# Raid on President Trump's Home



## Marauder06 (Aug 9, 2022)

Starting a new thread on this out of *the "Feds" one* because I suspect this situation going to be a long and complex and I don't want to derail the general discussion on Federal law enforcement about this specific case.

Also, a lot of people are going to feel a lot of different ways about this.  That's OK.  What's not OK is acting like a jerk about it when you're expressing those feelings on the site.  Please keep things civil.

We don't have mods anymore so I won't be able to remove individual posts, so if things get out of hand I'll have to delete the whole thread.  Ad I really don't want to do that.  This is a significant event in our country, with long-lasting repercussions, which I hope we can discuss in a reasonable manner.

*This article* sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well. Looking forward to hearing yours.



> excerpt:
> _I think the Democrats might have overreached with this one, though. While this will definitely excite the Democrats’ radical base, I think they may have gone to the Trump well one too many times to carry their political water. This action is going to create an enormous scandal that will energize Trump and his growing crowd of supporters and make him a martyr to them. As we saw over the course of history, from Jesus to George Floyd, martyrdom is a very useful thing for politics, politicians, and social movements._


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 9, 2022)

I am appalled, makes madder than hell.  "If." If they only held all the politicians and .gov employees to the same standard.  If he did something illegal, and they have evidence, let him shoulder the blame.  But if what he did was no worse than a former presidential candidate's laptop, a current president's son's laptop, Sandy Berger's mishandling classified information, yadda yadda yadda, then why are you going all "SWAT-and raid" and guarding the entrance with ARs when you did not do that to everyone else?

Until something compelling or evidentiary comes out I think this is political and little else.  The timing makes me skeptical, and way too many coincidences with other things going on.


----------



## Jaknight (Aug 9, 2022)

Not surprised by this at all. My feeling is they were always going to go full force after him to guarantee he doesn’t run again. They did this for the fence sitters to convince them Trump really is the great white evil


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 9, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> Starting a new thread on this out of *the "Feds" one* because I suspect this situation going to be a long and complex and I don't want to derail the general discussion on Federal law enforcement about this specific case.
> 
> Also, a lot of people are going to feel a lot of different ways about this.  That's OK.  What's not OK is acting like a jerk about it when you're expressing those feelings on the site.  Please keep things civil.
> 
> ...



RE: the article, I was talking recently to a republican never-Trumper, and even he is starting to say the democrats are psycho and acting like they have an axe to grind and Trump is not deserving of their 'treatment'.....


----------



## Gunz (Aug 9, 2022)

90 days to a midterm election that the democrats are afraid they’ll lose because everything is, well, pretty fucked up. So they’re in panic mode. They’re happy the USSC nixed Roe vs Wade because they need that as a rallying point. But the economy still sucks and people vote their pocketbooks. And then there’s Trump, their Baba Yaga, their bogeyman. So they’ve weaponized the bureaucracy to go after him. They’re going to fire every smoking gun they can find even if they have to conjure them up out of thin air.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 9, 2022)

Jaknight said:


> Not surprised by this at all. My feeling is they were always going to go full force after him to guarantee he doesn’t run again. They did this for the fence sitters to convince them Trump really is the great white evil


That's kind of what I'm thinking.  Roe getting overturned was, IMO, the thing that might have helped save the Dems from a red flood in the mid-terms. However, that doesn't seem to be moving the needle the way a lot of people (including me) thought it would.  The Jan 6 hearings also appear to be a bust.  Literally the only thing left in their quiver is pushing the "Trump is bad" button.




Also, I'm open to having my mind changed on this.  Maybe there really is some super-sketchy, "this is really unique and no where near what others have done" things going on.  But I doubt it.


----------



## AWP (Aug 9, 2022)

Maybe I'm dumb, maybe I'm jaded, or maybe I just don't care, but I look forward to seeing what the raid produced. What did the warrant say they thought they would find vs. what they actually found? What charges, if any, are brought?

I think Trump and his brand of authoritarianism are bad for America, bad for the Republican party, bad for the world to be frank. What I don't want to see is the guy get railroaded. This isn't just about Trump, as much as people would like you to think, the office of the president...ALL of them, is kind of at stake here. Of course, the anti-Trump crowd are bleating and cawing and practically dancing in the street because this is what they want, this is what they believe to be true. I believe if I just had a few hours with Crazy Kate Beckinsale I could get her on Team A-dub, but that doesn't make it REAL or viable or anything beyond a fever dream.

Until someone "shows me the money" I'll assume PT Barnum's ghost is selling tickets to the show.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

I think the Dems just keep making Ass's out of themselves.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

AWP said:


> Maybe I'm dumb, maybe I'm jaded, or maybe I just don't care, but I look forward to seeing what the raid produced. What did the warrant say they thought they would find vs. what they actually found? What charges, if any, are brought?


You’re naive.

Go read the FISA warrant for Carter Page: the entire thing was fraudulent yet approved by a judge…and renewed 3 times by a judge.

Trump will be indicted for X. Take it to the bank.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 9, 2022)

At the end of the day, this just wasn't the way to handle things - even if there was "something" to it. We have stooped to a new low as a nation...


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

I wouldnt put anything past these folks. They hate Trump and now he's ruining their chances at reelection to the swamp. Some of these Reps have either been drained, or, are getting or have been primaried simply because of their inability to the see the forrest. Their feelings are hurt, The DOJ is theirs, and they want some butt.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

I'm waiting to see what exactly this was about. The story about it just being over boxes of records from the National Archive really makes the actions taken by the FBI seem overblown.

There are a number of investigations Trump is facing, but it really doesn't seem like the trigger should be pulled on something like this unless the FBI director and DOJ leadership at large are 100% sure they're gonna find something of significance. 




AWP said:


> I think Trump and his brand of authoritarianism are bad for America, bad for the Republican party, bad for the world to be frank. What I don't want to see is the guy get railroaded.



Fully agree with this. A lot of people are disregarding the Jan 6th committee hearings as political theater (which is fair to an extent), but the one agreed upon fact is that we had a lame duck President who was attempting to prevent a lawful election from taking place, through knowingly dubious legal maneuvering and unverified/knowingly false fraud information. 
People think they hate authoritarianism/fascism until the person in charge is on their team. 

That doesn't mean you get to make him into a political prisoner. Doing that just ensures that the pendulum swings with even more momentum in the other direction. 
If the pendulum keeps swinging more and more, we're only a few elections away from getting ourselves a Lukashenko, Bolsanoro, Putin, Maduro, etc. The sad thing is half of the voting population would support said leader.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> but the one agreed upon fact is that we had a lame duck President who was attempting to prevent a lawful election from taking place, through knowingly dubious legal maneuvering and unverified/knowingly false fraud information


I disagree that this is an agreed upon fact.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Topkick said:


> I disagree that this is an agreed upon fact.


Cool. Allow me to quote myself


Cookie_ said:


> People think they hate authoritarianism/fascism until the person in charge is on their team.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I'm waiting to see what exactly this was about. The story about it just being over boxes of records from the National Archive really makes the actions taken by the FBI seem overblown.
> 
> There are a number of investigations Trump is facing, but it really doesn't seem like the trigger should be pulled on something like this unless the FBI director and DOJ leadership at large are 100% sure they're gonna find something of significance.
> 
> ...



The election took place in Nov. The J6 show trial was focused on actions taken by others with innuendo that “Trump did it all!” in Jan the following year to certify the results.

Precision here matters.

It’s sad that you appear to be casting judgement on your preconceived notions of half the voting population. It (the adversarial nature) the best thing about our politics as it requires each candidate to bring their best foot forward. If not, we’d have Sanders, Pocahontas, or Harris going after their political enemies.

I disagree that people hate authoritarians; Americans deep throated the shit out of any COVID decree and libs poured baby blood on themselves, begging to be governed harder.

”4 more years!” of this USG shitshow & you all yootz can have it.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

@Cookie_ you can brush me off but I'm not arguing that the election was stolen. Polls show that nearly half of America does not believe Biden won. So, no, its not an agreed upon fact. 

ETA I'll leave it at that. I dont want to take this thread down the wrong road.


----------



## TLDR20 (Aug 9, 2022)

Maybe let’s see what the warrant was for and what they found.

Does everyone think that the threat of an armed standoff was outside the realm of possibility? Not with Trump, I don’t think that is why this was done that way, but with his supporters? The kind of people who might storm the capitol?


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Topkick said:


> @Cookie_ I'm not arguing that the election was stolen, but polls show that nearly half of America does not believe Biden won. So, no, its not an agreed upon fact. Thats the only point I am making.
> 
> ETA I'll leave it at that. I dont want to take this thread down the wrong road.


Gotcha.

I'm talking specifically about The Eastman memos, which was the plan to have Pence refuse electors from a number of states so Trump could be declared President. This is after a number of audits in states failed to find any sort of fraud.

They even acknowledged that the legal theory likely wouldn't stand up if it made it to the Supreme Court, but they were hoping that wouldn't happen.

Anything else fraud wise definitely still has questions, so I understand your perspective there.

@Brill I think we are in agreement about authoritarianism.

I think that the majority of Americans would claim to not support an Authoritarian leader; I also think those same Americans would support it if that leader was of their political party.


----------



## Kaldak (Aug 9, 2022)

I'm sure he has the Area-51 alien files at the resort! That's why the heavy handed execution of the warrant. 



Cookie_ said:


> I'm waiting to see what exactly this was about. The story about it just being over boxes of records from the National Archive really makes the actions taken by the FBI seem overblown.



In all seriousness, I am going to reserve judgements until we see the warrant, and what was actually found.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> This is after a number of audits in states failed to find any sort of fraud.


Demonstrably false: none of the cases were tried in 2020 but dismissed on procedural grounds. The cases that went forward, had a majority seeing that State’s laws were in fact violated (mostly court rulings for COVID waivers were illegal).

AZ, WI, GA, & PA were all adjudicated only RECENTLY.


----------



## AWP (Aug 9, 2022)

Maybe most of y’all are fine with authoritarianism, but I bristle when some drive- thru czar refuses to give me extra horsey sauce at Arby’s.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

TLDR20 said:


> Maybe let’s see what the warrant was for and what they found.
> 
> Does everyone think that the threat of an armed standoff was outside the realm of possibility? Not with Trump, I don’t think that is why this was done that way, but with his supporters? The kind of people who might storm the capitol?



But not the kind of people who would burn poor neighborhoods cuz oppression something something during a global pandemic that magically was contagious pending group’s political leanings: 

BLM & Antifa - immune from COVID 
Anything conservative - superspreader events

BLM riots in summer of ‘20 killed 20-25
J6 riots killed one


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Brill said:


> Demonstrably false: none of the cases were tried in 2020 but dismissed on procedural grounds. The cases that went forward, had a majority seeing that State’s laws were in fact violated (mostly court rulings for COVID waivers were illegal).
> 
> AZ, WI, GA, & PA were all adjudicated only RECENTLY.



I used audit thinking about recounts, which IIRC had occurred in the majority of disputed states prior to the 6th.

You're right that the (substantiated) legal challenges hadn't occurred yet.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 9, 2022)

Brill said:


> Demonstrably false: none of the cases were tried in 2020 but dismissed on procedural grounds. The cases that went forward, had a majority seeing that State’s laws were in fact violated (mostly court rulings for COVID waivers were illegal).
> 
> AZ, WI, GA, & PA were all adjudicated only RECENTLY.


“You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take”
-Wayne Gretzky 



       -Michael Scott


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

So the White House is claiming Biden wasn't aware the raid was happening. 
I get that Joe is basically a walking corpse at this point, but you think they'd at least pretend he remembered about it.

Jokes aside, this won't make anyone think this is somehow less of a political thing. I see two likely scenarios, and neither of them are good.

Scenario 1. The White House legit didn't know the FBI was going to raid Trump. It'd be likely Director Wray didn't tell the WH so that it wasn't seen as a political action, but this isn't a normal situation. 
Republicans(rightly) see this as another example of FBI/Intel agencies acting without oversight.

Scenario 2. White House is lying, and trying to use the fact that the FBI Director is a lifelong Republican/Federalist Society member as a shield. Biden knew but is trying to make it seem apolitical. Again, this blows up when it (inevitably) gets leaked in hours/days.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

Not a good look.

Judge who green-lit raid at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home donated thousands to Obama


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Not a good look.
> 
> Judge who green-lit raid at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home donated thousands to Obama



This whole thing is gonna be weird. There's gonna be a lot of "this official support party x, but these guys support party y" stuff.

Who is Christopher Wray, the FBI director who (probably) authorised Mar-a-Lago search


----------



## TLDR20 (Aug 9, 2022)

Brill said:


> But not the kind of people who would burn poor neighborhoods cuz oppression something something during a global pandemic that magically was contagious pending group’s political leanings:
> 
> BLM & Antifa - immune from COVID
> Anything conservative - superspreader events
> ...



What does that have to do with what I said?

What is the essence of force protection? Be prepared right?


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> This whole thing is gonna be weird. There's gonna be a lot of "this official support party x, but these guys support party y" stuff.
> 
> Who is Christopher Wray, the FBI director who (probably) authorised Mar-a-Lago search


Whataboutism


----------



## Kaldak (Aug 9, 2022)

More interesting to me is the page with the judge's official .gov bio is now restricted. 

https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/content/judge-bruce-e-reinhart


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Fully agree with this. A lot of people are disregarding the Jan 6th committee hearings as political theater (which is fair to an extent), but *the one agreed upon fact is that we had a lame duck President who was attempting to prevent a lawful election from taking place, through knowingly dubious legal maneuvering and unverified/knowingly false fraud information.*


"Agreed upon" by whom?  Given the information available at the time, the emotions, and the rampant fraud and disinformation going around during the election, the possibility of widespread election fraud seemed entirely plausible.  Also, if the president was a lame duck, how was he going to prevent a lawful election from taking place?  The election was already over.  And finally, if we're all in agreement on this, why the hearings?

After you have a chance to respond to the above (if you choose to do so) I'd like to shift the focus back to the FBI raid.


----------



## AWP (Aug 9, 2022)

Kaldak said:


> More interesting to me is the page with the judge's official .gov bio is now restricted.
> 
> https://www.flsd.uscourts.gov/content/judge-bruce-e-reinhart



He also represented 4-5 members of Camp Epstein resulting in their being granted immunity from prosecution.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Whataboutism


"This guy supported Obama"

"Yea, and the FBI Director is a Republican appointed by Trump"

So we agree that their personal politics shouldn't be the focus?

Cool.



Marauder06 said:


> "Agreed upon" by whom?  Given the information available at the time, the emotions, and the rampant fraud and disinformation going around during the election, the possibility of widespread election fraud seemed entirely plausible.  Also, if the president was a lame duck, how was he going to prevent a lawful election from taking place?  The election was already over.  And finally, if we're all in agreement on this, why the hearings?
> 
> After you have a chance to respond to the above (if you choose to do so) I'd like to shift the focus back to the FBI raid.



I linked it earlier in the page, so you may not have seen it.

I was specifically talking about the Eastman Memos, which came to official public knowledge during the hearings.

It was an attempt to argue VP Pence had legal authority to throw out slates of electors in contested states, thereby declaring President Trump elected. 

It was a knowingly dubious legal argument that those involved said likely wouldn't past muster at the supreme court, but they were confident challenges wouldn't make it that far.

I understand most people on this board are opposite the political spectrum from me, but it's crazy how few people seem to care that those employed by the former president were drawing up legal arguments to conduct a coup d'teat.

That's why I bring it up in regards to the FBI raid. It makes more sense to be something involved regarding that then mishandled documents


----------



## Jaknight (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> "This guy supported Obama"
> 
> "Yea, and the FBI Director is a Republican appointed by Trump"
> 
> ...


I think there was a lot of shadiness on both sides during the election and maybe this raid is gonna reveal more of the Trump side.  What I think is most likely to be is this just theater for the midterms.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> This guy supported Obama"
> 
> "Yea, and the FBI Director is a Republican appointed by Trump"
> 
> So we agree that their personal politics shouldn't be the focus?



Political leanings matter but I'm okay with whataboutism. It works. Now do Liz Cheney.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 9, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> "This guy supported Obama"
> 
> "Yea, and the FBI Director is a Republican appointed by Trump"
> 
> ...



I'm not defending any actions but if we're playing these games, lets put some context on the table. The Democrat's, literally spent Trumps entire presidency trying to prove the Russians helped him get elected in an illegitimate election.  Because their chosen idiot, Hillary, had bullshit intelligence made up to to start it all before the election. 

