FBI raids Trump's home

152,087 Views | 2081 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Harrison Bergeron
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

BaylorJacket said:

Truly a fascinating situation. Trump is stupid enough to illegally take home classified Nuclear documents.

But, the government is absolutely (beyond) corrupt enough to plant evidence.
A) nothing he took is classified.. he declassified everything he took by the act of taking it when leaving office.

B) the FBI and NARA had access to the records previously and told him to make them more secure with an additional lock which he did.

As a former president, he has an office, a secured space and security. It was still safe and secure just like the 30000 pages of records Obama has..

Watching to see how the game of warrant chicken playes out..

The warrant affidavit was sealed so I would love to see who "snitched". Supposedly a USS guy..

Both sides are getting riled up and its hilarious to watch.
Trump wasn't president when he left office. And that's just one of the problems with your theory.

Obama's records are in the custody of NARA.
he wasnt? He packed and shipped everything prior to Jan 20..

Come on Sam..

"recent congressional testimony has made it clear that the Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and "loss" of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges."
Actually, no:
Quote:

Mr. Trump left the White House on the morning of Jan. 20, just hours before President Biden was inaugurated. Accounts of the former president's departure described a highly disorganized exit with slapdash packing, especially as aides had spent the weeks before focused on contesting the results of the 2020 election and preparing for Mr. Trump's defense in a second impeachment trial that was held in February.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/09/us/politics/trump-classified-records-timeline.html
I don't know whom you're quoting or which congressional testimony they're referring to.
EatMoreSalmon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Google came up with this article with 4th's quote:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/06/10/crisis_at_the_national_archives_137241.html
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

If Trump supporters are as crazy and violent as the left says they are, and they somehow charge Trump and get him off the ballot…would that not break the country in half?

If they think everything will be fine if they charge Trump, then their claims about his supporters can't be true.
Where have Republicans rioted for even a 1/10th as long as Dems ?

This entire narrative of conservatives being a threat to democracy is a joke.

A joke 90% of the media promotes knowing full well it is a hypocritical lie.
LateSteak69
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

Doc Holliday said:

If Trump supporters are as crazy and violent as the left says they are, and they somehow charge Trump and get him off the ballot…would that not break the country in half?

If they think everything will be fine if they charge Trump, then their claims about his supporters can't be true.
Where have Republicans rioted for even a 1/10th as long as Dems ?

This entire narrative of conservatives being a threat to democracy is a joke.

A joke 90% of the media promotes knowing full well it is a hypocritical lie.


Zap! Space lazer! Get a ****ing clue.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oldbear83 said:

C. Jordan said:

4th and Inches said:

BaylorJacket said:

Truly a fascinating situation. Trump is stupid enough to illegally take home classified Nuclear documents.

But, the government is absolutely (beyond) corrupt enough to plant evidence.
A) nothing he took is classified.. he declassified everything he took by the act of taking it when leaving office.

B) the FBI and NARA had access to the records previously and told him to make them more secure with an additional lock which he did.

As a former president, he has an office, a secured space and security. It was still safe and secure just like the 30000 pages of records Obama has..

Watching to see how the game of warrant chicken playes out..

The warrant affidavit was sealed so I would love to see who "snitched". Supposedly a USS guy..

Both sides are getting riled up and its hilarious to watch.
This is totally incorrect.

A) He has to formally declassify documents. His taking them home doesn't declassify them.

B) The FBI believed he had documents he hadn't disclosed. Apparently an informant in Trumpworld clued them in.

Now, we're hearing the docs may have been related to nukes.

Third, his office at Mara Lardo is not a secure classified facility.

The warrant won't tell you who the informant is.

So, you're wrong about it all.


OK, my turn

A) Classification depends on a number of factors. Some classifications have sunset provisions so after a certain time they declassify (this was done so academics could access historical docs at Archives w/o a cumbersome process), while some are classified only under certain conditions (e.g. the President's travel plans for a given day are classified for that day and while in office bc routine, but are not classified once the POTUS becomes a former POTUS). Still other documents are classified according to who may or may not see them. For example, some documents would not be classified for Trump bc he created the document or already had prior knowledge of their content, but would be beyond the authority of the FBI agents who raided the residence. The absence of a Special Master at the scene therefore either implies that the documents were not sensitive, or else that the FBI royally screwed up.

