PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
Not sure, I was kind of wondering about that myself.
Joe steals Nancy's purse
- Thread starter ActionianJacksonian
- Start date
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Of course, I posted the link originally:
"
JUDICIAL WATCH, INC., Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
Michael Bekesha, Paul J. Orfanedes, Judicial Watch, Inc., Washington, DC, for Plaintiff. Daniel Schwei, Elizabeth J. Shapiro, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant.
"
The DOJ is who would "assume custody or control" of Presidents personal records dummy.
You suck at this.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Dang, man. I don't think I've ever met a more stupidly hard headed person than you.
Read the top of the brief. It says: NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, Defendant.
The DOJ is who would "assume custody or control" of Presidents personal records
The plaintiffs asked for that. The court had no jurisdiction, the plaintiffs had no standing. The case was thrown out. What? Do you claim that anything a plaintiff says in a filing is precedent going forward? Whether they win or lose the suit? How ridiculous is that?
There must be a finding in the favor of the plaintiff to make your claim true. They lost the suit. At every level their claims were found to be without merit.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
counsel for the defense ≠ defendant
doublejj
Well-Known Member
don't blame me i voted for Biden....
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
So did I.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
doublejj
Well-Known Member
If you can find enough redeeming value in republican policy (what ever that is) then vote for it. the republicans offer America nothing of value to vote for. They have made voting blue a non question for most of us.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Precedents were set nonetheless. Motion to dismiss granted because seizure by Defendant via Defense "contrary the the PRA's express terms".
Open wide here comes the yummy airplane.....(bolded for your gnat-like attention span)
"
Under the statutory scheme established by the PRA, the decision to segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President's term and in his sole discretion, see44 U.S.C. § 2203(b), so the Deputy Archivist could not and did not make a classification decision that can be challenged here."
"Since the President is completely entrusted with the management and even the disposal of Presidential records during his time in office, it would be difficult for this Court to conclude that Congress intended that he would have less authority to do what he pleases with what he considers to be his personal records."
"Because the audiotapes are not physically in the government's possession, defendant submits that it would be required to seize them directly from President Clinton in order to assume custody and control over them. Def.'s Mem. in Support of Mot. to Dismiss at 1, 15–18. Defendant considers this to be an “extraordinary request” that is “unfounded, contrary to the PRA's express terms, and contrary to traditional principles of administrative law.” Id. at 1. The Court agrees."
There is a good reason we keep transcripts of court cases. Your theory this is null and void is ignorant I would say but I'm pretty sure it's just propaganda and you know better. You're just pushing a narrative.
This is exactly what Dershowitz meant by "The Clinton Test" in JJ's post earlier.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
The dismissal and reasons for it literally is the precedent
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Dershowitz is an entertainment site's host. lulz. So everything Alex Jones says is true too. And everything said by anybody on TV is true.
Regarding the suit.
There was no precedent set. The plaintiff had no standing. Their case had no merit.
What you are citing as precedent is the defendant's failed testimony.
The absurdity of what you are saying is amazing.
PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
It's not a binary choice for me. If I continue to be abandoned by Democrats, I will likely vote third party.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
No standing and no merit...for what reasons again?
Come on slugger, you can do it I know you can! It's right there in the script or you need time to reed moar gooder?
doublejj
Well-Known Member
They will have a new term for trumps escapades...."the fecal test"
doublejj
Well-Known Member
how do you want your eggs with those flap jacks?..
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Did you think that Gascon recall vote went ok? I thought it was funny how signatures magically were very important suddenly.
PJ Diaz
Well-Known Member
Go ahead, keep alienating folks. Works every time you need a majority.
ActionianJacksonian
Well-Known Member
Yeah dude, yall have just about exhausted language and law.
Let's see what am I, a black white supremacist, a fascist, a nazi, a bigot, deplorable, insurrectionist, treasonous bla bla bla bla bla
Nothing left to do but physically detain or destroy anyone you don't agree with at this point.