It doesn't matter what side, your politics are fucked and it has spread around the world.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

TLDR20 said:


> What does that have to do with what I said?
> 
> What is the essence of force protection? Be prepared right?



My point was YOU loved you some Steele dossier shit (forget about the Alfa bank bullshit that you SWORE was legit & I said…repeatedly with sourced material…that it, the ENTIRE Trump/Russia shit was garbage while you drank nightly from the Racheal Maddox cup of “knowledge“.

Now you’re team “let’s see what the warrant says & findings of the FBI”???? Where is “the walls are closing in!!!!”

Democrats, progressives, libs, socialists, whatever your side is called today based on feels started this entire shit of weaponizing the DOJ & IC to neuter your political rivals. Embrace it.


----------



## Brill (Aug 9, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Political leanings matter…


Dude, that is ALL that matter in the upper & middle echelons of the IC; every agency too. Nobody is immune.


----------



## TLDR20 (Aug 9, 2022)

Brill said:


> My point was YOU loved you some Steele dossier shit (forget about the Alfa bank bullshit that you SWORE was legit & I said…repeatedly with sourced material…that it, the ENTIRE Trump/Russia shit was garbage while you drank nightly from the Racheal Maddox cup of “knowledge“.
> 
> Now you’re team “let’s see what the warrant says & findings of the FBI”???? Where is “the walls are closing in!!!!”
> 
> Democrats, progressives, libs, socialists, whatever your side is called today based on feels started this entire shit of weaponizing the DOJ & IC to neuter your political rivals. Embrace it.



I’ve never watched Rachel Maddow in my life but cool. 

Sometimes peoples views on matters change as evidence is presented. Maybe after 6ish years my views have shifted somewhat. 

I don’t know what Alfa bank is, I’ve never even heard of that. 

You literally do not know me. I haven’t posted on this site since 2017, until 4 months ago. 

I’ll go back through my posts and try and find what you are talking about. I’m willing to take an L if I “SWORE” anything was true.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 9, 2022)

It would be really great if this thread could stay on track.


----------



## AWP (Aug 9, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It would be really great if this thread could stay on track.



My sweet summer child, this is Shadowspear.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 9, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It would be really great if this thread could stay on track.




I think the only time the political threads stayed on track was when you and the other mods could lock it for a bit when the personal attacks got out of hand.


----------



## Kaldak (Aug 10, 2022)

Sad take.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It would be really great if this thread could stay on track.


I agree with you brother. 

As an aside, the people derailing this thread are the same ones who shilled 'MSM talking points' over the past few years regarding SpyGate, the Hunter Biden Laptop, Russian Collusion, etc. Same people quashed, derailed, and attacked conversations regarding govt corruption as information was coming out.

Given the events and people behind the raid at Mar A Lago, I think there is going to be significant chaff from demoralized members of the community who may or may not have stakes in keeping the information sphere muddled.

That said, there are some interesting connections between the people who signed off on the raid.



Spoiler: Judge and Epstein



Judge who OK’d Mar-a-Lago raid Obama donor once linked to Jeffrey Epstein

From the article:










Spoiler: Deleted tweet/account



Twitter Suspends NYPost writer, Paul Sperry. Behold his final tweet: - TheDonald


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> View attachment 40208
> 
> I think the only time the political threads stayed on track was when you and the other mods could lock it for a bit when the personal attacks got out of hand.



We don't need Mods. We need to act like adults and police ourselves. Be intellectually honest, civil, and not so thin-skinned. If you make political statements, expect some discourse.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

Topkick said:


> We don't need Mods. We need to act like adults and police ourselves. Be intellectually honest, civil, and not so thin-skinned. If you make political statements, expect some discourse.


I think we need mods.  People are incapable of civilly governing themselves in the absence of coercive consequences, and I'm  not limiting that statement to this site.

At any rate, this situation (the Trump one, not the "could you just not be an asshole for once" one in this thread) is fascinating to me.  Was Trump actually planning to run again in 2024?  Does this latest incident change that equation?  Did the Democrats time this deliberately to influence that decision ahead of the midterms?  Will this have any impact on the coming elections, and if so, what will that impact be?

Happy to hear thoughts on any of the above questions.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I think we need mods. People are incapable of civilly governing themselves in the absence of coercive consequences, and I'm not limiting that statement to this site.


The problem I've seen here with Mods is that they are people too. Their bias often shows through as much as anyone.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I think we need mods.  People are incapable of civilly governing themselves in the absence of coercive consequences, and I'm  not limiting that statement to this site.
> 
> At any rate, this situation (the Trump one, not the "could you just not be an asshole for once" one in this thread) is fascinating to me.  Was Trump actually planning to run again in 2024?  Does this latest incident change that equation?  Did the Democrats time this deliberately to influence that decision ahead of the midterms?  Will this have any impact on the coming elections, and if so, what will that impact be?
> 
> Happy to hear thoughts on any of the above questions.



I think Trump has talked around (running in 2024), coming up to the line without actually crossing it.  This incident does change the equation in that anything that comes out with any charge may prohibit him from running (per USC).  Was this an early panic button/October Surprise?  Dunno.  
I see the impact one of two ways (well, really one of three):  galvanizes the left, galvanizes the right, galvanizes both.  I agree with previous comment (@Grunt ??) that Trump is the democrats Baba Yaga (_after all it was HIS judges that overturned Roe V Wade!_, said clutching my pearls), and their recourse is either get him out now so they can game plan, or go all-in on crushing and vilifying him.

I have a hard time figuring out timing: was this the plan for now?  How long has this been in the works?  A week, a month, three months?  Did they do this now for a reason, vice a month from now?


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

I'm not sure Trump will run again. I think he just likes the game. He enjoys the headlines, and most of all he seems to like fucking with their heads. I think its working, making the Dems heads explode trying to figure out how to remove him from the picture permanently.


----------



## 757 (Aug 10, 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1556990308424028163
On today's episode of stranger than fiction...


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 10, 2022)

757 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1556990308424028163
> On today's episode of stranger than fiction...



Can't open...what does it say??


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> Can't open...what does it say??


Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo calling out the Dems to make the rationale behind the raid public.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo calling out the Dems to make the rationale behind the raid public.



Thanks.  He is reading the tea leaves I think. He sees the narrative and know how this can blow up and hurt the democrats.


----------



## AWP (Aug 10, 2022)

This is delicious, this is like a Boston cream doughnut to a fat kid, aka me. This is a bowl of chili on a crisp, winter's day. No amount of mom's mac n cheese could warm me like this story.

We have a guy, a sexual predator, who murdered hundreds of elderly because he mismanaged the COVID crisis, with a brother who worked for a major news organization that actively covered for him, calling on his party who hates the subject of the investigation, for the transparent accounting of this nonsense IOT avoid a hint of political impropriety?

I don't care if the above is a massive run on sentence. This story is amazing!


----------



## Steve1839 (Aug 10, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> Thanks.  He is reading the tea leaves I think. He sees the narrative and know how this can blow up and hurt the democrats.


Agreed...and I suspect there's a good deal of fear, should turn-about be fair play...I suspect there are skeletons in many closets on both sides of the aisle...


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> Was Trump actually planning to run again in 2024? Does this latest incident change that equation? Did the Democrats time this deliberately to influence that decision ahead of the midterms? Will this have any impact on the coming elections, and if so, what will that impact be?


1. I'd have put the odds in the upper 80s that Trump would run. I think the midterm results of his backed candidates would have been what determines whether he fully commits or just plays on the outside influence angle.

2. I think the only way this changes the above is if criminal charges come out of this.

3. This is the really interesting question to me, because there are a number of groups that might want him out. If the Dems did this, they have to really hope charges come from this and expand beyond Trump into his network.  That's the only way the likely surge in GOP voter base becomes an acceptable risk. To cross thread an example, there's a theory that the Dobbs decision was leaked because Roberts was trying to get Kavanaugh to preserve Roe. The idea is that the leak ensured Kavanaugh stayed in line with the other conservative justices, even though it would get Dems out in force politically.  Maybe it's the same thing here; a big political win at the expense of motivating the opposing base.

There's also the possibility that, as @Topkick mentioned earlier, that some never Trump Republicans are involved in this.  The official White House position is that Biden didn't know this was happening.  If that's truly the case, it could be that this is Never-Trumper thing; take out Trump and "save" the GOP.

Of course, it could be that there were no major background political machinations and this is just legit an up and up criminal investigation, but nobody would ever buy that, myself included. 

4. I don't know the outcome this will have on midterms. I'm sure in the immediate future there will be fundraising and outrage, but will that hold until November? The average voter seems to have a short attention span.



Topkick said:


> I'm not sure Trump will run again.* I think he just likes the game.* He enjoys the headlines, and most of all he seems to like fucking with their heads. I think its working, making the Dems heads explode trying to figure out how to remove him from the picture permanently.



I agree with the bolded statement. Trump is a narcist and he likes to flaunt that. Not that other politicians aren't(I think they all are to some degree), but he seems to take a bit more personal joy in it than others.  I'm not sure if he won't run though. I think it comes down to how much these legal cases against his business hurt him. He may decide it's better to step out of the spotlight from the  sort of scrutiny he's been put under since getting elected.



757 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1556990308424028163
> On today's episode of stranger than fiction...




Fuck Cuomo, but he's right.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> He may decide it's better to step out of the spotlight from the sort of scrutiny he's been put under since getting elected.


I think this is the objective of the anti-trumpsters. Combine all of those you mentioned and you have "the swamp"


----------



## 757 (Aug 10, 2022)

Since we don't have anything concrete at this point, I am going to operate off the assumption that the prevailing theory of "Trump took classified docs" is correct.

This case may be another example of 757's "throw it at the wall and hope that it sticks" theory. The most recent example of this is Roe V Wade. TLDR for that case, Mississippi (one of many states) made a law that limited abortion, it was challenged-appealed and made it to SCOTUS who then made the determination to DRASTICALLY alter the law.

Anyway, this case may follow a similar logic. We all know that POTUS has a plethora of protections and powers, but do those exist when he is out of office? If you ask 27 different lawyers you will probably get 13 different opinions. As far as I've researched, there really isn't a lot of precedent regarding classified docs and an ex-POTUS. which leads me to...

Precedent. One thing I've learned over the years is that when precedent has not been established...sometimes it's better not to engage because you can establish "bad precedent." In this case however, the risk of establishing bad precedent doesn't seem so bad. The code everyone seems to be harping on is 18 U.S. Code § 2071. Essentially, "Whoever, having the custody of any such record...shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States." You lose, former POTUS's can keep docs they had in the Oval...but if you win, Trump cannot run again.

If your goal is to prevent Trump from becoming POTUS again, this may be the "best" way to try and ensure that outcome.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 10, 2022)

757 said:


> Since we don't have anything concrete at this point, I am going to operate off the assumption that the prevailing theory of "Trump took classified docs" is correct.
> 
> This case may be another example of 757's "throw it at the wall and hope that it sticks" theory. The most recent example of this is Roe V Wade. TLDR for that case, Mississippi (one of many states) made a law that limited abortion, it was challenged-appealed and made it to SCOTUS who then made the determination to DRASTICALLY alter the law.
> 
> ...



I just read this, not 5 minutes ago:

Donald Trump Must Be The 2024 Republican Nominee

The author details 'the myths' of Trump having classified docs and therefore breaking the law.  I do not know the veracity of the author's assertions.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 10, 2022)

757 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1556990308424028163
> On today's episode of stranger than fiction...


Folks, you hate to see it.  Very sad!


----------



## 757 (Aug 10, 2022)

@Devildoc good read.

The one area I'm curious about from your article is, 

"The supposedly confidential papers stolen from Trump’s safe are not subject to the Federal Records Act because they are copies of papers that exist in other places. And _by definition_, if the President removes them from the White House to another place, they are no longer classified. His action, taken _before_ the new occupant was sworn in, was completely lawful. The act of removing them from a SCIF (Secure Compartmented Information Facility, e.g. the White House) by the only person lawfully empowered to do so, is not subject to prosecution."

Classified Information is weird and I don't feel like trying to figure out the layers that could be at play, though I'm inclined to agree with the above analysis based on practicality.

However, Bloomberg actually produced an interesting article about this whole thing with a section that really stood out, bolding my own.

"Presidents do have ultimate decision-making power over the classification of documents, and Trump could theoretically have declassified any records he removed from the White House. Indeed, former Trump National Security Council member Kash Patel has claimed Trump did just that before leaving office. *There is no set procedure for presidential declassification*, meaning that could be the basis for a defense if a case proceeds against Trump. *But even if Trump was found to have declassified documents, he could still potentially be prosecuted for removing or destroying them*. And Richard Painter, chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, points out that declassification of documents for an improper purpose could be a crime in itself. “If he declassified documents in order to remove them and destroy them, he’s destroying evidence, and that’s obstruction of justice or obstruction of Congress,” Painter said."

Do I think that will stick? Probably not, but its not about the odds, its about the stakes. Clinton was impeached because he got his willy washed and then lied about it, not for the stuff he was being investigated for...so anything seems possible. If they went in because "classified documents" but found something else and a judge says it's admissible...wellllllll, who knows.


----------



## AWP (Aug 10, 2022)

I’m waiting to hear an opinion from Clinton or Petraeus. If ever there were experts in handling classified documents within one’s home…


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 10, 2022)

757 said:


> Precedent. One thing I've learned over the years is that when precedent has not been established...sometimes it's better not to engage because you can establish "bad precedent." In this case however, the risk of establishing bad precedent doesn't seem so bad. The code everyone seems to be harping on is 18 U.S. Code § 2071. Essentially, "Whoever, having the custody of any such record...shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States." You lose, former POTUS's can keep docs they had in the Oval...but if you win, Trump cannot run again.
> 
> If your goal is to prevent Trump from becoming POTUS again, this may be the "best" way to try and ensure that outcome.



That's not the craziest idea. If Trump is the existential level threat that some Dem/Rep politicians make him out to be, then doing something with this much political blowback makes sense even if it galvanizes your opponents.



Devildoc said:


> I just read this, not 5 minutes ago:
> 
> Donald Trump Must Be The 2024 Republican Nominee
> 
> The author details 'the myths' of Trump having classified docs and therefore breaking the law. I do not know the veracity of the author's assertions.



I can't wrap my head around this idea that turning the Schedule F employee classification into at will employment is a good thing.

_(I'm mistaken. Schedule F was the classification Trump created that was at will employment, which was rescinded by Biden)_

Say Trump comes in a "drains the swamp" of all 50k such employees; what then?

Do all those agencies just absorb the lose of that many personnel and keep trucking along? Do they think they can replace all those people quickly?

Also, if there's anything that should be common sense in politics, it's that the rules are eventually used by the opposition.  Imagine if in 2028 President Ocasio-Cortez came in vowing to fire 50k staff and replace them with DemSocs; people would lose their shit.

ETA: I picked AOC for that example not because I think she'd ever win, but because she's gonna be the new Socialist boogeyman used to scare the GOP/Neolib Dems.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Imagine if in 2028 President Ocasio-Cortez came in vowing to fire 50k staff and replace them with DemSocs; people would lose their shit.


You are right on here. I agree. Elections have consequences, free and fair or not, as we are seeing right now. When Obama won fair and square, conservatives knew it and they ate it. The issue with Trump is that most conservatives don't believe Biden won. Although Trump supports this idea, its not something he created or owns. Most Conservatives are skeptical that Biden, of all people, could garner more votes than Trump or Obama ever did.


----------



## JED321 (Aug 10, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I'm waiting to see what exactly this was about. The story about it just being over boxes of records from the National Archive really makes the actions taken by the FBI seem overblown.
> 
> There are a number of investigations Trump is facing, but it really doesn't seem like the trigger should be pulled on something like this unless the FBI director and DOJ leadership at large are 100% sure they're gonna find something of significance.
> 
> ...


----------



## JED321 (Aug 10, 2022)

My money is riding on the likelihood the FBI did more planting of monitoring devices.  The search was just a Red Herring.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I can't wrap my head around this idea that turning the Schedule F employee classification into at will employment is a good thing.
> 
> *Say Trump comes in a "drains the swamp" of all 50k such employees; what then?*
> 
> Do all those agencies just absorb the lose of that many personnel and keep trucking along? Do they think they can replace all those people quickly?


The other *1,810,000+ other federal employees* start doing their jobs?


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

JED321 said:


> My money is riding on the likelihood the FBI did more planting of monitoring devices.  The search was just a Red Herring.