B) Speculation. Also, the FBI regularly shields their informants by having the real source submit their tips through a third party who is paid by the FBI to play the role. The circumstances do not rule out someone with a grudge making up **** to go after Trump. There is, after all, precedent for just that behavior.

Regarding nukes, you're going to have a really hard time selling that claim. As POTUS, the closest thing Trump would have seen or handled with regard to nuclear weapons would the the SIOP, which by definition is partly created by the POTUS as CINC (see part A about who has authority to see such material), or an old nuclear codes card, which would be valueless and obsolete by the next day. All in all, that dog won't hunt.

As for 'secure facilities', depending on the level of classification any locked cabinet and door may be sufficient to meet the requirement for secure documents. You need to stop confusing movie glitz with the real world.

So, you're blowing smoke like a Cheech & Chong movie. Only you're not funny at all.
The president taking a document home doesn't automatically declassify it. This should be obvious to anyone who's not desperate to come up with a last-ditch defense. The report about the informant and the undisclosed documents isn't speculation. It came from two senior government officials. Your theory that it was made up by someone with a grudge? That's speculation. There are any number of nuclear-related documents other than SIOPS and code cards that a president could see. As for secure facilities, you're probably talking about outdated rules. All classified information currently has to be stored in containers or facilities built according to certain specifications.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LateSteak69 said:

Canada2017 said:

Doc Holliday said:

If Trump supporters are as crazy and violent as the left says they are, and they somehow charge Trump and get him off the ballot…would that not break the country in half?

If they think everything will be fine if they charge Trump, then their claims about his supporters can't be true.
Where have Republicans rioted for even a 1/10th as long as Dems ?

This entire narrative of conservatives being a threat to democracy is a joke.

A joke 90% of the media promotes knowing full well it is a hypocritical lie.


Zap! Space lazer! Get a ****ing clue.
Get some perspective and grow up .
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EatMoreSalmon said:

Google came up with this article with 4th's quote:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/06/10/crisis_at_the_national_archives_137241.html
Thanks. I agree with the concerns about private email exchanges, but that's not something that can easily be solved with a search warrant. The damage is already done. The existing documents that were shipped to Chicago are a different matter, and not at all what Republicans are suggesting. They were shipped to a federal facility and properly handed over to NARA.
ABC BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

Doc Holliday said:

If Trump supporters are as crazy and violent as the left says they are, and they somehow charge Trump and get him off the ballot…would that not break the country in half?

If they think everything will be fine if they charge Trump, then their claims about his supporters can't be true.
Where have Republicans rioted for even a 1/10th as long as Dems ?

This entire narrative of conservatives being a threat to democracy is a joke.

A joke 90% of the media promotes knowing full well it is a hypocritical lie.
Add democracy to the growing list of words which democrats can't define.
Stefano DiMera
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I suggest someone dig up Ivana's grave on his golf course..not sure why it took 10 pallbearers to carry that coffin unless it was being used as a file cabinet.

This board is fun. I should post here more often.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Has the FBI saved democracy and recovers the overdue library books yet?
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

RMF5630 said:

Sam Lowry said:

Okay, maybe not.


Come on Sam, storing NUCLEAR DOCUMENTS at a private beach resort for 18 months? Now, they become "state secrets" national security issues 3 months before the 22 elections? For 18 months it was ok to go through attorneys, but this week it reached such a threat that we needed to send in 30 armed FBI agents? Sounds kosher to me...
Y'all don't miss a beat, do you?

MONDAY: "Why didn't they negotiate first? Something's not right."
TUESDAY: "Why didn't they negotiate first? Something's not right."
WEDNESDAY: "Why didn't they negotiate first? Something's not right."
THURSDAY: "Why did they negotiate first? Something's not right!!!"


Hey, I am just asking common sense questions. If there were nuclear top secret docs at Mar Lago for 18 months, why now? Obviously there was no urgency. Couldn't have been that crucial to National Defense if during the Afghanistan pullout, Ukraine conflict and Taiwan issue to just leave them there. Now, it reached an urgency to send 30 FBI agents?

Doesn't it seem a bit opportune for this to drop 3 months before midterms?

