Is Trump's stupidity his best defense in the stolen documents case?

No, some of the evidence in the indictment shows that Trump

• brandished docs he knew were sensitive to persons not having clearance,
• knew that this was wrong
• knew he was no longer PotUS
• and, therefore, that he could no longer declassify them

Since(?) the initial post, we've now had two recordings of Trump saying some/most/all of these things.

I think he can PRETEND to be that stupid, but he had given testimony without knowing he was giving it--so, much more trustworthy than solicited testimony in Court.

So it won't work.

he certainly is stupid--but his is driven by narcissism--he views every event in the world as revolving around him, like a little child

Oh he is world class stupid, but his dishonesty, disregard of law, lying, selfishness, and purely evil heart are even worse.

Nope. Ignorance of the law is no defense and excuse. That legal principle goes at least as far back as Aristotle. Pleading stupidity is just another form of pleading ignorance.

[quote]In law, ignorantia juris non excusat (Latin for "ignorance of the law excuses not"),[1] or ignorantia legis neminem excusat ("ignorance of law excuses no one"),[2] is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely by being unaware of its content.

European-law countries with a tradition of Roman law may also use an expression from Aristotle translated into Latin: nemo censetur ignorare legem ("nobody is thought to be ignorant of the law") or ignorantia iuris nocet ("not knowing the law is harmful").[/quote]
[b]Wikipedia[/b]

But in his defense, he says he was duped by Queen Elizabeth.

I think it's less stupidity than sheer arrogance.

It’s really too bad you don’t know what you are talking about….enough said

Not from the guy who made Hillary email server, the keystone of his presidential win.

He’s an actor