I was listening to Meghan Kelly while I was washing dishes tonight.  She mentioned that one of the things searched was Melania Trump's closet.  If that is true, how did they know to search there?


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I was listening to Meghan Kelly while I was washing dishes tonight.  She mentioned that one of the things searched was Melania Trump's closet.  If that is true, how did they know to search there?



Or if the warrant covers everything, why did they mention her closet specifically?  That weird.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

757 said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1556990308424028163
> On today's episode of stranger than fiction...


So I wanted to revisit this (fmr. Gov Cuomo's comments regarding the raid) for a moment.  Why would he do this?

Is he that mad at the Democrat party for his ouster that he's lashing out?

Is he desperately trying to stay relevant and in the political spotlight after his unceremonious fall from grace?

Does he already know that this was a legit(ish) action, and by coming up on the net help bolster Dems' claims that it's legit.

..."


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> Or if the warrant covers everything, why did they mention her closet specifically?  That weird.


That's a good point.  If this was a "we're looking everywhere" thing, this it's natural they would look in the former First Lady's closet.  This could be cherry-picking to make it seem more salacious.  "They even looked in... TRUMP'S PERSONAL BATHROOM!!"


----------



## Gunz (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I think we need mods.  People are incapable of civilly governing themselves in the absence of coercive consequences, and I'm  not limiting that statement to this site.
> 
> At any rate, this situation (the Trump one, not the "could you just not be an asshole for once" one in this thread) is fascinating to me.  Was Trump actually planning to run again in 2024?  Does this latest incident change that equation?  Did the Democrats time this deliberately to influence that decision ahead of the midterms?  Will this have any impact on the coming elections, and if so, what will that impact be?
> 
> Happy to hear thoughts on any of the above questions.



I hope Trump doesn’t run. But with his ego it’s probably inevitable that he will. And if so, the GOP convention is going to be a major shit show.

Whatever the reasons for the raid, you can’t reasonably discount politics as one of the catalysts. It played a part. I repeat…it played a part and nothing will convince me that it didn’t.

Was it deliberately timed? Every aspect of national politics in an critical election year is strategically timed.

Does the raid change the equation? I don’t think it changes anything. Trump is such a polarizing figure those who hate him will continue to hate him and those who support him will continue to support him.


----------



## DasBoot (Aug 10, 2022)

Honest question- 

What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind? 

What evidence needs to be provided that would lead you to believe this was warranted? What info would need to come out of this raid that would lead you believe the former president deserves to be brought up on charges? 

What source would have to report this information for you to believe it? Is there any outlet you trust to give you straightforward information regarding the former POTUS and any alleged crimes he may have committed?


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> Honest question-
> 
> What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
> 
> ...


Fair question. I think the Russia collusion debacle combined with a years long, empty handed feverish hatred from the MSM and the establishment has solidified a skepticism that is now nearly impenetrable. At this point, conservatives are likely going to question anything that the swamp claims Trump has done. They have made it pretty clear that they are out to get him.


----------



## compforce (Aug 10, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> What evidence needs to be provided that would lead you to believe this was warranted? What info would need to come out of this raid that would lead you believe the former president deserves to be brought up on charges?


[/QUOTE]
Honestly, regardless of which party did it or was in office, the precedent set by raiding a former POTUS' home has serious implications.  I didn't like or vote for Obama and yet if this was him being raided, it would take Treason level charges with enough evidence to virtually guarantee a conviction to warrant the...ummm... warrant.  He better have the damned nuclear launch codes in his possession.  Remember that once anything is done successfully in politics, it will happen repeatedly.  Sued over the hanging chads 20 years ago?  Now we have lawsuits every election on a continually grander scale.  If you don't think that every time the balance of power changes, the former office holder isn't going to have to deal with these types of shenanigans, you are dead wrong.  We've gone from the most admired and respected country in the world to the country everyone is laughing at behind our backs in a period of 20 years.  The only reason they aren't doing it directly to our faces is that we are still the most capable of projecting power globally.




DasBoot said:


> > What source would have to report this information for you to believe it? Is there any outlet you trust to give you straightforward information regarding the former POTUS and any alleged crimes he may have committed?
> 
> 
> I look to overseas media.  They rarely have a stake in the outcome.  I'd probably believe what I read about it in the Daily Caller.  There are no truly unbiased media outlets left.  The 24 hour news cycle killed the few that were left.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 10, 2022)




----------



## Dame (Aug 10, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I was listening to Meghan Kelly while I was washing dishes tonight.  She mentioned that one of the things searched was Melania Trump's closet.  If that is true, how did they know to search there?


Sir, I hate to say it but, they just wanted to look in her thong drawer.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 10, 2022)

Dame said:


> Sir, I hate to say it but, they just wanted to look in her thong drawer.


Boys will be boys


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 10, 2022)

Dame said:


> Sir, I hate to say it but, they just wanted to look in her thong drawer.


Guess these SS guys forgot they weren’t in LATAM any more


----------



## AWP (Aug 11, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Guess these SS guys forgot they weren’t in LATAM any more


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 11, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> So I wanted to revisit this (fmr. Gov Cuomo's comments regarding the raid) for a moment.  *Why would he do this?*
> 
> Is he that mad at the Democrat party for his ouster that he's lashing out?
> 
> ...


Fear. Coumo is a criminal and knows that when the tables turn he has no cover, no protection, and that he'll likely end up in a cage.

This shift in incivility, means he (Coumo) and a lot of other bureaucrats and politicians are done. We're about to see the beginning of the French Revolution a la style Américain.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 11, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> Honest question-
> 
> What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
> 
> ...



I agree with the posts above about having five plus years, almost 6 years, of fabricated stories, lies, propaganda, the left has come up with against Trump, and naturally people would see this as yet one more of the same. After these past years, why wouldn't they?

If the Justice department would say, "We have a warrant to search to look for these based on this information which was submitted to the Justice department as basis for a legal search," and then to find those items and lay out a logical case before the American people, it would at least be above the appearance of impropriety and politics and maybe lay out a logical and rational case as to why they're doing that.  

But even attorneys are saying that there is no legal basis for what's going on (to which I can't confirm or refute since I don't know the law).

As far as media outlet goes, I don't trust a damn one of them to give me unbiased, entirely accurate information.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 11, 2022)

R.Caerbannog said:


> Fear. Coumo is a criminal and knows that when the tables turn he has no cover, no protection, and that he'll likely end up in a cage.
> 
> This shift in incivility, means he (Coumo) and a lot of other bureaucrats and politicians are done. *We're about to see the beginning of the French Revolution a la style Américain.*


I hope not brother, the French Revolution got a lot of good people killed and destroyed a country.  None of us want either of those things to happen here.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 11, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> Honest question-
> 
> What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
> 
> ...



I am no Trump cheerleader. I supported many of his policies but not his behavior. I want him to STFU and retire. 

But I honestly can't think of any media source, Left or Right, that isn't (or hasn't been) tainted by political bias. I agree with @Devildoc 's reply above. Show me the evidence. Lay it out. Convince me that this man committed a crime worthy of arrest and prosecution. Convince me that it's worth the damage it will do to the office of the Presidency.


----------



## AWP (Aug 11, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I hope not brother, the French Revolution got a lot of good people killed and destroyed a country.  None of us want either of those things to happen here.



It is inevitable though. We’re going to keep dividing our country until you have two extremes with a group in the middle trying to just hang on and survive. That’s just man’s nature supported by a few thousand years of history.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 11, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I hope not brother, the French Revolution got a lot of good people killed and destroyed a country.  *None of us want either of those things to happen here*.


Agreed. Who knows... maybe we'll get a more surgically precise, marked for global export, Romanian-esque version instead. I don't see us fracturing or being destroyed though.


----------



## 757 (Aug 11, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> Honest question-
> 
> What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
> 
> ...


Very tough, but a really good question.

I kind of view this situation like a spouse that's been cheated on. You saw the best in them, but they betrayed your trust...so now what? If you truly love the person, you try to make it work...but you have to establish boundaries, often extremely inconvenient ones usually involving additional oversight.

For me at least, if the rumors about, keeping Trump's lawyers from observing the process and ordering them to turn off cameras are proven to be *false* *based on video evidence*, that would be step one toward earning back my trust.

Steps 2-3 involve the FBI having a legit reason for the raid, and it better be damn close to earth shattering, followed by a successful acquisition of said earth shattering documents/tapes/whatever.

Anything less, and I will assume the FBI is in Tijuana, playing STD roulette with a bunch of Mexicans who, bless their hearts, are trying to save up money to build that beautiful wall I was told about circa 2016.


----------



## AWP (Aug 11, 2022)

The good news is the DOJ has released the contents of the search warrant.

Oh, wait…


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 11, 2022)

AWP said:


> The good news is the DOJ has released the contents of the search warrant.
> 
> Oh, wait…



Apparently he could release it himself, but his legal team has said they don't want to.


Trump team won’t release FBI warrant for Mar-a-Lago raid as judge weighs motion to unseal it

If this warrant was so "thin and weak" as his lawyer said, why not jump on the moment and take control of the narrative? If they weren't looking for anything major, why hold that information back?


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 11, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Apparently he could release it himself, but his legal team has said they don't want to.
> 
> 
> Trump team won’t release FBI warrant for Mar-a-Lago raid as judge weighs motion to unseal it
> ...



Looks like from the article that even if the Trump legal team has it, they cannot release it.  Maybe I misread or misunderstand.  Edited to add, it also looks like from the article they are trying to control the narrative, painting this to be a malicious infringement based on politics.  They are requesting a hard copy of the paperwork, affidavit, and inventory of what was taken.  

Also interesting that the FBI kicked out Trump's lawyers, kicked them off the property.


----------



## AWP (Aug 11, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Apparently he could release it himself, but his legal team has said they don't want to.
> 
> 
> Trump team won’t release FBI warrant for Mar-a-Lago raid as judge weighs motion to unseal it
> ...



The government executed a search warrant but the accused should release the details of said warrant?

Lol


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 11, 2022)

Looks like they are using a law he signed to prevent him from running again.  And if this is the reason for the raid, I want to see similar raids on all former Presidents homes.



> On Monday at about 10 a.m. EDT, two dozen FBI agents and technicians showed up at Donald Trump's Florida home to execute a search warrant to obtain any government-owned documents that might be in the possession of Trump but are required to be delivered to the Archives under the provisions of the 1978 Presidential Records Act. (In response to the Hillary Clinton email scandal, Trump himself signed a law in 2018 that made it a felony to remove and retain classified documents.) The act establishes that presidential records are the property of the U.S. government and not a president's private property. Put in place after Watergate to avoid the abuses of the Nixon administration, the law imposes strict penalties for failure to comply. "Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined" $2,000, up to three years in prison or "shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States."





> The act, and concerns about the illegal possession of classified "national defense information" are the basis for the search warrant, according to the two sources. The raid had nothing to do with the January 6 investigation or any other alleged wrongdoing by the former president.



Exclusive: An informer told the FBI what documents Trump was hiding, and where


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 11, 2022)

RackMaster said:


> Looks like they are using a law he signed to prevent him from running again.  And if this is the reason for the raid, I want to see similar raids on all former Presidents homes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think one of the differences is as president he has the authority to declassify the materials, even if it's in his house. Clinton never had that authority.  At least that's one legal theory. We will see how it goes.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 11, 2022)

RackMaster said:


> Looks like they are using a law he signed to prevent him from running again.  And if this is the reason for the raid, I want to see similar raids on all former Presidents homes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That would have to be a hell of a good source, with super placement and access, whose testimony would be above reproach.  So… probably not the maid, probably not the gardener.  

Either someone in President Trump’s inner circle, or someone on his Secret Service detail?


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 11, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> That would have to be a hell of a good source, with super placement and access, whose testimony would be above reproach.  So… probably not the maid, probably not the gardener.
> 
> Either someone in President Trump’s inner circle, or someone on his Secret Service detail?



I'm thinking SS detail.  I think the Trump team has likely, weeded out potential leaks from his inner circle.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 11, 2022)

Democrats have been much better about the weaponization of the DOJ than Republicans ever were.  But regardless of whether you think there was a legal basis for it, this idiot AG never thought to even think about whether they should do this and set a massive precedent by doing such.  The optics of how the FBI colluded with the Clinton Campaign to attempt to halt Trump's candidacy should have saw Comey behind bars.  No one from that episode has face justice, in fact many of them are becoming rich off book deals. 

Post inauguration this whole government has TDS, the only thing they focus on is Trump.  We're turning into a banana republic, and here's the thing.  Just like removing the Filibuster to get some nonsense done bit the Democrats in the ass.  When a new regime takes power, the precedent has been set.  And if you don't think the current administration is corrupt and incompetent...you have been living in a coal mine sealed off from everyone else.



DasBoot said:


> Honest question-
> 
> What would it take for those of you who view this as a “sham,” “politically motivated” or a sign “we live in a banana republic” to change their mind?
> 
> ...



We're clearly living in different worlds. But let's start with Garland and Biden resigning.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 11, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Post inauguration this whole government has TDS


I think this is backfiring. These dumbasses are just losing their jobs and galvenizing the right. If Trump wasnt going to run again, I think there is a better chance he will now...unless the FBI actually has something.


----------



## DasBoot (Aug 11, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Democrats have been much better about the weaponization of the DOJ than Republicans ever were.  But regardless of whether you think there was a legal basis for it, this idiot AG never thought to even think about whether they should do this and set a massive precedent by doing such.  The optics of how the FBI colluded with the Clinton Campaign to attempt to halt Trump's candidacy should have saw Comey behind bars.  No one from that episode has face justice, in fact many of them are becoming rich off book deals.
> 
> Post inauguration this whole government has TDS, the only thing they focus on is Trump.  We're turning into a banana republic, and here's the thing.  Just like removing the Filibuster to get some nonsense done bit the Democrats in the ass.  When a new regime takes power, the precedent has been set.  And if you don't think the current administration is corrupt and incompetent...you have been living in a coal mine sealed off from everyone else.
> 
> ...



I live in the world where you ask questions to better understand varying viewpoints. I guess you’re off in the echo chamber world.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 11, 2022)

AWP said:


> The government executed a search warrant but the accused should release the details of said warrant?
> 
> Lol



If the accused is arguing that the search was over nothing and basically had no legal basis, yes.

I'm not saying the government shouldn't release the warrant, which should have been done within 24 hours of the raid given the enormity of it, but that the legitimacy of the warrant could already be known.

If I want to control the narrative that this is a political witch hunt, I'm releasing those documents. The only reason I'm not is if the warrant specifies things that aren't being reported on yet.



RackMaster said:


> Looks like they are using a law he signed to prevent him from running again.  And if this is the reason for the raid, I want to see similar raids on all former Presidents homes.


I appreciate the irony of him getting caught by a law he pushed for and signed, but I really hope this isn't the case.  It fully creates precedent for every new election to have political prisoners.


Marauder06 said:


> That would have to be a hell of a good source, with super placement and access, whose testimony would be above reproach.  So… probably not the maid, probably not the gardener.
> 
> Either someone in President Trump’s inner circle, or someone on his Secret Service detail?



I'm thinking someone in the inner circle who is facing charges/investigations themselves. I'm sure we'll know when they announce their book in 6-8 months.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 11, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> If the accused is arguing that the search was over nothing and basically had no legal basis, yes.
> 
> I'm not saying the government shouldn't *release the warrant*, which should have been done within 24 hours of the raid given the enormity of it, but that the legitimacy of the warrant could already be known.
> 
> ...


By nature, a search warrant is going to read in a way that is damaging to its target;  Anything damaging about Trump gets leaked.  I'm kind of surprised it hasn't been published by NYT and CNN already.

Loved the last bolded part of your post..


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 11, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> I live in the world where you ask questions to better understand varying viewpoints. I guess you’re off in the echo chamber world.



I'm just not for weaponizing the DOJ against a former president.  The precedent they set this week is one in which we will have Republican AGs now do the same to the other side.  There's a great twitter account to follow here: https://twitter.com/CrimeADay

Basically you've probably committed 5 felonies since Breakfast.  What we have here is just selective prosecution.


----------



## DasBoot (Aug 11, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> I'm just not for weaponizing the DOJ against a former president.  The precedent they set this week is one in which we will have Republican AGs now do the same to the other side.  There's a great twitter account to follow here: https://twitter.com/CrimeADay
> 
> Basically you've probably committed 5 felonies since Breakfast.  What we have here is just selective prosecution.