He didn't return in timely manner, ok. Fine him. You are not jailing someone on this type of thing. Hell, the impeached him, censured him, held a commission, tried him, why not fine him? Maybe next week they will hire a voodoo priest to poke pins in a Trump doll. Get it. Not gonna stop.

By the way, did they find the docs? Or is this another can't prove a negative. No docs were found, but we know he has them. Right?
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trump posted on Truth social

"Not only will I not oppose the release of documents related to the unAmerican, unwarranted, and unnecessary raid and break-in of my home in Palm Beach, Florida, Mar-a-Lago, I am going a step further by ENCOURAGING the immediate release of those documents"
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Stefano DiMera said:

I suggest someone dig up Ivana's grave on his golf course..not sure why it took 10 pallbearers to carry that coffin unless it was being used as a file cabinet.

This board is fun. I should post here more often.


We are just getting rolling. By end of day personal insults will start and condemnation of life choices and even rating peoples intelligence. Good family fun. Will set you up for move to tequila of your choice. So what's your pleasure,

Love Liz Dem
never Trump liberal,
never Trump conservative,
Trump for President,
Trump ok but just go away (my personal choice)
Will follow Dear Leader to Hell

Join in.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I am old enough to remember when Bill Clinton actually lost the nuclear codes..

Freaking clowns!
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RMF5630 said:

Stefano DiMera said:

I suggest someone dig up Ivana's grave on his golf course..not sure why it took 10 pallbearers to carry that coffin unless it was being used as a file cabinet.

This board is fun. I should post here more often.


We are just getting rolling. By end of day personal insults will start and condemnation of life choices and even rating peoples intelligence. Good family fun. Will set you up for move to tequila of your choice. So what's your pleasure,

Love Liz Dem
never Trump liberal,
never Trump conservative,
Trump for President,
Trump ok but just go away (my personal choice)
Will follow Dear Leader to Hell

Join in.
when in doubt, post a gif!
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RMF5630 said:

Stefano DiMera said:

I suggest someone dig up Ivana's grave on his golf course..not sure why it took 10 pallbearers to carry that coffin unless it was being used as a file cabinet.

This board is fun. I should post here more often.


We are just getting rolling. By end of day personal insults will start and condemnation of life choices and even rating peoples intelligence. Good family fun. Will set you up for move to tequila of your choice. So what's your pleasure,

Love Liz Dem
never Trump liberal,
never Trump conservative,
Trump for President,
Trump ok but just go away (my personal choice)
Will follow Dear Leader to Hell

Join in.
I remember when the Clintons removed hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of possessions out of the White House by 'mistake'.
LateSteak69
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LateSteak69 said:

ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
what did Biden sell to China for Hunters Billion+?

This is fun!
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
LateSteak69
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

LateSteak69 said:

ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
what did Biden sell to China for Hunters Billion+?

This is fun!


It was about $400K, so probably a recipe for lettuce wraps.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Judicial Watch Aug 9th filed motion to unseal the search warrant records. US v Sealed Search Warrant (Case No 9:22-mj-08332).

Garland and DOJ claiming they doing something that already been done..
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LateSteak69 said:

4th and Inches said:

LateSteak69 said:

ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
what did Biden sell to China for Hunters Billion+?

This is fun!


It was about $400K, so probably a recipe for lettuce wraps.
no self respecting Asian would by a recipe for anything from an American! It has no flavor!
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
Osodecentx
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

LateSteak69 said:

ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
what did Biden sell to China for Hunters Billion+?

This is fun!
What about all of the 'W's taken from the computers when Clinton left the WH?
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

I don't take the Fifth like Dear leader
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You are the weak minded who will get him nominated for 2024, just like Dems want
Yup, Oso has gone squirmy and sweaty, like Hunter when he first heard about a search warrant.
Old Fifth Amendment Leader has your loyalty to the bitter end
You oppose Americans using their Constitutional rights.

Noted.
Dear Leader did.

