Posted on 06/10/2023 9:51:18 AM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Even without the “like” the entire thing seems like a stretch. It’s not as if Trump could accidentally reclassify some document by saying the wrong magic word.
The real conspirators.☑️
Not ours
The idiots in the New York case never established a date when the bish claimed she was raped. In a dressing room, for cry eyed. She worked with NY Dems to change their law so she could sue Trump.. That law only lasts 1 year.
The entire case shows what slime they are.
This thing paid for by H3ll and 0 no doubt is much the same.
An indictment is not evidence,
No.
Did Trump say that it was classified?
No.
Trump did say when the document could have been declassified and when it could not have been declassified.
He did say that it was "still a secret".
He did not say it was classified..
altering anything submitted to court is illegal.
what the heck is wrong with you?
Are you thinking it’s OK for him to do this???
If he purposely misrepresented the evidence during his public dog and pony show in the trail venue, he has poisoned the potential jury pool. Trump lawyer needs to make a motion to dismiss based on the prosecutor’s unethical conduct working to the disadvantage of the defendant
No where in the transcripts I have read has Trump stated the documents he was referring to were currently classified or were never declassified.
Shouldn’t evidence tampering be grounds for complete dismissal of all charges? The prosecution has completely destroyed what infinitesimally little credibility they had to begin with.
Saying a document is secret of course the document was secret doesn’t matter that it was not classified it’s still a secret document so trump was right
Like Judges give a damn when they are lied to or defrauded by corrupt government employee’s. See FISA court
“And here we go again. The biggest bombshell portion of the Jack Smith indictment - the Bedminster tape - has already been debunked
Smith tampered with the evidence”
We need a national law, even an Amendment to th United States Constitution. Prosecutor who alters evidence, denies Brady Material to the defense, or otherwise denies a defendant due process, and anyone involved, does the punishment of the defendant. Even if that defendant was guilty, the still do the same time. Otherwise, just continue to watch the descent into 4th world status.
Once again, they didn’t tamper with the evidence. The transcript of what was said is there to read. The tape is the evidence, not the indictment. The fact that the wording was changed slightly in the indictment does not constitute evidence tampering or change what the prosecution has to prove in court. The only way this could be evidence tampering is if the grand jury was not allowed to hear the tape or read the transcript, and the prosecutor only gave them an altered version of the statements on the tape to consider in their investigation. As long as they had access to the actual, unaltered evidence to review, the prosecution selectively editing the statement in the indictment, while sleazy, does not constitute evidence tampering.
It is like the J6 Committee showing the world video evidence of the Capitol with fake Hollywood/Disney sound to scare/sway the masses while smearing the protesters and Trump. I want to know why nice man Pence never came out and said that the tapes were doctored—he works there he should know and the was 2nd in command. Instead, he trashed his boss.
It’s like Adam Schiff giving testimony about his “thoughts” about what Trump may have done while portraying his words as what Trump actually said and did when, in fact, it was a fictional story.
It was done by Smith to write a narrative and sway public opinion.
“Despite common assumptions, 18 USC 793 does not require that material be classified to indict someone for mishandling it. The word “classified” doesn’t appear in the statute at all.”
“The indictment charges Trump under 18 USC 793(e), which only qualifies the material as being potentially injurious to the US or advantageous to a foreign power”
So it’s okay to alter evidence presented to a grand jury in order to get an indictment?
That really seems like a stretch of the law to me.
So, if an actual quote was say "you know I'm not a rapist", but the prosecutor presents a quote "you know I'm a rapist.
That's not tampering with evidence?
Posting all kinds of wild theories with no foundation just makes people look like fanatics. I have seen people post that the tape didn’t exist, that the tape was generated by AI, that the tape was illegal because Trump didn’t know he was being taped, that Trump was deliberately lying on the tape to smoke out traitors in his midst, and now that the way the prosecutor wrote his indictment constitutes evidence tampering. I have posted on other threads - I think the whole choice to prosecute Trump on these charges is nakedly political. I think most of the charges are bogus and he has strong defenses. But on this one charge, IF the transcript is accurate, and IF Trump actually showed a classified document to the writer after appearing to acknowledge he did not declassify it as president and could not do so later, and IF the prosecutor has someone willing to testify to that set of facts - then this charge is the most serious danger to Trump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.