Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sdgla who wrote (1406442)	6/13/2023 7:00:39 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	4 Recommendations Recommended By Brumar89 Doren pocotrader Wharf Rat Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580024

Sdgla, I can answer all four questions easily, and I'm not even a legal expert: 1) Why does Garlard need an opinion from the OLC before indicting Trump? Is there a law requiring it? 2) The Presidential Records Act does not give Trump carte blanche to retain those documents. Besides, Trump could have argued that from the beginning. Instead, he feigned compliance with the request for the return of documents, because even he knew the PRA doesn't apply. Instead, he fully intended to deceive. That's obstruction of justice, plain and simple. 3) Again, the intent to deceive is pretty clear in the indictment. Just because Trump never intended to injure the U.S. doesn't matter. His actions were reckless and st00pid beyond belief. 4) Again, the Presidential Records Act doesn't apply here. Numerous sources have already argued against it. The Act is nothing but a talking point that is being fed to the pro-Trump trolls to regurgitate. Tenchusatsu