Cool.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 11, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> That would have to be a hell of a good source, with super placement and access, whose testimony would be above reproach.  So… probably not the maid, probably not the gardener.
> 
> Either someone in President Trump’s inner circle, or someone on his Secret Service detail?



I’d guess an employee, not Secret Service, certainly not family. Someone on the administrative staff.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 11, 2022)

Same FBI that targeted concerned parents who spoke up about mask mandates. So why should we just accept this as "good"? FBI Whistleblowers Claim Agents Investigated Parents Accused of Threatening School Boards over Mask Policies | National Review


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 11, 2022)

Who has a Washington Post subscription and can paste the relevant info here?

Because holy shit, if this is true it's probably the best reason to justify raiding a former President for documents. 

Mar-a-Lago raid live updates: Feds were looking for classified documents about nuclear weapons during raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago, Washington Post reports


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 11, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Who has a Washington Post subscription and can paste the relevant info here?
> 
> Because holy shit, if this is true it's probably the best reason to justify raiding a former President for documents.
> 
> Mar-a-Lago raid live updates: Feds were looking for classified documents about nuclear weapons during raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago, Washington Post reports


Citing people familiar. Either put your name on it or commit sepuku. I've been so done with this shit for 5 years.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 11, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Who has a Washington Post subscription and can paste the relevant info here?
> 
> Because holy shit, if this is true it's probably the best reason to justify raiding a former President for documents.
> 
> Mar-a-Lago raid live updates: Feds were looking for classified documents about nuclear weapons during raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago, Washington Post reports





> -The FBI searched former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home on Monday, sparking a firestorm.
> -Attorney General Merrick Garland said he personally signed off on the warrant used in the raid.
> -Feds were looking for classified documents about nuclear weapons during raid, The Washington Post reports.
> 
> ...


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 11, 2022)

Is nuclear weapons code name for alien technology?  Because I believe anyone on the Trump team would steal documents like that, as much as I believed he was the Russian Manchurian Candidate.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 11, 2022)

Oh man! I was getting tired of the old thing- I’m glad we have this current thing. 

None of these stories make sense, none of the information lines up, and it was brought to you by the same people that have been after President Trump for 7 years. 

Color me not giving a fuck. 

Oh and if you’re on the ‘wait and see’ if it was warranted camp, you’re being the silliest lil goose. I’m excited to see how you feel when the other party is doing it. 

The only appropriate reaction to this is ‘Disband the FBI. Immediately.’


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 12, 2022)

I have found that anyone is capable of anything.  It's entirely possible that President Trump had some super sketchy, very time-sensitive stuff in his home that the Justice Department, in the interests of national security and with no political malice aforethought, had no other recourse other than to send in dozens of armed men to secure it.

...but I don't think that's the case.

I'm curious too about the nuclear stuff.  Whose nukes are we talking?  Iran's?  Israel's? the Norks'?  Ours?  And what is the characterization of that information?  They seem to want to make people think he had the codes written down or something.  I mean, I have "nuclear weapon information" on my work laptop.  It's unclassified non-presidential-level open source information that I use for class, but if the FBI raided my office they could leak that they found "nuke stuff" in my files too.

I think it's shitty the way politicians handle classified information.  The system is ripe for abuse and the consequences are too little and too inconsistent.  But I don't have enough information right now to say "yeah I think this was a good call."


----------



## Gunz (Aug 12, 2022)

RackMaster said:


> Is nuclear weapons code name for alien technology?  Because I believe anyone on the Trump team would steal documents like that, as much as I believed he was the Russian Manchurian Candidate.



Well, now, wait a minute...Maybe he was so pissed that the election was stolen, he's got Barron down in the Mar a Lago basement with a Russian scientist building a suitcase nuke for the next January 6th insurrection. It makes perfect sense.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 12, 2022)

Gunz said:


> Well, now, wait a minute...Maybe he was so pissed that the election was stolen, he's got Barron down in the Mar a Lago basement with a Russian scientist building a suitcase nuke for the next January 6th insurrection. It makes perfect sense.


My brother in Christ, that’s what the Chinese Soros funded pedophiles want you to think! Don’t be a useful idiot! Time for a revolution!

Kidding. That’s obviously a joke. No one says those things and is taken seriously.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 12, 2022)

Everyone!!!  Get on your e-bikes, today we ride!!


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 12, 2022)

POLL: Mar-a-Lago Raid Backfires Spectacularly on Democrats

^I hope the headline proves to be true, but I think it's too soon to determine the long term effects.  It's entirely possible that there was something genuinely bad in there, or that can be spun to look bad, and it redounds to the benefits of the Democrats.

Or, if the plan all along was to get Trump to announce he's running again because 1) it will energize Dems ahead of the midterms and 2) Trump will be easier to defeat (again) than another Rep candidate, then the long term utility is worth it over the short term hit.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 12, 2022)

RackMaster said:


> Everyone!!!  Get on your e-bikes, today we ride!!


----------



## AWP (Aug 12, 2022)

The funny thing is how much Trump gets off on this shit. Supporters, detractors, defenders, attackers...all of them with his name in their mouths. He's all they talk about, all they think about, would spill blood for him or against him...

This raid just feeds that. It nurtures his black, little heart.

There's no way he doesn't run again. He doesn't give a shit about anything or anyone but himself. He has his cult who would do anything for him should he lose even the Republican nomination. He's a guy with enough sway that merely backing a candidate gives them a sizable boost in the polls.

Hell, the judge who signed off on the warrant had his entire life on the news by the end of the day. That moron alone gave Team Trump data to work with, to discredit him and the search. Obama donor, Epstein tie-in...that dude was made to energize the Trump base and cast doubt on the legality of the warrant.

Things I've seen explode in my lifetime: Two space shuttles, the twin towers, Anne Heche's car, and the heads of a hundred+ million Americans whenever Trump is quoted in the press.

Glorious!


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 12, 2022)

I dunno.  Te whole thing feels contrived and awfully convenient.  But who can blame people for being skeptical?  I mean, they have cried 'wolf!' a dozen times.

Me, to the DOJ and democrats:


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 12, 2022)

AWP said:


> The funny thing is how much Trump gets off on this shit. Supporters, detractors, defenders, attackers...all of them with his name in their mouths. He's all they talk about, all they think about, would spill blood for him or against him...
> 
> This raid just feeds that. It nurtures his black, little heart.
> 
> ...



My wife is like Trump like that: someone slaps her, she doesn't slap them back, she cuts off their head and puts it on a spike.  She, like Trump, is a street fighter, loves getting dirty.  Trump doesn't play by the rules.  I think he'd be at home back in the Hamilton-Burr days, just dueling it out like a man.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 12, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> My wife is like Trump like that: someone slaps her, she doesn't slap them back, she cuts off their head and puts it on a spike


Reminds me of a qoute I heard years ago from Sonny Barger. I like it and its always stuck with me.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 12, 2022)

Apparently there is going to be a major announcement from the DOJ at 1430 today.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 12, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> Apparently there is going to be a major announcement from the DOJ at 1430 today.


Wouldn't be surprised if it's just the announcement of the warrant.  Trump was posting yesterday that he was directing his lawyers to support an immediate release of the documents.



> Trump said in a social media post late Thursday that he supported the “immediate release” of search warrant documents.
> 
> His statement, if officially echoed by his lawyers, is likely to lead a magistrate judge to unseal the warrant and some related documents.
> 
> ...


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 12, 2022)

Fair point: 



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1557803391757205504
Then people pointed out "well it's in possession of the national archives at the Obama Presidential Library".  

I would like to point out that's not the case.  The Obama presidential library just began construction in August of last year, with groundbreaking in September 21.  The wiki says that the documents are in a facility that is in line with the requirements under NARA.

Supposedly, in June the FBI spoke to Trump about changing the locks/doors to the document storage area at Mar a Lago, apparently that change didn't get done.  So we're gonna raid the place? Idiots. The lot of them.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 12, 2022)

"Donald Trump, the primary political foe of the current president, has nuclear documents of a highly classified nature. While we instructed him to place an additional lock on the door months ago, as part of the investigation he was cooperating with, we recently felt this was unacceptable. So, under the direction of Merrick Garland, (who may have a personal vendetta against Mr. Trump, stemming from his Supreme Court nomination and subsequent passing-over), 30 FBI agents conducted a raid and search of Mr. Trump's house; during the search, the teams denied Mr. Trump's legal team access and were made to wait outside. The contents of the sealed warrant haven't been released/unsealed, but we have a very good source in the Trump camp."

This is the DOJ/FBIs position. 

That's it. That's the whole post.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 12, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Fair point:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is Trump just saying shit


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558151577751490561


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 12, 2022)

Anyone have a WSJ account here?  This article, apparently, has information on what the FBI seized

WSJ News Exclusive | FBI Recovered 11 Sets of Classified Documents in Trump Search, Inventory Shows


----------



## 757 (Aug 12, 2022)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558100760130363394


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 12, 2022)

https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews....22/08/gov.uscourts.flsd_.617854.17.0_15-1.pdf


----------



## Gunz (Aug 12, 2022)

The economy sucks, the country is on the brink of a recession, Biden is about as effective and inspiring as a bag of coleslaw…and the country is focused on an ex-president and some very ambiguous legal circumstances based on various interpretations which could tie up courts for years to come…none of which will result in Trump being hauled off to jail.

Not a fucking iota, not a fucking molecule of any of this is pertinent to the state of the Union at this moment in time.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 12, 2022)

Stuff like this just makes us look more clownish than we already do!


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 12, 2022)

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, " This tends to happen, when elections are stolen by kid sniffers and their puppet masters." .

At least the other banana republics have a surplus of "thic" thin waisted lasses. Le sigh....


----------



## 757 (Aug 12, 2022)

*Checks item #7*

Well guys I was wrong, there is only one way to ensure this super sensitive information never becomes public.

Obvious last resort.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 12, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews....22/08/gov.uscourts.flsd_.617854.17.0_15-1.pdf


That's some weak shit.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 12, 2022)

757 said:


> *Checks item #7*
> 
> Well guys I was wrong, there is only one way to ensure this super sensitive information never becomes public.
> 
> Obvious last resort.


That video was bullshit.  Zero dogs shot.  ;)


----------



## Ex3 (Aug 12, 2022)

Just for shits and gigs... let's say that 45 did take highly classified documents relating to nuclear weapons and signals intelligence — two of the most sensitive areas in the entire U.S. government to an unsecured location. Would y'all still defend him? 🤨


----------



## JedisonsDad (Aug 12, 2022)

Ex3 said:


> Just for shits and gigs... let's say that 45 did take highly classified documents relating to nuclear weapons and signals intelligence — two of the most sensitive areas in the entire U.S. government to an unsecured location. Would y'all still defend him? 🤨


If a law was legitimately broken, then he should be held accountable.

On that same note, it should be a level field across the board. Just because your party is in power, doesn’t mean you’re exempt from prosecution, or even from being investigated. (Hunter and Clinton)


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 12, 2022)

From everything up to date, this is because locks weren't changed fast enough.  The FBI raided a former Presidents home over locks.  Instead of the body responsible for security of said documents, making an appointment with said President and changing the damn locks.   If no one sees this as the witch hunt it is and the long term ramifications; put some of your biased hatred for Trump away.  This is Banana Republic petty bullshit, to keep a man from running again.  If the tides were turned, all Hell would have broken loose and America would be burning right now.

Oh wait... When the elections happen and the Republicans are in power, I hope all the Democrat former President's and the rest of the ilk (looking at you Hillary), are up to date on current lock standards.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 12, 2022)

Based on that Warrant the FBI violated the President's 4th Amendment rights and that judge should be disbarred. No probable cause in that warrant.  It's also wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy toooooooooo brooooooaaaaaadddddd.

Effectively that idiot Judge gave the FBI license to seize 100% of all his presidential documents.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Aug 12, 2022)

For contrast, here are the articles and comparisons applied to Trump, when he talked about investigating Hillary.

Notice words like “authoritarian” and being likened to leaders of Iran and Venezuela.

Here Are Some People Who Actually Jailed Their Political Opponents Post-Election

Edit to add, article is from 2016.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 12, 2022)

Ex3 said:


> Just for shits and gigs... let's say that 45 did take highly classified documents relating to nuclear weapons and signals intelligence — two of the most sensitive areas in the entire U.S. government to an unsecured location. Would y'all still defend him? 🤨



It'd clearly be a fake news political witch hunt, so of course there will be defenders.
Everybody keeps mentioning "he was raided over a lock!" but conveniently leaving out there was a grand jury subpoena for these documents? That seems like the bigger part of the story here.

That being said, nothing has been confirmed as to whether the TS/SCI stuff was actually nuke info or not. That's about the only part of this I think would legitimize the actions taken.

If it's shown he had info AND was going to do something with it, then smash him; otherwise, I think it's a bad move to basically "find a crime" a former president.


----------



## Polar Bear (Aug 12, 2022)

Ex3 said:


> Just for shits and gigs... let's say that 45 did take highly classified documents relating to nuclear weapons and signals intelligence — two of the most sensitive areas in the entire U.S. government to an unsecured location. Would y'all still defend him? 🤨


We don’t have to, he will be pardon. That’s why this is a waste of time. Same thing with Bidens connection to China.


----------



## Locksteady (Aug 12, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I think it's a bad move to basically "find a crime" a former president.


I have no sympathy for anybody with that level of access - much someone with original classification authority - getting book-slapped for behavior that exceeds what would already get the vast majority of other security clearance-holders years of prison time.

This applies equally to Clinton while she was SecState, and she should remain just as vulnerable to investigation as any other former agency head if there is a warranted suspicion she mishandled classified information.

The insulation a President may receive from security violation scrutiny via their appointed FBI director can and should face an equal and opposite scrutiny from a less politically sympathetic Bureau director if their behavior legally justified further investigation - which, in this case, it appears it did.


----------



## Salt USMC (Aug 12, 2022)

Okay, I have a radical idea but hear me out on this: DOJ agrees not to charge Trump BUT he has to take the Cyber Awareness training every year


----------



## Grunt (Aug 12, 2022)

Personally, I can only imagine the alleged TS materials that former presidents possess. We will never truly know, but if Trump does, I can imagine that many of them do/did....


----------



## JedisonsDad (Aug 12, 2022)

So my understanding is that a regular inspection determined his locks weren’t safe enough, and they gave him time to comply and then he didn’t.

If that is true, why didn’t they take the documents then? If the documents were important enough to “raid” now, they were important enough to seize earlier. If they weren’t important enough to seize and secure earlier, they aren’t important enough to “raid” now.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 12, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> So my understanding is that a regular inspection determined his locks weren’t safe enough, and they gave him time to comply and then he didn’t.
> 
> If that is true, why didn’t they take the documents then? If the documents were important enough to “raid” now, they were important enough to seize earlier. If they weren’t important enough to seize and secure earlier, they aren’t important enough to “raid” now.


Yep...that's it in a nutshell. That's why I think this whole situation sucks....


----------



## compforce (Aug 12, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Okay, I have a radical idea but hear me out on this: DOJ agrees not to charge Trump BUT he has to take the Cyber Awareness training every year


That would be cruel and unusual punishment.  It would be found unconstitutional by SCOTUS


----------



## AWP (Aug 12, 2022)

Wait, the FBI knew the docs were there, but were insufficiently secured? By leaving them in place, doesn’t that make the agents liable as well?


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 12, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> So my understanding is that a regular inspection determined his locks weren’t safe enough, and they gave him time to comply and then he didn’t.
> 
> If that is true, why didn’t they take the documents then? If the documents were important enough to “raid” now, they were important enough to seize earlier. If they weren’t important enough to seize and secure earlier, they aren’t important enough to “raid” now.



It seems like there are two seperate things going on. The lock is the story in much the way "they searched Melania's closet" is; it's intended to give people something inconsequential to focus on instead of the other parts in question.

From this NBC News article:

Agents went in June to take possession of documents requested by the subpoena, and were given a number of documents by Trump's legal team. The agents made the recommendation to add additional security measures to the storage room they searched.



> The federal officials who went to Mar-a-Lago for the June meeting were "coming down to retrieve the documents that were being requested" in the subpoena, the source said, adding that the meeting was arranged with the Trump team's understanding that turning over relevant documents that day would fulfill the subpoena.
> 
> Citing "two sources briefed on the classified documents" sought in the subpoena, The New York Times reported Thursday that federal officials were prompted to search Mar-a-Lago because uncollected material was particularly sensitive to national security.
> 
> ...