'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?' Trump's position on declining to testify has changed over time.
Over the years, former President Donald J. Trump has generally criticized other politicians for taking the Fifth Amendment. But on Wednesday, he invoked the right himself during a deposition at the office of the New York attorney general, and it wasn't the first time.
Mr. Trump previously contended that invoking one's Fifth Amendment rights was virtually an admission of wrongdoing.
"So there are five people taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" Mr. Trump said at a rally in Iowa in 2016, referring to investigations into Hillary Clinton's handling of potentially classified material as secretary of state.
Soon after, at a presidential debate, Mr. Trump doubled down on criticizing Ms. Clinton for using a private email server as secretary of state, again referencing the Fifth Amendment. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth, so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful," he said.
Yet in 1998, he suggested that President Bill Clinton should have done just that during the impeachment investigation into Clinton. "It's a terrible thing for a president to take the Fifth Amendment, but he probably should have done it. I don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened," Trump said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was singing a different tune, however, when he arrived at the New York attorney general's office in downtown Manhattan to give sworn testimony for a civil inquiry into his business practices.
In a statement emailed just before the questioning started, Mr. Trump acknowledged his shifting positions over the years, but said circumstances had changed. He portrayed himself as the victim of politically motivated investigations, not just by the New York attorney general, but by the Justice Department and other prosecutors who he asserted "have lost all moral and ethical bounds of decency."
"I once asked, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'" he wrote. "Now I know the answer to that question. When your family, your company, and all the people in your orbit have become the targets of an unfounded, politically motivated Witch Hunt supported by lawyers, prosecutors, and the Fake News Media, you have no choice."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/nyregion/trump-fifth-amendment-comments.html

Don't be foolish. I will take the fifth on anything above a traffic stop, because I am a Republican elected official. I might trust the local cop, but I can't control what Feds might do with anything I say. See the Missouri and Roku examples posted here. (insert the proverbial "we are not in Kansas anymore" here.

After they get thru with Trump, they'll come for his supporters. And after they're done with them, they'll come for you. You've inconveniently spoken & voted & donated too many times over the years to be trusted. And after they're done with you, they'll come after our center-left friends who are uncomfortable with what they're seeing but going along with it because they think Trump is the bigger problem at the moment. And after that, they'll start measuring levels of enthusiasm among true believers.

that's the way these things go.
Until they are stopped.
and they will be.
Everyone will remember who stopped it and who played along with it, too.

They will come for the law breakers
define lawbreakers.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

4th and Inches said:

LateSteak69 said:

ScruffyD said:

you seem so angry. like i stole nuclear secrets and tried to cover it up. or maybe sell them to saudi arabia. jeez.


And Kushner got $2B from the Saudi's. Huh.
what did Biden sell to China for Hunters Billion+?

This is fun!
What about all of the 'W's taken from the computers when Clinton left the WH?
what about the truck loads of stuff the clintons had to return when they left?
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Waco1947 said:

whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

I don't take the Fifth like Dear leader
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You are the weak minded who will get him nominated for 2024, just like Dems want
Yup, Oso has gone squirmy and sweaty, like Hunter when he first heard about a search warrant.
Old Fifth Amendment Leader has your loyalty to the bitter end
You oppose Americans using their Constitutional rights.

Noted.
Dear Leader did.

'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?' Trump's position on declining to testify has changed over time.
Over the years, former President Donald J. Trump has generally criticized other politicians for taking the Fifth Amendment. But on Wednesday, he invoked the right himself during a deposition at the office of the New York attorney general, and it wasn't the first time.
Mr. Trump previously contended that invoking one's Fifth Amendment rights was virtually an admission of wrongdoing.
"So there are five people taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" Mr. Trump said at a rally in Iowa in 2016, referring to investigations into Hillary Clinton's handling of potentially classified material as secretary of state.
Soon after, at a presidential debate, Mr. Trump doubled down on criticizing Ms. Clinton for using a private email server as secretary of state, again referencing the Fifth Amendment. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth, so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful," he said.
Yet in 1998, he suggested that President Bill Clinton should have done just that during the impeachment investigation into Clinton. "It's a terrible thing for a president to take the Fifth Amendment, but he probably should have done it. I don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened," Trump said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was singing a different tune, however, when he arrived at the New York attorney general's office in downtown Manhattan to give sworn testimony for a civil inquiry into his business practices.
In a statement emailed just before the questioning started, Mr. Trump acknowledged his shifting positions over the years, but said circumstances had changed. He portrayed himself as the victim of politically motivated investigations, not just by the New York attorney general, but by the Justice Department and other prosecutors who he asserted "have lost all moral and ethical bounds of decency."
"I once asked, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'" he wrote. "Now I know the answer to that question. When your family, your company, and all the people in your orbit have become the targets of an unfounded, politically motivated Witch Hunt supported by lawyers, prosecutors, and the Fake News Media, you have no choice."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/nyregion/trump-fifth-amendment-comments.html

Don't be foolish. I will take the fifth on anything above a traffic stop, because I am a Republican elected official. I might trust the local cop, but I can't control what Feds might do with anything I say. See the Missouri and Roku examples posted here. (insert the proverbial "we are not in Kansas anymore" here.

