clinton's staff had requested the emails to be deleted months before the subpoena and Comey confirmed his agency's investigation found no evidence that any work-related emails were 'intentionally deleted in an effort to conceal them.'

Longer version of the other Clinton nonsense:

What false testimony before Congress? You're just making crap up. If you're suggesting Clinton lied about sending classified material in emails, Comey, who at one point told Congress "there was classified material emailed" by Clinton later admitted, under oath, that although material later 'determined by the owning agency' to be classified had not been marked classified.

And the IG's report confirmed Clinton had not lied:

'There was no evidence that the senders or former Secretary Clinton believed or were aware at the time that the emails contained classified information. The emails in question were sent to other government officials in furtherance of the senders' official duties. There was no evidence that the senders or former Secretary Clinton intended that classified information be sent to unauthorized recipients, or that they intentionally sought to store classified information on unauthorized systems.'

And republicans didn't bother to bring forward any suggestions for charges because they knew it was all bullsh!t (although they were happy to chant "Lock Her Up!" a bazillion times).


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/08...

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.