After this happened, someone tipped the FBI off that there were still classified documents that they failed to turn over.



> Trump this year had to return 15 boxes of documents that the National Archives and Records Administration said were improperly taken from the White House.
> 
> 
> A separate source confirmed an earlier Wall Street Journal report by telling NBC News that “someone familiar” with documents inside Mar-a-Lago told investigators there may have been more classified documents at the club than were initially turned over, leading in part to the search on Monday.



The documents seized in the raid were (allegedly) in seperate locations from the previous visit in June.

From The Hill:



> Investigators discovered classified documents in two areas: Trump’s personal office above a ballroom and in a storage room near the pool. Sources say there were “boxes everywhere,” with some containing Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). Those are considered some of the highest level of classified documents.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Aug 12, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> It seems like there are two seperate things going on. The lock is the story in much the way "they searched Melania's closet" is; it's intended to give people something inconsequential to focus on instead of the other parts in question.
> 
> From this NBC News article:
> 
> ...


Thanks for clearing that up. It’s hard to follow what all is happening, without devoting serious hours to reading.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 13, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> Thanks for clearing that up. It’s hard to follow what all is happening, without devoting serious hours to reading.


Well lucky for you, no one is doing that. Not the press or the lawyers or really anyone. So you’re not behind.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 13, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> It'd clearly be a fake news political witch hunt, so of course there will be defenders.
> Everybody keeps mentioning "he was raided over a lock!" but conveniently leaving out there was a grand jury subpoena for these documents? That seems like the bigger part of the story here.
> 
> That being said, nothing has been confirmed as to whether the TS/SCI stuff was actually nuke info or not. That's about the only part of this I think would legitimize the actions taken.
> ...



Gonna need you to remove your politics from your comments and begin using deductive reasoning as it pertains to the warrant. My last comment is strictly based on legal reasoning.

Within the warrant there are three attachments listed. A, B, and C.

There is no D that is even redacted. So this subpoena that they had in June is not applicable to this warrant. If it was it would be a part of the attachments.

ETA: There was no probable cause in that warrant and the scope was too broad. If that is the burden required to get a warrant, then everyone on this board should be scared as fuck because that means they need to probable cause to get a warrant and LEAs will just violate your 4th amendment rights at will. And unlike Trump, most of us don't have to kind of means to go after a local PD civilly for such a gross violation.
______
And now you can put your biased hat back on and think about how this precedent if executed on Obama would create a revolution. Again, Garland, Biden, and co didn't even think about whether they should even do this. Why? Because they're so far beyond rational human beings at this point.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 13, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Gonna need you to remove your politics from your comments and begin using deductive reasoning as it pertains to the warrant. My last comment is strictly based on legal reasoning.


This whole thing is going to include politics, just based on the nature of the people involved. 




ThunderHorse said:


> ETA: There was no probable cause in that warrant and the scope was too broad. If that is *the burden required to get a warrant, then everyone on this board should be scared as fuck because that means they need to probable cause to get a warrant and LEAs will just violate your 4th amendment rights at will. *And unlike Trump, most of us don't have to kind of means to go after a local PD civilly for such a gross violation.



For example, this is politics, whether you think it is or not. There's 1000s of lawyers who agree/disagree on you assessment, based on their personal politics.

Just a quick Google search can find legal experts who say basically everything counter to you. 

So are you the only true paragon of unbiased legal opinion, or do you just have a different view based on your politics and are acting like your above the muck with everyone else?

I agree with the bolded, but I'm surprised this seems like a unique thing to you. Warrants have had an extremely low bar forever. 



ThunderHorse said:


> Within the warrant there are three attachments listed. A, B, and C.
> 
> There is no D that is even redacted. So this subpoena that they had in June is not applicable to this warrant. If it was it would be a part of the attachments.



So the subpoena probably holds as much legal precedent as "the lock!" that keeps getting mentioned?

Both of them are just bits of information that may or may not hold any significance, and we need to see what was in the affidavit that gave them probable cause?

Cool with me.



ThunderHorse said:


> And now you can put your biased hat back on and think about how this precedent if executed on Obama would create a revolution. Again, Garland, Biden, and co didn't even think about whether they should even do this. Why? Because they're so far beyond rational human beings at this point.



I literally would not care if Obama was raided because he left office with TS/SCI/Secret information and had it stored in a closet near a pool that may be easily accessible by the public. 

Our leaders are people, and I give them no reverence when it comes to things like this.
The fact that they hold a position of public trust means they should be held to the standards of legality, and I don't give a fuck what party they are.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 13, 2022)

I'm no expert, I don't "practice" law in my current role. I just went to law school. My subject matter is Sports Law and I write all our competition law policy for my organization.

My Fiancée however does practice law and she works for a state that doesn't take shit from the Federal government. Florida is also one of those states, so I could see in the next 30 days protection details at Mar a Lago barring any Federal officer with a badge from entering and the state AG going after that field office and that judge. So yeah, if that's generally the burden to get a warrant, then our government and judges willfully violate 4th Amendment rights on the daily and most of us do not have the means to bring them to their knees and get compensation for that violation of rights. But Trump does have the means, so we'll see where this goes.

Like I said. These idiots didn't think about the precedent they set. And you are right, it's full of politics. But now it's been done and we've entered the beginnings of a Banana Republic.  I foresee Federal law enforcement action in Conservative states becoming very difficult to execute in the next 90 days.

_____

Politics hat on:
Let's just keep dividing the country, it's a really great plan that worked well for the Democrats throughout Covid and BLM riots.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 13, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Politics hat on:
> Let's just keep dividing the country,* it's a really great plan that worked well* for the Democrats throughout Covid and BLM riots.


The thing is, that absolutely DOES work.  As a group, people are stupid and easily misled.  If you give them something to hate and someone they can feel superior to, you can get them to do just about anything.  Heap some fear on top of that and sprinkle in a little "injustice" and it's a perpetually-regenerating powder keg.

Many people in the US, including some non-liberals, hate President Trump.  Getting on board with the "he's a racist" train gave people an unearned sense of moral superiority.  "Our democracy is in danger!" is the constant fear.  And the injustice / diversity-inclusion-equity thing is the icing on a very bitterly divisive cake.

Whether he gets charged or not, whether he runs again or not, whether he is DQ'd from future office or not, I think this was a good move for Democrats.  Trump is fear, hate, moral superiority, and all of the "muh raciszm!!" all rolled up and personified.  And they get to do it under the mantra of "no one is above the law."  Democrats have literally nothing else to run on at the moment.  They have to bring out their figurative and literal trump card because it's the last thing in their hand that they can play.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 13, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The thing is, that absolutely DOES work.  As a group, people are stupid and easily misled.  If you give them something to hate and someone they can feel superior to, you can get them to do just about anything.  Heap some fear on top of that and sprinkle in a little "injustice" and it's a perpetually-regenerating powder keg.
> 
> Many people in the US, including some non-liberals, hate President Trump.  Getting on board with the "he's a racist" train gave people an unearned sense of moral superiority.  "Our democracy is in danger!" is the constant fear.  And the injustice / diversity-inclusion-equity thing is the icing on a very bitterly divisive cake.
> 
> Whether he gets charged or not, whether he runs again or not, whether he is DQ'd from future office or not, I think this was a good move for Democrats.  Trump is fear, hate, moral superiority, and all of the "muh raciszm!!" all rolled up and personified.  And they get to do it under the mantra of "no one is above the law."  Democrats have literally nothing else to run on at the moment.  They have to bring out their figurative and literal trump card because it's the last thing in their hand that they can play.



And don't leave out that weak people fear being ostracized by the mass.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 13, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The thing is, that absolutely DOES work.  As a group, people are stupid and easily misled.  If you give them something to hate and someone they can feel superior to, you can get them to do just about anything.  Heap some fear on top of that and sprinkle in a little "injustice" and it's a perpetually-regenerating powder keg.
> 
> Many people in the US, including some non-liberals, hate President Trump.  Getting on board with the "he's a racist" train gave people an unearned sense of moral superiority.  "Our democracy is in danger!" is the constant fear.  And the injustice / diversity-inclusion-equity thing is the icing on a very bitterly divisive cake.
> 
> Whether he gets charged or not, whether he runs again or not, whether he is DQ'd from future office or not, I think this was a good move for Democrats.  Trump is fear, hate, moral superiority, and all of the "muh raciszm!!" all rolled up and personified.  And they get to do it under the mantra of "no one is above the law."  Democrats have literally nothing else to run on at the moment.  They have to bring out their figurative and literal trump card because it's the last thing in their hand that they can play.



Well they had the overturning of Roe to galvanize their base...but I think they misplayed their hand here.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 13, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The thing is, that absolutely DOES work.  As a group, people are stupid and easily misled.  If you give them something to hate and someone they can feel superior to, you can get them to do just about anything.  Heap some fear on top of that and sprinkle in a little "injustice" and it's a perpetually-regenerating powder keg.
> 
> Many people in the US, including some non-liberals, hate President Trump.  Getting on board with the "he's a racist" train gave people an unearned sense of moral superiority.  "Our democracy is in danger!" is the constant fear.  And the injustice / diversity-inclusion-equity thing is the icing on a very bitterly divisive cake.
> 
> Whether he gets charged or not, whether he runs again or not, whether he is DQ'd from future office or not, I think this was a good move for Democrats.  Trump is *fear, hate, moral superiority, and all of the "muh raciszm!!"* all rolled up and personified.  And they get to do it under the mantra of "no one is above the law."  Democrats have literally nothing else to run on at the moment.  They have to bring out their figurative and literal trump card because it's the last thing in their hand that they can play.



The bolded is the new Left SOP, since Obama.  It's been used in Canada, since Obama sent advisors to help Trudeau get elected.  Trudeau used it on the Trucker protest. Then against any Conservative politicians that took time to talk to them. And justification for locking up trucker protest leader's without bail, for month's.  Supporters lap that shit up.  But if they need that extra push, they use Trump’s name and call any opposition a Trumper.  Then the media echo chamber repeats it enough, then the mass of idiots believe it.  Trump is the International Leftist Boogeyman.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 13, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The thing is, that absolutely DOES work. As a group, people are stupid and easily misled.



I firmly believe that the expansion of social media makes the lines more divided, because people have more exposure to generalized politics without having to develop their own political position. 

Facebook/twitter/etc have made it much easier to treat politics like a SEC championship game and not something that actually has consequences.



RackMaster said:


> It's the new Left SOP, since Obama. It's been used in Canada, since Obama sent advisors to help Trudeau get elected. Trudeau used it on the Trucker protest. Then against any Conservative politicians that took time to talk to them. And justification for locking up trucker protest leader's without bail, for month's. Supporters lap that shit up. But if they need that extra push, they use Trump’s name and call any opposition a Trumper. Then the media echo chamber repeats it enough, then the mass of idiots believe it. Trump is the International Leftist Boogeyman.



Stoking fear, hate, and moral superiority isn't unique to a political party. Neither is Members lapping it up themselves while condemning the other side.

I could say the left is just adapting to what some republican voters did while Obama was running against McCain.

Or ya know, go back to when Kennedy had to give a speech saying he wasn't a pawn of the Pope.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 13, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I firmly believe that the expansion of social media makes the lines more divided, because people have more exposure to generalized politics without having to develop their own political position.
> 
> Facebook/twitter/etc have made it much easier to treat politics like a SEC championship game and not something that actually has consequences.
> 
> ...


The first part of your post, up to the bolded, part, I agree with.

But were Republicans regularly physically attacking voters on the other side and burning down American cities, and actively calling for the dismantlement of major US institutions during the McCain vs. Obama time period?  I know it was a long time ago and my memory sucks, but I don't recall any of that.


----------



## Locksteady (Aug 13, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Facebook/twitter/etc have made it much easier to treat politics like a SEC championship game and not something that actually has consequences.


For as long as I have bemoaned how the American public's enthusiasm towards sports/simulations of things with consequences far outweighed public interest in politics/things with consequences, this may lead to an even worse situation than yesteryear's indifference to it.

Nicely put.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 13, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> If it's shown he had info AND was going to do something with it, then smash him; otherwise, I think it's a bad move to basically "find a crime" a former president.



I’m curious as to the possibilities of the “something” Trump might “do” with SCI/TS nuke stuff?


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 13, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The first part of your post, up to the bolded, part, I agree with.
> 
> But were Republicans regularly physically attacking voters on the other side and burning down American cities, and actively calling for the dismantlement of major US institutions during the McCain vs. Obama time period?  I know it was a long time ago and my memory sucks, but I don't recall any of that.



It's accelerationism in action.

It used to stay within the realms of just talking, but as the rhetoric gets more extreme and common (Bush/GOP war criminals, Obama as a chimp/calls for lynching), the boundary of what people think is acceptable gets pushed.

This isn't one side. The right pushes the line a bit, so the left pushes some more (or vice versa) amd the line just keeps going further because we keep saying "well, what about the other side?".

ETA: I dont have a good idea of what would be a "fix" for this. It either cools off or explodes in some form, and im not sure which will happen first.


Gunz said:


> I’m curious as to the possibilities of the “something” Trump might “do” with SCI/TS nuke stuff?



The most common theory I've seen bandied about is something involving Saudi Arabia.

Apparently there was a 2019 investigation by the oversight commitee regarding a whistle-blower(s) saying the administration was attempting to give "nuclear technology" to the Saudis.

I'd like to make it clear that the oversight committee found no wrong-doing; the tech in question was involving reactors.


It'd be crazy for Trump to have taken nuke documents to sell to the Saudis.
That's something that requires a lot more than some journalist/political commentators trying to "follow breadcrumbs" and make dots line up over years.

The crazier thing is I wouldn't put it past Trump (or other politicians as full of themselves as him[Clintons]) to actually do something like this is they thought they could get away with it.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 13, 2022)

The reality of it is that our politicians are all third grade playground bullies trying to abuse everyone else that isn’t in their gang. None of them care about this country or the electorate. None of them - they all suck…


----------



## AWP (Aug 13, 2022)

What if Melania dimed him out?


----------



## Grunt (Aug 13, 2022)

AWP said:


> What if Melania dimed him out?


Nothing quite like the enemy from within…


----------



## JedisonsDad (Aug 13, 2022)

AWP said:


> What if Melania dimed him out?


Then it’s time to trade her in for a new model.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 13, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> : I dont have a good idea of what would be a "fix" for this. It either cools off or explodes in some form, and im not sure which will happen first.


Raiding the home of a popular former president isnt going to cool things. (Yes, he is popular to a large swath of Americans whether ones wants to admit this or not)

Our politicians need to stop choosing sides and realize they are not our leaders, they are our servants.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 13, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Raiding the home of a popular former president isnt going to cool things. (Yes, he is popular to a large swath of Americans whether ones wants to admit this or not)



I’m a guy who wants Trump—as I’ve said before—to STFU and retire. I was fed up with him and all the drama. And Jan 6th put the nail in the coffin for me. But even I have found myself sympathizing with his side of things during this latest blow up. That tells me the Democrats, the DOJ etc have misplayed their hand.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 13, 2022)

Gunz said:


> I’m a guy who wants Trump—as I’ve said before—to STFU and retire. I was fed up with him and all the drama


The swamp wants us all to get to this point


----------



## AWP (Aug 13, 2022)

I’m just saying if you’re a female snitch, the best way to misdirect everyone is to have the po po dig through your panty drawer. Just like that, you become a victim.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 13, 2022)

Maybe Barron is making a move for the top.  Take all the elder Trump’s down in one shot.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 13, 2022)

This timeline is absolutely delicious. Twists, turns, bad internet takes, villains, heroes, absolute douchebags.

I can’t wait to see what happens next when nothing happens next.

ETA-


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Aug 13, 2022)

#MattressTags


----------



## 757 (Aug 14, 2022)




----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 15, 2022)

I like the cartoon, but I don't think it's accurate.  I don't think it blew up on the Democrats at all.  I think this is going just they way they hoped it would.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 15, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I like the cartoon, but I don't think it's accurate.  I don't think it blew up on the Democrats at all.  I think this is going just they way they hoped it would.
> 
> View attachment 40290



I'm not sure which party will benefit. Probably the Dems. I know if Trump decides to run--provided he's not in jail--the GOP is in for an insane national convention...probably one which will lead to an even bigger fissure in the Party and a Democratic White House for another 4.

The whole thing is such a freakin shit show... America loses in the end.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 15, 2022)

The best thing Trump could do for the party right now is to declare that he is a distraction and does not want to be divisive and just say that he would not accept a nomination and is not running. But his ego will not let him do that.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 15, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> The best thing Trump could do for the party right now is to declare that he is a distraction and does not want to be divisive and just say that he would not accept a nomination and is not running. But his ego will not let him do that.