After they get thru with Trump, they'll come for his supporters. And after they're done with them, they'll come for you. You've inconveniently spoken & voted & donated too many times over the years to be trusted. And after they're done with you, they'll come after our center-left friends who are uncomfortable with what they're seeing but going along with it because they think Trump is the bigger problem at the moment. And after that, they'll start measuring levels of enthusiasm among true believers.

that's the way these things go.
Until they are stopped.
and they will be.
Everyone will remember who stopped it and who played along with it, too.

They will come for the law breakers
define lawbreakers.
people who disagree with them..
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Osodecentx said:

whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

I don't take the Fifth like Dear leader
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You are the weak minded who will get him nominated for 2024, just like Dems want
Yup, Oso has gone squirmy and sweaty, like Hunter when he first heard about a search warrant.
Old Fifth Amendment Leader has your loyalty to the bitter end
You oppose Americans using their Constitutional rights.

Noted.
Dear Leader did.

'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?' Trump's position on declining to testify has changed over time.
Over the years, former President Donald J. Trump has generally criticized other politicians for taking the Fifth Amendment. But on Wednesday, he invoked the right himself during a deposition at the office of the New York attorney general, and it wasn't the first time.
Mr. Trump previously contended that invoking one's Fifth Amendment rights was virtually an admission of wrongdoing.
"So there are five people taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" Mr. Trump said at a rally in Iowa in 2016, referring to investigations into Hillary Clinton's handling of potentially classified material as secretary of state.
Soon after, at a presidential debate, Mr. Trump doubled down on criticizing Ms. Clinton for using a private email server as secretary of state, again referencing the Fifth Amendment. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth, so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful," he said.
Yet in 1998, he suggested that President Bill Clinton should have done just that during the impeachment investigation into Clinton. "It's a terrible thing for a president to take the Fifth Amendment, but he probably should have done it. I don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened," Trump said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was singing a different tune, however, when he arrived at the New York attorney general's office in downtown Manhattan to give sworn testimony for a civil inquiry into his business practices.
In a statement emailed just before the questioning started, Mr. Trump acknowledged his shifting positions over the years, but said circumstances had changed. He portrayed himself as the victim of politically motivated investigations, not just by the New York attorney general, but by the Justice Department and other prosecutors who he asserted "have lost all moral and ethical bounds of decency."
"I once asked, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'" he wrote. "Now I know the answer to that question. When your family, your company, and all the people in your orbit have become the targets of an unfounded, politically motivated Witch Hunt supported by lawyers, prosecutors, and the Fake News Media, you have no choice."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/nyregion/trump-fifth-amendment-comments.html

Don't be foolish. I will take the fifth on anything above a traffic stop, because I am a Republican elected official. I might trust the local cop, but I can't control what Feds might do with anything I say. See the Missouri and Roku examples posted here. (insert the proverbial "we are not in Kansas anymore" here.

After they get thru with Trump, they'll come for his supporters. And after they're done with them, they'll come for you. You've inconveniently spoken & voted & donated too many times over the years to be trusted. And after they're done with you, they'll come after our center-left friends who are uncomfortable with what they're seeing but going along with it because they think Trump is the bigger problem at the moment. And after that, they'll start measuring levels of enthusiasm among true believers.

that's the way these things go.
Until they are stopped.
and they will be.
Everyone will remember who stopped it and who played along with it, too.
That's fine. Did you ever say, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'

I have no problem with criminals taking the nickel. Just pointing out Dear Leaders' quote from the little red book
I used to think that way.

I'm wiser now.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

whiterock said:

Waco1947 said:

whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

I don't take the Fifth like Dear leader
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You are the weak minded who will get him nominated for 2024, just like Dems want
Yup, Oso has gone squirmy and sweaty, like Hunter when he first heard about a search warrant.
Old Fifth Amendment Leader has your loyalty to the bitter end
You oppose Americans using their Constitutional rights.

