The Soapbox

fishhoo

Joined: 02/27/2004 Posts: 1354
Likes: 2883


Truly my last comment -- just on PRA personal record comment


You do know I assume that the PRA has language that attempts to help define and clarify what actually qualifies as a "personal document". The Clinton case does the same -- it goes into substantive detail about what defines a personal document.

Why? Really simple -- why would the Act itself as well as any battle or litigation over this aspect of the Act actually look at the substance of the issue if you are in fact right? What is the purpose of assigning meaning to the definition -- or having an Act at all actually -- if you are correct and a President simply has to say the words or even just "think" -- everything I have removed I define as a personal document. Why wasnt Summary Judgment just granted in the Clinton case because all he had to say is "personal" and....Voila....regardless of a single other fact or analysis of the substance. And again, why not answer and write the words...."If a former President keeps a spy list at home but then says hey, its all personal.....then it is". Because you know this isnt reality or what you even really think. Yet, you seem to still be able to ignore this but insist your analysis is the only possible way to see things.

I'm sorry, I honestly don't understand. This feels like a surreal discussion in terms of a legitimate legal analysis. Argue all day long that it seems unfair or purely political prosecution if you want, but that is always a different argument. Moving on...

(In response to this post by Los Angeles Hoo)

Posted: 04/05/2024 at 8:39PM



+0

Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:


Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:


Current Thread:
 
  
Cannon denies Trump's motion to dismiss -- CMUHoo 04/04/2024 3:45PM
  Only to put it off to do real damage later. ** -- DanTheFan 04/04/2024 7:10PM
  He has nothing to appeal. ** -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 8:18PM
  Yet ** -- WaxHoo 04/04/2024 8:42PM
  The problem with prosecuting fake cases… -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 9:56PM
  💩 post. It’s 🌲 ** -- Hoodeac 04/04/2024 10:08PM
  That's twice in one afternoon! ** -- ResistHoo 04/04/2024 6:11PM
  That is practically a fussilade from that Cannon ** -- Tuckahokie 04/04/2024 6:57PM
  💩 post ** -- Hoodeac 04/04/2024 6:09PM
  I'm sorry that happened to you, Icecaps. ** -- ResistHoo 04/04/2024 6:13PM
  If were worthy of prosecution, then... -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 5:42PM
  My argument can be boiled down thus:… -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/05/2024 10:25AM
  It's not in play in a pre-trial motion. It is in play... -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 10:15PM
  Yes. The president could do all of that. If you… -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/05/2024 01:18AM
  What? you don't know about the wand? ** -- Capital City Hoo 04/04/2024 11:06PM
  You realize you’re arguing with a mental patient -- BocaHoo91 04/04/2024 10:56PM
  Thank you counselor! You're so right - please keep going! ** -- Capital City Hoo 04/04/2024 10:30PM
  That's fine, and I can believe that, although... -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 5:58PM
  Clinton, for one. She didn't... -- Los Angeles Hoo 04/04/2024 6:08PM
  Simply put, no. -- Newt 04/04/2024 5:46PM
  Lala is just Tommy with a better vocabulary ** -- HptHokie 04/04/2024 5:48PM
  No. ** -- WaxHoo 04/04/2024 5:39PM
  She told Trump to go fuck himself. -- SixerHoo 04/04/2024 4:55PM
  🍌🍌🍌republic ** -- SixerHoo 04/04/2024 5:44PM
  Buckled but not buckled. -- Newt 04/04/2024 5:40PM
  Yes -- WaxHoo 04/04/2024 5:03PM

Notice: Trying to get property 'queue' of non-object in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /data/www/sportswar.com/wp-includes/script-loader.php on line 2781
vm307