That is the endstate the Dems are hoping for.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 15, 2022)

Topkick said:


> That is the endstate the Dems are hoping for.



Is it? I think they are banking on him fighting and making noise to fracture the GOP. Right now polls are favoring the Democrats, and part because of this. I think if he stepped down the Republicans would galvanize and head through the back two years of this campaign season unified.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 15, 2022)

IMO its all about maintaining power and they are afraid that Trump could win again. These folks want him gone because he's disruptive. This has been the objective from the beginnning in 2016 and it hasn't changed.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 15, 2022)

All they care about is stopping anyone that could serve as a roadblock to their forward momentum. Whoever is considered a threat is a target. Right now, it’s Trump and they will continue to fire for effect on him until he is replaced by someone else.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 15, 2022)

Worth noting that Trump just recently cleaned house in the polls over DeSantis. I dont think this raid is going to change many minds. The Republicans are well aware of this.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 15, 2022)

This is an exquisite little question, especially since we now know the Dems will fund Republicans (farther right) to beat more centrist R's they think they can beat in larger races.

After really examining the complete and total dog shit planning that the dems do in political chess (they're fucking terrible); _do the Dems think that Trump is a threat and they want to damage him now? If so, what's the end state- to not run at all, or to damage him in such a way that all they have to do is point and say, "SEE?! TRUMP BAD!" and hope Biden or the actual presumptive Dem nom wins because they assume his ego is too big to NOT run."_

It can't be both. They've spent too much time (6 years), money and political capital, and I think the rank and file are finally getting wise. It's all good to complain about mean tweets and dumb shit a guy says when you throw a dart at investments and make 100% returns or when gas is under $2. 

Now... it's a mix of the boy who cried wolf, reality and economics smacking those people right in their smug little faces. 

The most absolutely insane thing that Trump could do right now? Keep doing what he's doing, soak up all the attention and vitriol, and then endorse DeSantis (running mate Nikki Haley). 

Then, Trump goes out and does what Trump is good at- stumping for the base, and throwing his full weight behind a ticket that can win and leaves the Dems holding the bag. 

But, he won't, and that won't happen, because there is no benevolent force pulling the strings and the universe is a cold and horrifyingly brutal place that does not care about your political machinations.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 15, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> After really examining the complete and total dog shit planning that the dems do in political chess (they're fucking terrible); _do the Dems think that Trump is a threat and they want to damage him now? If so, what's the end state- to not run at all, or to damage him in such a way that all they have to do is point and say, "SEE?! TRUMP BAD!" and hope Biden or the actual presumptive Dem nom wins because they assume his ego is too big to NOT run."_



Establishment Dems and Latte Liberals are still very much focused on the "bad man can't be elected because he's bad" mindset they were when Hillary tried to trot it out in 2016.  They still haven't understood that majority of people who aren't a registered Dem doesn't really give a shit about what Trump has said or accused of if it's not legitimately criminal. 

They keep trying to play politics as some Ivy League debate club when it's really just the WWE to most people, and Trump is the best heel they've seen in years. They don't understand that a good heel will always have more audience support then a boring babyface.



amlove21 said:


> The most absolutely insane thing that Trump could do right now? Keep doing what he's doing, soak up all the attention and vitriol, and then endorse *DeSantis* *(running mate Nikki Haley)*.
> 
> Then, Trump goes out and does what Trump is good at- stumping for the base, and throwing his full weight behind a ticket that can win and leaves the Dems holding the bag.



If I was a GOP strategist, this would be the combo I'd be pushing. DeSantis has the media savvy and culture war positions of Trump, without any of the personal baggage Trump brings. He also has the military (Navy JAG) and religious (practicing Roman Catholic) Trump lacked. Hell, he can even throw out the time he was attacked by a crazy liberal and how he still supports gun rights.  Dude is a younger, more politically viable Trump, and I think even never-Trumpers would support him.

Haley hits that sweet spot with right leaning/centrist voters that DeSantis might not.  A minority woman, born to immigrant parents, who was a governor and U.N. ambassador? Hard to see the Dems having an easy way to attack her.
She also hits that moderate position of "I don't support Trump's actions on Jan 6th/election was stolen, but the committee is politically motivated". 

I don't see a DNC team-up that beats them unless a necromancer resurrects FDR and Kennedy.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 15, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> If I was a GOP strategist, this would be the combo I'd be pushing.


Except that may not be what the American people want.

Trump gets 10-point Mar-a-Lago raid boost over DeSantis: poll

ETA I do think the push for Trump fatigue by the swamp is working and two more years of it will likely change things.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 15, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> Is it? I think they are banking on him fighting and making noise to fracture the GOP. Right now polls are favoring the Democrats, and part because of this. I think if he stepped down the Republicans would galvanize and head through the back two years of this campaign season unified.



I believe that’s exactly what will happen. Trump will run, the party will split into two factions, and the Democrats will win.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 15, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Establishment Dems and Latte Liberals are still very much focused on the "bad man can't be elected because he's bad" mindset they were when Hillary tried to trot it out in 2016.  They still haven't understood that majority of people who aren't a registered Dem doesn't really give a shit about what Trump has said or accused of if it's not legitimately criminal.
> 
> They keep trying to play politics as some Ivy League debate club when it's really just the WWE to most people, and Trump is the best heel they've seen in years. They don't understand that a good heel will always have more audience support then a boring babyface.
> 
> ...


Yup, that's why I said it. Also, because of the aforementioned nihilism (I am not a nihilist, but it's what the cool kids do now) that's why I am sure it doesn't happen. It makes the most sense, and would probably do the most good for the most people. 

Imagine if Trump just did this:

Absolutely skullfuck the establishment media for _years_, baiting them with wilder and wilder stuff. Keeps his fundraising (record breaking, I might add) pace and continues to fight "the narrative". 
Acts (righteously) as martyr, prophet and oracle, all in once. Just replay the 300 times he said something, was lambasted, and then was right. German fuel independence...the 60 minutes interview about Russia and Biden's laptop...gas prices...assault on normal values...coming for the 2A...government overreach and spying... all true. Literally all true things he said. He should just flame everyone that doubted him. Show footage of BLM and Antifa riots, everywhere. 
Waits until the absolute last minute; comes out and says, "They hate me too much! Just like they hate YOU! I will do ANYTHING I can to help this country, one that's being destroyed by the left- I love it so much, I'll take all the hate, and all the lies- and I will step aside because we have a team that could fix this! Not tomorrow, not next year- TODAY. We need your full support behind them- look what they did to me, your favorite president!"

They would give DeSantis and Haley 2 terms, right off the rip.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 15, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> Yup, that's why I said it. Also, because of the aforementioned nihilism (I am not a nihilist, but it's what the cool kids do now) that's why I am sure it doesn't happen. It makes the most sense, and would probably do the most good for the most people.
> 
> Imagine if Trump just did this:
> 
> ...



That was totally worthy of the gay love icon....


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 15, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> That was totally worthy of the gay love icon....


I appreciate that! I think that lil guy gets too much negative attention here. Personally, that's what I give *really* good posts.


----------



## AWP (Aug 15, 2022)

1. Fuck that icon.
2. Some really, really solid posts on this page.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 16, 2022)

AWP said:


> 1. Fuck that icon.
> 2. Some really, really solid posts on this page.


CONCUR

edited to add:  I'm glad that people have decided to act like professionals in this thread so that it can keep going.  I've seen a lot of good posts here, including several from a point of view I didn't agree with but nonetheless thought were thoughtful and well-argued.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 16, 2022)

Pretty sure this thread has had a significantly higher level discussion on what the repercussions and intent was of this by a factor of 10.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

Here's a really good article on the legal factors that are at play and how they may relate to this event.
It's one of the more balanced takes I've seen so far.

From the intro (paraphrased to show the author's approach to balancing viewpoints):



> Several sensible commentators—including George Will, Damon Linker, and David Brooks—think Attorney General Merrick Garland made a mistake, perhaps a disastrous one, in executing the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago.... They are right in this sense: Trump supporters would have viewed any criminal legal process directed at Trump from the Biden Justice Department as, in Linker’s words, “an illegitimate act undertaken by an alien, tyrannical ‘Regime’ resembling a Third World dictatorship.”... Which is not to say that Garland made the wrong decision. On that question it is far too early to tell. Will is right to suggest that Garland’s decision, even if scrupulously nonpolitical in intent, is “inherently political” and should be judged by how well he “adjust tidy principles to untidy realities” and “balance competing objectives.”.... And yet Trump has for all his adult life, and especially during his presidency and postpresidency, shown contempt for law. The FBI’s belief that Trump acted illegally in bringing scores of sensitive documents to Florida, or in not returning them upon request, is very far from shocking..... Garland will be judged over the coming days and months and years on whether that point had been reached—whether Trump’s indifference to law, and the failures of negotiations with Trump to right his wrongs, and the stakes of the information Trump possessed, justified the Mar-a-Lago search.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Here's a really good article on the legal factors that are at play and how they may relate to this event.
> It's one of the more balanced takes I've seen so far.
> 
> From the intro (paraphrased to show the author's approach to balancing viewpoints):



Balanced? Reads like a case of TDS to me. How many times in one article do you need to point out "orange man bad" ?


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

Absolutely outstanding. That article is arguing that you can have due process suspended if you, you know, resist the obviously biased and coordinated federal agencies that have 100% been out to get you. 

You’ve made a great point on this issue, @Cookie_ , it’s just not the one you set out to make. 

Get your hot takes in, everyone else. This is about to be the old thing; I assume the next thing is probably brewing AND ITS THE WORST ONE YET.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 16, 2022)

Warrant had overreach, grounds for challenge:

Boomerang? DOJ admission it over-collected evidence in Trump raid creates new legal drama


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 16, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> Warrant had overreach, grounds for challenge:
> 
> Boomerang? DOJ admission it over-collected evidence in Trump raid creates new legal drama



Said that a couple pages ago


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 16, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Said that a couple pages ago



Yes, you did.  I appreciate the 'independent verification' of facts.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Balanced? Reads like a case of TDS to me. How many times in one article do you need to point out "orange man bad" ?



Everything even slightly critical of Trump is TDS to you man, so I'm not sure what more you want. 

Trump isn't perfect. Trump has long flirted with pushing the law as far as he can and has expressed disdain for it throughout his public life; pointing that out shouldn't be suprising.



amlove21 said:


> Absolutely outstanding. That article is arguing that you can have due process suspended if you, you know, resist the obviously biased and coordinated federal agencies that have 100% been out to get you.
> 
> You’ve made a great point on this issue, @Cookie_ , it’s just not the one you set out to make.
> 
> Get your hot takes in, everyone else. This is about to be the old thing; I assume the next thing is probably brewing AND ITS THE WORST ONE YET.



I think we had different readings of that article.

The author is highlighting how this could be "real big deal" or "nothing burger", based on how broad these legal codes can be applied. He isn't arguing that's a good thing, and literally starts the article



> I have long worried (here, and, more recently, here) about the adverse consequences of the Biden Justice Department using criminal process against former President Trump.



and ends the article



> There are too many imponderables here to assess this issue at this poin*t. But in general, and even assuming very bad acts by Team Trump, the more unprecedented investigatory and prosecutorial steps that one administration takes in response to the acts of a prior administration, the worse. *If there is a lot more to come, and it seems that there is, that will put more pressure on the question whether Garland acted prudently out of practical necessity in executing the Mar-a-Lago warrant.
> 
> All of Garland’s decisions will be judged, as former FBI Director James Comey once wrote, not from the perspective of “urgency and exigency” under which he acted but, rather, from the “perfect, and brutally unfair, vision of hindsight.” Hopefully Garland anticipated this hindsight judgment and acted with a scrupulous attention to process, and with a fair-minded, non-overreactive assessment of the facts, and of what needed to be done, all things considered.



saying he's worried about this being a "gotcha" styled attack on Trump.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I think we had different readings of that article





Cookie_ said:


> Everything critical of Trump is TDS to you man, so I'm not sure what more you want.



Okay, cool. Maybe don't lead off with an intro that is very TDS?


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Okay, cool. Maybe don't lead off with an intro that is very TDS?


Sure thing.

Please define TDS for me, because I'm sure I don't understand it in the way you seem to see/use the phrase.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

@Cookie_


Cookie_ said:


> Sure thing.
> 
> Please define TDS for me, because I'm sure I don't understand it in the way you seem to see/use the phrase.


Despite your claims, I don't use the term often. At first, I actually thought it was stupid. But if I had to define it, I'd personally define its as a syndrome of someone who always takes the opposite side of Trump and/or looks for a way to explain away the lefts attempt to derail his presidency and then keep him from running in the future.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> *I think we had different readings of that article.*
> 
> The author is highlighting how this could be "real big deal" or "nothing burger", based on how broad these legal codes can be applied. He isn't arguing that's a good thing, and literally starts the article


You think so? Did you deduce that from me outright saying you had a different reading than I did, and that I thought yours missed a serious issue with the overall article (presumably because the article openly begs the question and in part to your obvious confirmation bias)? 

You forgot to include the second half of the opening paragraph. I am sure it wasn't malicious; just a innocent oversight. After he says, _"*I have long worried (here, and, more recently, here) about the adverse consequences of the Biden Justice Department using criminal process against former President Trump."* _

He follows with _*"I have also long worried (spurred by Garrett Graff) about the mischief, and potential criminal liability, that Trump might stir up after his presidency with access to classified information."*_

So he also said, and I am paraphrasing- _"I think weaponizing the DOJ is a bad thing. It's already happened twice, I wrote two articles already. But, we all know- this Trump guy is trouble, so it's sort of warranted? He's never been convicted of a crime, sure- but I mean, come on. This guy is guilty of something, we just don't know what"_

We have different readings because I accept both those views as shitty and borderline idiotic; one of those views align with your preconceived notion of the issue.


----------



## Gunz (Aug 16, 2022)

TDS. Trump Derangement Syndrome? That’s a thing? Thank God for the Urban Dictionary. Had I not found it years ago I’d still think “bukake” was a kind of Japanese animation.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Everything even slightly critical of Trump is TDS to you man, so I'm not sure what more you want


Unless you want to respond, I'll step aside after this post. I think Trump was a good president. I've also criticized things Trump has said and done. I think Biden sucks at presidenting, but I want him to do well and I will gladly say so when he does. And I'd still buy you a beer anytime.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> You forgot to include the second half of the opening paragraph. I am sure it wasn't malicious; just a innocent oversight. After he says, _"*I have long worried (here, and, more recently, here) about the adverse consequences of the Biden Justice Department using criminal process against former President Trump."* _
> 
> He follows with _*"I have also long worried (spurred by Garrett Graff) about the mischief, and potential criminal liability, that Trump might stir up after his presidency with access to classified information."*_
> 
> So he also said, and I am paraphrasing- _"I think weaponizing the DOJ is a bad thing. It's already happened twice, I wrote two articles already. But, we all know- this Trump guy is trouble, so it's sort of warranted? He's never been convicted of a crime, sure- but I mean, come on. This guy is guilty of something, we just don't know what"_


I didn't forget to quote a section; the topic of discussion was the author making anti-Trump comments, so I was highlighting where he repeatedly said he was worried about DOJ overreach.  Don't want you to think I was trying to downplay that aspect of the article, so I get where you're coming from with that.

I guess I'm just missing the point in the article you're seeing the author say it would be warranted to charge Trump for some bullshit. 

He provides a number of examples were things would easily be overreach that would "legally" get Trump in trouble, but would be stupid to try and do. 



amlove21 said:


> We have different readings *because I accept both those views as shitty and borderline idiotic;* one of those views align with your preconceived notion of the issue.



I agree with you that DOJ overreach and prosecuting Trump just for the hell of it are both stupid.

Only one of those things is actually in the article though, and it's not the one you think I'm supportive off.



Topkick said:


> @Cookie_
> 
> *Despite your claims, I don't use the term often.* At first, I actually thought it was stupid. But if I had to define it, I'd personally define its as a syndrome of someone who always takes the opposite side of Trump and/or looks for a way to explain away the lefts attempt to derail his presidency and then keep him from running in the future.



Appreciate it.  I'll say I see you use it here more than anyone else (which is why I responded glibly), but I'll dial that back if it's that's the case.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

@Cookie_ this was easier.