Noted.
Dear Leader did.

'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?' Trump's position on declining to testify has changed over time.
Over the years, former President Donald J. Trump has generally criticized other politicians for taking the Fifth Amendment. But on Wednesday, he invoked the right himself during a deposition at the office of the New York attorney general, and it wasn't the first time.
Mr. Trump previously contended that invoking one's Fifth Amendment rights was virtually an admission of wrongdoing.
"So there are five people taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" Mr. Trump said at a rally in Iowa in 2016, referring to investigations into Hillary Clinton's handling of potentially classified material as secretary of state.
Soon after, at a presidential debate, Mr. Trump doubled down on criticizing Ms. Clinton for using a private email server as secretary of state, again referencing the Fifth Amendment. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth, so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful," he said.
Yet in 1998, he suggested that President Bill Clinton should have done just that during the impeachment investigation into Clinton. "It's a terrible thing for a president to take the Fifth Amendment, but he probably should have done it. I don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened," Trump said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was singing a different tune, however, when he arrived at the New York attorney general's office in downtown Manhattan to give sworn testimony for a civil inquiry into his business practices.
In a statement emailed just before the questioning started, Mr. Trump acknowledged his shifting positions over the years, but said circumstances had changed. He portrayed himself as the victim of politically motivated investigations, not just by the New York attorney general, but by the Justice Department and other prosecutors who he asserted "have lost all moral and ethical bounds of decency."
"I once asked, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'" he wrote. "Now I know the answer to that question. When your family, your company, and all the people in your orbit have become the targets of an unfounded, politically motivated Witch Hunt supported by lawyers, prosecutors, and the Fake News Media, you have no choice."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/nyregion/trump-fifth-amendment-comments.html

Don't be foolish. I will take the fifth on anything above a traffic stop, because I am a Republican elected official. I might trust the local cop, but I can't control what Feds might do with anything I say. See the Missouri and Roku examples posted here. (insert the proverbial "we are not in Kansas anymore" here.

After they get thru with Trump, they'll come for his supporters. And after they're done with them, they'll come for you. You've inconveniently spoken & voted & donated too many times over the years to be trusted. And after they're done with you, they'll come after our center-left friends who are uncomfortable with what they're seeing but going along with it because they think Trump is the bigger problem at the moment. And after that, they'll start measuring levels of enthusiasm among true believers.

that's the way these things go.
Until they are stopped.
and they will be.
Everyone will remember who stopped it and who played along with it, too.

They will come for the law breakers
define lawbreakers.
people who disagree with them..
winner winner chicken dinner
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

4th and Inches said:

At the end of his presidency, Barack Obama trucked 30 million pages of his administration's records to Chicago...More than five years after Obama's presidency ended, the National Archives webpage reveals that zero pages have been digitized & disclosed..

Obama is a Dem and aint running for office so nobody cares..
Historians certainly care. The DOJ doesn't care because, unlike Trump, Obama is cooperating with NARA and they're the ones in charge of digitizing the documents. So it's a very different situation from what Cruz would have you believe.
of course the Obama situation is different from the Trump situation. Obama is a Democrat and Trump is a Republican. Ergo, Obama can be trusted to do that right thing and must be exempted from the law in order to protect the institution; while Trump is a authoritarian threat to democracy and must be held to highest levels of legal exactitude in order to protect democracy.

That repressive tolerance is noble work, I tell you, particularly when you throw the tolerance part of it out the window.

whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Canada2017 said:

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

How in the world did Christopher Wray get put in charge of the KBG aka FBI? Thats the clown we should all blame for this.
Does not the director of the FBI have to follow the orders of the Attorney General ?
Comey didn't. HE made the decision not to investigate HIllary.
Canada2017
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

whiterock said:

Osodecentx said:

I don't take the Fifth like Dear leader
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

You are the weak minded who will get him nominated for 2024, just like Dems want
Yup, Oso has gone squirmy and sweaty, like Hunter when he first heard about a search warrant.
Old Fifth Amendment Leader has your loyalty to the bitter end
You oppose Americans using their Constitutional rights.

Noted.
Dear Leader did.

