Subj : Re: fbi
To   : JEFF THIELE
From : Mike Powell
Date : Fri Sep 30 2022 16:16:00

> On 29 Sep 2022, Mike Powell said the following...
>  MP> >  MP> So, since he claims it was not wrong and that he didn't "do it," w
>  MP> >  MP> would you trust that he wouldn't again just because he has not yet
>  MP> > Why would you assume that he would do it again when he hasn't?
>  MP> People who maintain that they did nothing wrong, when they clearly did,
>  MP> have not learned their lesson.  Only a naive person would trust that
>  MP> they'd never do it again, especially if they can profit from it.

> If I got a ticket for speeding, but maintained that the traffic signs were
> confusing, and the court acknowledged that the signs were confusing but said
> that I was still speeding, and so reduced my fine, I might still claim that I
> was not speeding but after that experience might be more cautious about my
> speed in the future.

But you were speeding, and ignorance of the law is no defense.  That is one
of the first things they teach you before you get your license.

>  MP> >  MP> I would not trust that Trump, who says he didn't do anything wrong
>  MP> >  MP> taking documents, would not eventually repeat the same mistake aga
>  MP> >  MP> given the chance.... and he has not even been convicted yet.
>  MP> > Trump's a whole different story. I wouldn't trust him on any number of
>  MP> > things.
>  MP> What this boils down to is that you trust people because you like their
>  MP> politics and don't trust others because you don't.

> No, it boils down to intent.

Soros intended to make money and apparently didn't care if he was breaking
the law in order to do so.  He still believes he didn't break the law.

He has also stated his intent about the time he became known as the guy
who "broke the Bank of England."  Do you think that intent is OK even
though it had consequences for people that were not involved in overstating
the worth of the British Pound?  You know, like the everyday British
citizen?

>  MP> Why would YOU assume that Trump would do it again when he hasn't?  I
>  MP> know why I would assume it... because he won't admit he did something
>  MP> wrong when he did it the first time.

> Because he *did* do it again. It took multiple judicial actions to get all of
> the documents from him, if that was indeed all.

He has taken additional documents since this became public?  That is news
to me.  I bet it would be news to Archives and the FBI, too... you'd best
report it.


 * SLMR 2.1a * Copper wire was invented by lawyers arguing over a penny.
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
 * Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

.