----------



## Grunt (Aug 16, 2022)

@amlove21, Brother...that was quick work....


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

Grunt said:


> @amlove21, Brother...that was quick work....


I spent more time initially writing a coherent response before I remembered that's not a prerequisite in the world anymore.

Fuck it, I will just make a meme. - Me, today.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> @Cookie_ this was easier.
> 
> View attachment 40294


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> @Cookie_ this was easier.
> 
> View attachment 40294



Just call me a leftist cuck and we'll have reached the rabbit's level of discourse. (ETA: I'm joking. I don't mind the response) 


amlove21 said:


> I spent more time initially writing a coherent response before I remembered that's not a prerequisite in the world anymore.
> 
> Fuck it, I will just make a meme. - Me, today.


It's a fun meme.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Just call me a leftist cuck and we'll have reached the rabbit's level of discourse. (ETA: I'm joking. I don't mind the response)
> 
> It's a fun meme.


Well I would never call you that here or elsewhere, in your presence or otherwise. 

You’re a good dude, I tend to think you have bad ideas, that’s all. But take that with a grain of salt.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Aug 16, 2022)

*chortle*


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> You’re a good dude, I tend to think you have bad ideas, that’s all. But take that with a grain of salt.


@Cookie_ Fwiw, I agree with this 100%. I think you mostly present good talking points  in a conversational tone, whether I agree with them or not.


----------



## DasBoot (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> Well I would never call you that here or elsewhere, in your presence or otherwise.
> 
> You’re a good dude, I tend to think you have bad ideas, that’s all. But take that with a grain of salt.


With the number of times you’ve re-enlisted, I’d say your judgement is questionable at best.


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 16, 2022)

DasBoot said:


> With the number of times you’ve re-enlisted, I’d say your judgement is questionable at best.


Hurtful. Accurate... but still hurtful.


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

Interesting take from Tucker Carlson

Tucker Carlson: Trump ‘obviously’ going to be indicted

Fox News host Tucker Carlson predicted former President Trump will be indicted following a search at his Florida residence last week carried out by the FBI


----------



## Topkick (Aug 16, 2022)

LOL

Dick Cheney Launches Last-Minute Invasion Of Wyoming To Bolster Daughter’s Reelection


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 16, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> You’re a good dude, I tend to think you have bad ideas, that’s all. But take that with a grain of salt.



There's gotta be at least one person who has got some opposite viewpoints, because it keeps things interesting.

You're sarcastic and blunt, but you aren't an asshole; I know the jokes and discussion isn't personal.



Topkick said:


> @Cookie_ Fwiw, I agree with this 100%. I think you mostly present good talking points  in a conversational tone, whether I agree with them or not.



Appreciate it. These conversations are usually pretty decent once there have been a few posts back and forth.


I wanna say that the sentiments expressed above extends to pretty much everybody on this board.

We might disagree on politics to varying degrees, but there isn't anybody I communicate with on here that I wouldn't be willing to get a beer with if you pass through my neck of the woods.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 23, 2022)

I'm interested to observe whether the narrative on this situation changes over time.

The way I understand the current story is, former President Trump retained a number of documents after he left office, many of which were originally (and still may be) classified.  The National Archives knew what they were, and, as custodians of such materials, wanted them back. President Trump returned some but kept others.  The DOJ know he had those docs, and suggested he up the security for them, which he did.

Eventually, the DOJ decided that President Trump's possession of such documents constituted a national security threat so dire that they needed to raid his home to recover them, which they did.  Acting on an "insider tip," they decided to send more than two dozen federal agents to his home to confiscate the material in question.  Some of the material appears to be classified information, which President Trump claims to have declassified before he left office, some of which has to do with "nuclear weapons."

The timing, which included being during the time he was involved in case in NY, months before the midterms, and during the time when he was said to be mulling a potential 2024 presidential run, are all purely coincidental.

Is that about right?


----------



## Kaldak (Aug 23, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I'm interested to observe whether the narrative on this situation changes over time.
> 
> The way I understand the current story is, former President Trump retained a number of documents after he left office, many of which were originally (and still may be) classified.  The National Archives knew what they were, and, as custodians of such materials, wanted them back. President Trump returned some but kept others.  The DOJ know he had those docs, and suggested he up the security for them, which he did.
> 
> ...



Hit the nail perfectly on the head from my understanding. I also don't believe in coincidence.

Father was a federal 1811, so was raised with that belief. He also was never a big fan of the FBI; FBI were glory hounds who came in for an arrest, after other agencies did the leg work. His perspective, but he also retired just after 9/11, so things may be very different.


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 23, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> The DOJ know he had those docs, and suggested he up the security for them, which he did. <snip> Some of the material appears to be classified information, which President Trump claims to have declassified before he left office, some of which has to do with "nuclear weapons."



Both the Trump and DOJ narrative agree that Trump handed over some documents in June, and that the FBI made security recommendations for the "basement area" where some documents were still stored.  After that, the narratives differ.

Trump narrative is that he was still working with the National Archives to turn over documents when he was raided.

FBI narrative is that the "insider tip" claimed Trump still had access to documents requested in June and others that he had not disclosed he had. That was the reason for the raid.

The narrative then gets murky again when talking about what documents he actually had,  and if he was allowed to declassify them. For example, the president doesn't seem to have carte blanche to declassify Nuclear Information.



> What about nuclear secrets?​They are distinct, although for purposes of criminal law there is little substantive difference.
> Congress has passed a law, the Atomic Energy Act, that imposes its own legal restrictions on mishandling information about how to build a nuclear bomb or enrich nuclear material. Such information is called “restricted data.” Legally, it is not the same thing as being “classified” under the executive order, although in everyday parlance people often refer to it as classified.
> 
> The law established a process for making decisions about downgrading such protections. For those involving military weapons, Congress mandated that the decision be made jointly by senior officials at the Energy and Defense Departments; if the two departments disagree about whether or not to do so, the law says the president makes the final determination. So at a minimum, those officials must be involved in any decision to downgrade nuclear weapons information into so-called formerly restricted data.
> The Atomic Energy Act made it a crime for officials to disclose restricted data without authorization. But whether or not dangerous nuclear weapons information remains deemed to be restricted data, the Espionage Act separately makes its unauthorized retention or disclosure a crime.



The other thing that is interesting about this is the involvement of the The Espionage Act.



> That law was initially enacted to combat spying. Prosecutions under it were relatively uncommon until the Justice Department ramped up its use under both Trump and his predecessor Barack Obama to go after leakers of national security information, including leaks to the news media.
> 
> The law's section cited as the basis for the warrant prohibits unauthorized possession of national defense information. It did not spell out the details about why investigators have reason to believe such a violation occurred.
> 
> ...



The bolded statement is where this situation gets really dangerous politically.  Even if Trump were to successfully argue that everything was declassified, he could still be charged under the Espionage Act.


The only way I can see this thing ending without a major shitstorm for our country is Trump having "no-shit big time geopolitical fallout" nuclear info;info being sold to the Saudis, documents that acknowledge that we know about the Israelis having nukes/helped them, locations/capabilities of our silos, etc.
Something so big and impossible to defend that even his diehards in government have to agree it was a legitimate danger.

If it's anything less than that, the DOJ will never convince a large portion of the country that it wasn't a political arrest, and I wouldn't blame those people for thinking that.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 23, 2022)

@Cookie_ , I think they could have 100% irrefutable proof that he was the second gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 63, and Trump's people would still support him.  So I am not sure that the DOJ can provide anything that's going to sway a significant portion of the population that they are correct and that he is guilty. Especially because he has the resources to obfuscate in the media.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 23, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> @Cookie_ , I think they could have 100% irrefutable proof that he was the second gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 63, and Trump's people would still support him.  So I am not sure that the DOJ can provide anything that's going to sway a significant portion of the population that they are correct and that he is guilty. Especially because he has the resources to obfuscate in the media.


I think it's more likely that it would be another "far-right, white supremacist conspiracy theory" that it wasn't true, only for six months later for everyone to quietly admit that the whole thing was fabricated.  Again.

But hey, he's the greatest threat to the US since... ever... so anything goes.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 23, 2022)

So... now there's investigating Trump's.... taint?  lol

DOJ 'taint team' examining Trump Mar-a-Lago documents


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 23, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> So... now there's investigating Trump's.... taint?  lol
> 
> DOJ 'taint team' examining Trump Mar-a-Lago documents



Good work if you can get it....


----------



## Kraut783 (Aug 23, 2022)

It's the worst name for what it does....


----------



## Totentanz (Aug 23, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> So... now there's investigating Trump's.... taint?  lol
> 
> DOJ 'taint team' examining Trump Mar-a-Lago documents



So that’s be Stormy Daniels and who else…?


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 23, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> @Cookie_ , I think they could have 100% irrefutable proof that he was the second gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 63, and Trump's people would still support him.  So I am not sure that the DOJ can provide anything that's going to sway a significant portion of the population that they are correct and that he is guilty. Especially because he has the resources to obfuscate in the media.


I agree, there's always going to be a group that is "ride or die" for him, much like any politican that has a high level of charisma. 

I'm talking about having something of a level that even these GOP members calling to abolish the FBI (Gosar, Greene) or repeal the Espionage Act (Paul) would have to publicly acknowledge the severity of it. 


Marauder06 said:


> I think it's more likely that it would be another "far-right, white supremacist conspiracy theory" that it wasn't true, only for six months later for everyone to quietly admit that the whole thing was fabricated. Again.



I think an outcome like that, where it's basically another "Russian Collusion" thing, is preferable to them arresting him on technical charges.

The single worst outcome I can see is trying to charge Trump for mishandling documents. 
I know it's been mentioned on here that a bunch of us would like to see these rules enforced equally, but we all know it's different strokes for different folks.

 I'm worried that trying to smash him for something non-major, like that dude taking pictures of his sub (back in 2015/2016?) would push us way to close to widespread political violence.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 23, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> I agree, there's always going to be a group that is "ride or die" for him, much like any politican that has a high level of charisma.
> 
> I'm talking about having something of a level that even these GOP members calling to abolish the FBI (Gosar, Greene) or repeal the Espionage Act (Paul) would have to publicly acknowledge the severity of it.



I'm afraid it's going to become a political version of the True Scotsman argument. Even if they have that irrefutable proof, his "ride or die" base will say, "But if he's really guilty, then you need to provide X".  

I do wish I would abolish the FBI, but I've had that argument for 30 years.  We have had too many law enforcement agencies in too many intelligence agencies scattered and fractured with one hand knowing what the other is doing.  Shut half of them down and consolidate all of them. But that's an argument for another thread.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 23, 2022)

Of course, information like this just lends credence if not credibility to it being a politically motivated move.

Biden White House facilitated DOJ's criminal probe against Trump, scuttled privilege claims: memos


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 23, 2022)

Again, same FBI tried to derail his election. Same FBI where none of the people involved served time in prison. So if you're defending this, you're just supporting an organization that would put a bullet in your head wipe your existence. (Because they actually don't care about the rule of law or the oath they took)

For me this stopped being about 45 ages ago I'm done with him. Why? Because Biden is destroying our country. Next job? Win the mid terms to delay the remainder of his idiotic agenda. 

So disband the FBI remains the only take. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 26, 2022)

Read the affidavit. It's a pretty stupid reason to raid the home of a former president. Basically this is a spat between him and the National Archives and someone was really effing dumb and got DOJ involved to compel him to kowtow to the National Archives. 

It's not about omfg he'll sell Nuclear secrets to the Saudis or any of that nonsense. (If you thought so, you should rethink that because government upon successive government sucks that oil teet)


----------



## Muppet (Aug 26, 2022)

Talking heads say there's proof. DOJ redacted 98 percent of the files. Oh, sure, I'll believe anything the God damn federal government says. They are totally trustworthy.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Aug 26, 2022)

Muppet said:


> Talking heads say there's proof. DOJ redacted 98 percent of the files. Oh, sure, I'll believe anything the God damn federal government says. They are totally trustworthy.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2022)

"Apparently, this kind of thing is normal in investigations like this one."






Now A DOJ Task Force Investigates Trumps… Taint?​


----------



## amlove21 (Aug 31, 2022)

So in a timeline where literally everything gets leaked, you're telling me that there was actual malfeasance, they found what they were looking for, which completely justifies the affidavit... and that shit has stayed tightly under wraps. Not a peep.

Such incontrovertible truths were revealed at MAL that a completely complicit 24 hour news cycle that depends on Trump for ratings or dies has decided that this is the time for measured reporting.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 31, 2022)

Tangentially related. KJP calling "MAGA Republicans and Trump Supporters" extremists. She must be the person who writes all the irresponsible tweets from Biden's account. 


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565055401099509764
Didn't really know where to put this. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Cookie_ (Aug 31, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> So in a timeline where literally everything gets leaked, you're telling me that there was actual malfeasance, they found what they were looking for, which completely justifies the affidavit... and that shit has stayed tightly under wraps. Not a peep.



You've gotta give it a couple months for one of the FBI counter Intel agents to retire and release their tell all book. 

Look for _Hands-Deep in his Taint: Investigating Trump's Mar-a-Lago Documents _on book shelves and reading apps this holiday season.

Jokes aside, I am waiting for more leaks to the media. I bet within two weeks of this taint team finishing there start being stories about what this stuff was.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Aug 31, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> You've gotta give it a couple months for one of the FBI counter Intel agents to retire and release their tell all book.
> 
> Look for _Hands-Deep in his Taint: Investigating Trump's Mar-a-Lago Documents _on book shelves and reading apps this holiday season.
> 
> Jokes aside, I am waiting for more leaks to the media. I bet within two weeks of this taint team finishing there start being stories about what this stuff was.


No we'll probably get the book and about 10 articles from Maggie Hagerman exclaiming she was right in her reporting...when she isn't and is being fed bullshit or lying...and the NYT will never submit a retraction or apology while Trump is alive.


----------



## CQB (Sep 1, 2022)

Fascists huh? The Biden administration has pretty successfully made Google, faceplant & Twitter censor scientists & journalists it doesn't like. If the object of Fascism is to alter societies class structure & bow down to meaningless symbolism, (EV, climate etc.) the Dems are way in front on this. All Hail! Mussolini would be proud.


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 1, 2022)

Looks like the DOJ is building an obstruction case regarding these files, alleging that they documents were willfully hidden when FBI agents were at Mar-A-Lago in June. 


> Though Trump has said he had declassified all of the documents at Mar-a-Lago, his lawyers did not suggest that during the visit and instead "handled them in a manner that suggested counsel believed that the documents were classified," according to the document.
> ​FBI agents who went there to receive additional materials were given "a single Redweld envelope, double-wrapped in tape, containing the documents," the filing states.
> 
> That envelope, according to the FBI, contained 38 unique documents with classification markings, including five documents marked confidential, 16 marked secret and 17 marked top secret.
> ...



Trump's lawyers are still pushing for a special master, basically arguing that all of the documents found are no big deal, and that the DOJ is making the June meeting seem worse than it was.



> In Wednesday's response, Trump's attorneys downplayed the Justice Department's concerns about the classified material found at Mar-a-Lago, saying in the filing that there was no "cause for alarm."
> 
> They added that the Justice Department "significantly mischaracterized" in their filing a meeting in June between prosecutors and Trump's legal team. And, they added, that without a special master, prosecutors will "impugn, leak and publicize" details of its investigation.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 1, 2022)

Trump killed Jon Benet Ramsey. Why not? At this stage, any straw within grasp.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 1, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Looks like the DOJ is building an obstruction case regarding these files, alleging that they documents were willfully hidden when FBI agents were at Mar-A-Lago in June.
> 
> 
> Trump's lawyers are still pushing for a special master, basically arguing that all of the documents found are no big deal, and that the DOJ is making the June meeting seem worse than it was.


If the material was classified, I'd need to see the agents TSC-SCI documents in front of me. Otherwise I think that causes more spillage  yeah. And even if so, it's like here are the boxes in a secure facility. Get effed.

FBI continuing to be a tool of political malfeasance.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> If the material was classified, I'd need to see the agents TSC-SCI documents in front of me. Otherwise I think that causes more spillage  yeah. And even if so, it's like here are the boxes in a secure facility. Get effed.
> 
> FBI continuing to be a tool of political malfeasance.


If the material was still classified, then I think the former President was probably not allowed to possess it, at least outside of a legit SCIF, and the material should have been subject to being recalled by the Federal Government.  The argument that the Trump team is making is that then-President Trump declassified everything before he left.  So if that was the case, then it shouldn't really matter who sees them.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 1, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> If the material was still classified, then I think the former President was probably not allowed to possess it, at least outside of a legit SCIF, and the material should have been subject to being recalled by the Federal Government.  The argument that the Trump team is making is that then-President Trump declassified everything before he left.  So if that was the case, then it shouldn't really matter who sees them.