'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?' Trump's position on declining to testify has changed over time.
Over the years, former President Donald J. Trump has generally criticized other politicians for taking the Fifth Amendment. But on Wednesday, he invoked the right himself during a deposition at the office of the New York attorney general, and it wasn't the first time.
Mr. Trump previously contended that invoking one's Fifth Amendment rights was virtually an admission of wrongdoing.
"So there are five people taking the Fifth Amendment, like you see on the mob, right? You see the mob takes the Fifth. If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?" Mr. Trump said at a rally in Iowa in 2016, referring to investigations into Hillary Clinton's handling of potentially classified material as secretary of state.
Soon after, at a presidential debate, Mr. Trump doubled down on criticizing Ms. Clinton for using a private email server as secretary of state, again referencing the Fifth Amendment. "When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the Fifth, so they're not prosecuted, when you have the man that set up the illegal server taking the Fifth, I think it's disgraceful," he said.
Yet in 1998, he suggested that President Bill Clinton should have done just that during the impeachment investigation into Clinton. "It's a terrible thing for a president to take the Fifth Amendment, but he probably should have done it. I don't think he could have done any worse than what's happened," Trump said.
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump was singing a different tune, however, when he arrived at the New York attorney general's office in downtown Manhattan to give sworn testimony for a civil inquiry into his business practices.
In a statement emailed just before the questioning started, Mr. Trump acknowledged his shifting positions over the years, but said circumstances had changed. He portrayed himself as the victim of politically motivated investigations, not just by the New York attorney general, but by the Justice Department and other prosecutors who he asserted "have lost all moral and ethical bounds of decency."
"I once asked, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'" he wrote. "Now I know the answer to that question. When your family, your company, and all the people in your orbit have become the targets of an unfounded, politically motivated Witch Hunt supported by lawyers, prosecutors, and the Fake News Media, you have no choice."
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/10/nyregion/trump-fifth-amendment-comments.html

Don't be foolish. I will take the fifth on anything above a traffic stop, because I am a Republican elected official. I might trust the local cop, but I can't control what Feds might do with anything I say. See the Missouri and Roku examples posted here. (insert the proverbial "we are not in Kansas anymore" here.

After they get thru with Trump, they'll come for his supporters. And after they're done with them, they'll come for you. You've inconveniently spoken & voted & donated too many times over the years to be trusted. And after they're done with you, they'll come after our center-left friends who are uncomfortable with what they're seeing but going along with it because they think Trump is the bigger problem at the moment. And after that, they'll start measuring levels of enthusiasm among true believers.

that's the way these things go.
Until they are stopped.
and they will be.
Everyone will remember who stopped it and who played along with it, too.
That's fine. Did you ever say, 'If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?'

I have no problem with criminals taking the nickel. Just pointing out Dear Leaders' quote from the little red book
I used to think that way.

I'm wiser now.
With all the flagrant entrapment being employed by governmental minions these days.....only a fool would not automatically take the 5th .

Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Poor Sam. If the raiders had found anything, it would have been leaked to the media by now.

So ... yet another nothing burger.

Sound, fury, then flatulence, with apologies to Will S.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
J.B.Katz
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Since Monday's search of Mar-a-Lago by the FBI, Trump, Trump supporters, and right-wing media have all been accusing the government of executing a political vendetta and speculating that FBI agents might have planted evidence on the property.

Yesterday, Garland announced that the unjustified attacks on the Department of Justice have led it to file a motion to unseal the search warrant the FBI used and a redacted version of the receipt for the things removed from the premises. He also confirmed that copies of the warrant and the property receipt were left with Trump, as regulations require. Had Trump wanted to release them, he could have…and he still can, at any time.

Contrary to right-wing reports, Trump's lawyer was at Mar-a-Lago during the search, which a federal court authorized after finding probable cause. Garland personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant, and he also pointed out that the DOJ did not publicize the search; Trump did. Because of the public interest in the matterand to clear up confusion over itthe DOJ is asking a judge to unseal the documents.

Garland defended FBI agents against attacks on them, saying, "The men and women of the FBI and the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Every day they protect the American people from violent crime, terrorism, and other threats to their safety while safeguarding our civil rights. They do so at great personal sacrifice and risk to themselves."

Garland explained the principle at stake. "Faithful adherence to the rule of law is the bedrock principle of the Justice Department and of our democracy. Upholding the rule of law means applying the law evenly, without fear or favor. Under my watch that is precisely what the Justice Department is doing. All Americans are entitled to the evenhanded application of the law, to due process of the law, and to the presumption of innocence."

He also reminded people that "the Department of Justice will speak through its court filings and its work."

The DOJ motion to unseal the search warrant was signed by U.S. Attorney Juan Gonzalez and by Jay Bratt, the chief of the department's counterintelligence section.

The motion also throws the ball into Trump's court, saying "the former President should have an opportunity to respond to this Motion and lodge objections…."

This boxes Trump in. He and his supporters have been demanding the documents be released, although the DOJ cannot release them and Trump can.

This motion means that the DOJ has made a strong case to get permission to release them…unless Trump objects. Essentially, the DOJ just called his bluff.

At the New York Times, Katie Benner reported that already "Trump allies are discussing the possibility of challenging the Justice Department's motion to unseal the Mar-a-Lago search warrant. They have contacted outside lawyers about helping them."

This should play out quickly: yesterday a judge told the DOJ to discuss with Trump's lawyer whether Trump objects to unsealing the documents and to let the judge know by 3 p.m. today. Last night, Trump said he would not oppose the document's release, but he didn't release them himself.

Another right-wing talking point about the search fell apart today as well. Fox News Channel personalities have argued that the Justice Department should simply have issued a subpoena for the material. "Get a subpoena, he will give it back," Jesse Watters said. "It's not like Trump won't cooperate." But in fact it turns out the DOJ did deliver a subpoena two months ago, and the former president did not comply.

For all the loud protests of Trump supporters over the search, other Republicanseven ones who were previously Team Trumpseem to be backing away. Today, Fox News Channel contributor and former White House press secretary for President George W. Bush Ari Fleischer tweeted: "One thing I can't wrap my arms around: If Trump had classified documents, why didn't he give them back? Maybe he thought they were declassified. Maybe he thought it was government overreach. But if, for whatever reason, you have a classified document at home, you give it back."

For his part, Trump tried to suggest his own retention of documents was not nearly as bad as that of former president Barack Obama, who, Trump alleged, took "33 Million pages of documents…to Chicago." He is referring to the materials for the Obama presidential library, which have been moved from the National Archives and Records Administration with its permission and cooperation.

Tonight, Devlin Barrett, Josh Dawsey, Perry Stein, and Shane Harris at the Washington Post broke the story that the FBI agents at Mar-a-Lago were looking for documents relating to nuclear weapons, underscoring that the search was imperative.

But what springs to mind is the plan pushed by Trump's first national security advisor, Michael Flynn, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and fundraiser and campaign advisor Tom Barrack, to transfer nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. In 2019, whistleblowers from the National Security Council worried that their efforts might have broken the law and that the effort to make the transfer was ongoing. The plan was to enable Saudi leaders to build nuclear power plants, a plan that would have yielded billions of dollars to the investors but would have allowed Saudi Arabia to build nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, Zachary Cohen, Jamie Gangel, Sara Murray and Pamela Brown of CNN report that the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol has interviewed the former secretary of transportation in the Trump administration, Elaine Chao, and is in discussions with former education secretary Betsy DeVos and former national security advisor Robert O'Brien. Former secretary of state Mike Pompeo met with the committee on Tuesday. At least nine Cabinet-level officials either have talked to the committee or are negotiating the terms of interviews. One of the topics has been the attempt to remove Trump through the 25th Amendment after the events of January 6.

The lies about the FBI and the January 6th attack on the Capitol came together today and took a life. Ricky Walter Shiffer, who appears to have been at the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, shot into the FBI field office in Cincinnati with a nail gun this morning while brandishing an AR-15-style weapon. After the attack, he took refuge in a cornfield, where law enforcement officers killed him this afternoon.

source: Heather Cox Richardson
Booray
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Or different in that Obama complied with the law and Trump did not.

I am sure it hurt to have that small detail pointed out.
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Too early in the day for word salad, especially one already gone rancid like that one.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Oldbear83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Booray said:

Or different in that Obama complied with the law and Trump did not.

I am sure it hurt to have that small detail pointed out.
Obama as patron of Law and Order?

That's funny!!
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.