But again that's not really what's going on. What's going on is the FBI being stupid or acting overtly against s political opponent in a spat between a former president and the National Archives. There is exactly zero finesse being used. However I'm not surprised. The current POTUS is just as bad with his mouth, except he's worse politically because he wants to disrupt my way of life and being more divisive than ever. But because he's a Democrat that's completely ok with the idiots that control the media. 

Exactly zero unification going on. Just vindictive division.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> But again that's not really what's going on. What's going on is the FBI being stupid or acting overtly against s political opponent in a spat between a former president and the National Archives. There is exactly zero finesse being used. However I'm not surprised. The current POTUS is just as bad with his mouth, except he's worse politically because he wants to disrupt my way of life and being more divisive than ever. But because he's a Democrat that's completely ok with the idiots that control the media.
> 
> Exactly zero unification going on. Just vindictive division.


I think what you said in the above post, and what I said in my last one, are both accurate.  Either the materials are classified, or they're not.  That's one issue.  The other, and more important issue IMO, is the politically-motivated actions against a rival for President.  I mean, the last president got impeached over that...


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> But again that's not really what's going on. What's going on is the FBI being stupid or acting overtly against s political opponent in a spat between a former president and the National Archives. There is exactly zero finesse being used. However I'm not surprised. The current POTUS is just as bad with his mouth, except he's worse politically because he wants to disrupt my way of life and being more divisive than ever. But because he's a Democrat that's completely ok with the idiots that control the media.
> 
> Exactly zero unification going on. Just vindictive division.


Answer me this: what agency is responsible  for counterintelligence issues in CONUS?  How would the National Archives recover classified documents when they don’t have any mechanism to do so? 

Let’s not forget that nobody knew about this raid UNTIL Trump decided to tweet about it.  Or whatever it is they do on Truth social.  The FBI exercised plenty of discretion in the matter, right up until Trump did what he always does - open his mouth and blurt out his thoughts.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 1, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Answer me this: what agency is responsible  for counterintelligence issues in CONUS?  How would the National Archives recover classified documents when they don’t have any mechanism to do so?
> 
> Let’s not forget that nobody knew about this raid UNTIL Trump decided to tweet about it.  Or whatever it is they do on Truth social.  The FBI exercised plenty of discretion in the matter, right up until Trump did what he always does - open his mouth and blurt out his thoughts.



You mean the organization of Ruby Ridge and Waco fame? Do you really think we should trust them? Same organization where no one involved in the Steele Dossier went to prison for interference in an election? That three letter organization. I think the only thing we can trust them on is the kiddie port prosecution units. Everything else? Disband.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Sep 1, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> If the material was still classified, then I think the former President was probably not allowed to possess it, at least outside of a legit SCIF, and the material should have been subject to being recalled by the Federal Government.  The argument that the Trump team is making is that then-President Trump declassified everything before he left.  So if that was the case, then it shouldn't really matter who sees them.


Not entirely true.

Just because something isn’t classified, doesn’t mean anyone and everyone can see it.


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> You mean the organization of Ruby Ridge and Waco fame? Do you really think we should trust them? Same organization where no one involved in the Steele Dossier went to prison for interference in an election? That three letter organization. I think the only thing we can trust them on is the kiddie port prosecution units. Everything else? Disband.


Still doesn’t answer my question.  Who is going to get improperly retained classified information?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 1, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> Not entirely true.
> 
> Just because something isn’t classified, doesn’t mean anyone and everyone can see it.


If he made it unclassified, i.e. without any additional caveats, that's literally what it means.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Sep 1, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> If he made it unclassified, i.e. without any additional caveats, that's literally what it means.


Something can be unclassified, but still FOUO.

It’s a designation, not a classification.

And it’s dissemination is for only the conduct of official business. If you believe it is an unlawful seizure, you can argue it’s not for official business.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> You mean the organization of Ruby Ridge and Waco fame? Do you really think we should trust them? Same organization where no one involved in the Steele Dossier went to prison for interference in an election? That three letter organization. I think the only thing we can trust them on is the kiddie port prosecution units. Everything else? Disband.


Did you trust them when they re-opened the investigation into Clinton’s emails a week before an election?

I bet there were no calls to disband them after that.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 1, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Still doesn’t answer my question.  Who is going to get improperly retained classified information?



National Archives has an investigations unit that has law enforcement powers. So, um, that unit. 

(And yes from time to time they coordinate with the FBI, per the website)


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> National Archives has an investigations unit that has law enforcement powers. So, um, that unit.
> 
> (And yes from time to time they coordinate with the FBI, per the website)


Like on….counterintelligence matters?


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> National Archives has an investigations unit that has law enforcement powers. So, um, that unit.
> 
> (And yes from time to time they coordinate with the FBI, per the website)



And that alone speaks volumes about federal law enforcement and investigation.


----------



## AWP (Sep 1, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> Something can be unclassified, but still FOUO.


FOUO is dead, CUI is the name of the game now.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 1, 2022)

Devildoc said:


> And that alone speaks volumes about federal law enforcement and investigation.



They National Archives OIG probably even has a SWAT team.

The Department of Education also has a law enforcement apparatus and had a SWAT team and they used it once... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...california-home/2011/06/08/AGUxlKMH_blog.html


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 1, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> They National Archives OIG probably even has a SWAT team.
> 
> The Department of Education also has a law enforcement apparatus and had a SWAT team and they used it once... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...california-home/2011/06/08/AGUxlKMH_blog.html



Thumbs down only because of what you said, not because of you.

All the federal agencies and their little independent law enforcement and intelligence branches.  Very, very few of them are worth a damn and not a single tax dollar.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 1, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> Something can be unclassified, but still FOUO.
> 
> It’s a designation, not a classification.
> 
> And it’s dissemination is for only the conduct of official business. If you believe it is an unlawful seizure, you can argue it’s not for official business.


*FOUO was replaced by CUI*.

Additionally, it's a caveat.  In your example, UNCLASSIFIED is the classification, FOUO (when it was a thing) was the caveat.  So it would be U//FOUO

As I said in my earlier message, 



> If he made it unclassified, i.e. without any additional caveats, that's literally what it means.



So, unclass, w/o additional caveats, means:
unclassified - Glossary | CSRC 


> Information that does not require safeguarding or dissemination controls pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13556 (Controlled Unclassified Information) and has not been determined to require protection against unauthorized disclosure pursuant to E.O. 13526 (Classified National Security Information), or any predecessor or successor Order, or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. See controlled unclassified information (CUI), and classified national security information.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 1, 2022)

I would like the Five Eyes countries to have a unified system that is identical to ours.


----------



## Kraut783 (Sep 1, 2022)

oh geeeez...another caveat.....


----------



## AWP (Sep 1, 2022)

I don’t miss my last job ( for a bunch of reasons), but one of those is classifying half of our work as S// REL FVEY and then a bunch of individual countries.

CUI has made things stupid and I miss FOUO.


----------



## AWP (Sep 2, 2022)

Just to nerd out for a second, and this stuff is so dumb I don't understand all of it (kind of my job, but I digress, I present:

This moron's guide to CUI.

Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) is more than DoD, the rest of the government didn't want Defense to have all of the fun.

CUI Categories and CUI Registry: Limited Dissemination Controls

You could have a document that reads something like CUI//DCRIT//FEDCON which translates to Controlled Unclassified Information about DoD Critical Infrastructure Security Information releasable only to Federal employees and contractors.

But that's a banner. Let's go to the CUI Designation Indicator. We get to put these on stuff like diagrams and slides decks and... toilet paper, I don't fucking know. This is on my briefing slides and network diagrams (a version, not specifically this example), along with a version of the banner described above.

Controlled By: OUSD(I&S)
Controlled By: CL&S INFOSEC
CUI Category(ies): PRVCY
Limited Distribution Control: FEDCON
POC: Daffy Duck, 307-555-1234

*OR*

We could have stayed with FOUO because no one will protect CUI any better than they protected FOUO according to sources who are not allowed to speak on the record blah, blah, blah.

So, yeah...anyone who deals with "FOUO" data, which is most of the Federal government, now has to learn CUI. I'll bet a dollar, pick just about any office or program out there, once one brief is published every swinging binary genital holder or whatever we are these days will Copy-Paste that bitch to infinity.

CUI//AWPBULLSHITRANTS//SHADOWSPEAR


----------



## Dame (Sep 2, 2022)

AWP said:


> Just to nerd out for a second, and this stuff is so dumb I don't understand all of it (kind of my job, but I digress, I present:
> 
> This moron's guide to CUI.
> 
> ...


I always thought FOUO was dumb. There was no real reason to protect FOUO.  
CUI I can understand. There has to be a _legal_ reason to mark something CUI. HIPAA is a good example.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 2, 2022)

Dame said:


> I always thought FOUO was dumb. There was no real reason to protect FOUO.
> CUI I can understand. There has to be a _legal_ reason to mark something CUI. HIPAA is a good example.


FOUO was useful for OPSEC and PERSEC.  For example, it's not classified that we're having a big training event at this big, unsecure and easily accessible area, but we still don't necessarily want the public to know about it.  Same with some TTPs.  And the Army is notorious for putting personal info, to include SSNs, on widely-distributed documents, so FOUO helped protect that kind of info.  In theory.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 2, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> …it's not classified that we're having a big training event at this big, unsecure and easily accessible area, but we still don't necessarily want the public to know about it…



Like the Black Helicopters taking alien bodies from Area 51?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 2, 2022)

Gunz said:


> Like the Black Helicopters taking alien bodies from Area 51?


Sorry, that information is FOUO.  CUI.  Something.  Whatever.  ;)


----------



## Gunz (Sep 2, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Still doesn’t answer my question.  Who is going to get improperly retained classified information?



If Trump had any Restricted Data (RD) pertaining to nuclear weapons, as has been inferred, the DoE would be the sole arbiter of that material. And it also has an enforcement office.


----------



## Muppet (Sep 2, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Tangentially related. KJP calling "MAGA Republicans and Trump Supporters" extremists. She must be the person who writes all the irresponsible tweets from Biden's account.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1565055401099509764
> Didn't really know where to put this. 🤷‍♂️



I'm certainly no MAGA Trump supporter. Frankly, I thing they all suck but, if, we haven't learned who the true enemy of the state are, heads are up asses. 

The fact that the bumbling retard and this side show freak are considering US citizens as "extremists" is alarming but typical. 

This is the division the tater was talking about. Alienating populations are a quick way to ensure it being easier for power. 

You know what kind of "leader" does this? 

Fucking banana republic. 

Oh, these cunts refuse to recognize our country as a constitutional republic and not a democracy. Lack of education or, perhaps, they know exactly what they are doing.....


----------



## Devildoc (Sep 2, 2022)

Muppet said:


> I'm certainly no MAGA Trump supporter. Frankly, I thing they all suck but, if, we haven't learned who the true enemy of the state are, heads are up asses.
> 
> The fact that the bumbling retard and this side show freak are considering US citizens as "extremists" is alarming but typical.
> 
> ...



"Banana republic"?  C'mon, Bro, we don't need that kind of over-the-top hyperbole.... it's not like he weaponized the DOJ and FB....

Oh, nevermind....


----------



## Gunz (Sep 2, 2022)

Muppet said:


> I'm certainly no MAGA Trump supporter. Frankly, I thing they all suck but, if, we haven't learned who the true enemy of the state are, heads are up asses.
> 
> The fact that the bumbling retard and this side show freak are considering US citizens as "extremists" is alarming but typical.
> 
> ...



I’m not a Trumpista for sure…but I did vote for him. And I greatly resent the administration’s hate campaign against 74-million American citizens. Even if Biden qualifies that it’s only “MAGA Republicans” who are “extremists,” all the people who voted for Trump are inferred in those comments. And certainly the January 6th “insurrectionists” do not represent the vast majority of normal conservatives who voted for Trump.

I think this tactic is going to backfire on Biden.


----------



## Muppet (Sep 2, 2022)

Gunz said:


> I’m not a Trumpista for sure…but I did vote for him. And I greatly resent the administration’s hate campaign against 74-million American citizens. Even if Biden qualifies that it’s only “MAGA Republicans” who are “extremists,” all the people who voted for Trump are inferred in those comments. And certainly the January 6th “insurrectionists” do not represent the vast majority of normal conservatives who voted for Trump.
> 
> I think this tactic is going to backfire on Biden.



I voted for him also and unless we, the people have a better candidate, if he runs again, I'll vote for him. 

I'll keep my mouth shut about 6 Jan. My opinion may not be popular here. The term "insurrectionist" pisses me off, also.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 2, 2022)

DeSantis. Just sayin.


----------



## JedisonsDad (Sep 2, 2022)

Gunz said:


> I’m not a Trumpista for sure…but I did vote for him. And I greatly resent the administration’s hate campaign against 74-million American citizens. Even if Biden qualifies that it’s only “MAGA Republicans” who are “extremists,” all the people who voted for Trump are inferred in those comments. And certainly the January 6th “insurrectionists” do not represent the vast majority of normal conservatives who voted for Trump.
> 
> I think this tactic is going to backfire on Biden.


It’s like they don’t remember the whole “deplorable” moment Hillary had, and how that turned out.


----------



## Dame (Sep 2, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> FOUO was useful for OPSEC and PERSEC.  For example, it's not classified that we're having a big training event at this big, unsecure and easily accessible area, but we still don't necessarily want the public to know about it.  Same with some TTPs.  And the Army is notorious for putting personal info, to include SSNs, on widely-distributed documents, so FOUO helped protect that kind of info.  In theory.


True Sir, but the CUI designation does the same thing, and declares "there's a law that says so."
All that PII is protected by law. It's just that no one knows it or pays attention to it.
Even the Supreme Court had its hand slapped this month. Wyden tells Supreme Court to stop exposing people's Social Security numbers 


> "Each year, federal courts make available to the public court filings containing tens of thousands of Americans' personal information, such as their Social Security Numbers (SSNs) and dates of birth," Wyden wrote. "However, federal court rules — required by Congress — mandate that court filings be scrubbed of personal information before they are publicly available. These rules are not being followed, the courts are not enforcing them, and as a result, each year tens of thousands of Americans are exposed to needless privacy violations."


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Sep 2, 2022)

Muppet said:


> I voted for him also and unless we, the people have a better candidate, if he runs again, I'll vote for him.
> 
> I'll keep my mouth shut about 6 Jan. My opinion may not be popular here. The term "insurrectionist" pisses me off, also.


Samesies. Insurrectionist is a bullshit term anyways. Just like deplorable, racist, and whatever other buzzwords the MSM is pitching for normal Americans. 

I'm preaching to choir saying this, but Jan 6 was a nothing burger that keeps being flouted by people who cheered on DNC funded useful idiots burning down US infrastructure and farmland. My town was downwind of their bullshit. We tasted smoke for a fortnight.

(Oh and there was an open source document that was posted on here, that showcased all the connections between the rioter handlers and the DNC. It's gone now, but it was in the protest thread. One of the ex mods even complained about it being posted, something about how we don't do that here.)

An election was stolen, patriots like Ashley Babbit were murdered, and others are being railroaded. Unpopular though it may be, the truth will set one free, no matter what others say.


----------



## Kraut783 (Sep 2, 2022)

Gunz said:


> DeSantis. Just sayin.


 Would like to see Nikki Haley as a VP candidate....if not for DeSantis, then someone.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Sep 3, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> They National Archives OIG probably even has a SWAT team.
> 
> The Department of Education also has a law enforcement apparatus and had a SWAT team and they used it once... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...california-home/2011/06/08/AGUxlKMH_blog.html


@ThunderHorse @Devildoc 

The very first paragraph from the link above: _The Department of Education did not conduct the search by a SWAT team, nor does the Department of Education own or operate a SWAT Team, as was originally reported._


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 5, 2022)

There appears to be some sanity going on...at least with the judges: Judge orders halt to DOJ review of documents seized from Trump


----------



## Kraut783 (Sep 5, 2022)

Appointing a special master is probably the right decision, there is no downside to it legally.


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 6, 2022)

Who’s gonna be the one to tell him that SAP info, HCS, and SI aren’t covered under executive privilege?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Who’s gonna be the one to tell him that SAP info, HCS, and SI aren’t covered under executive privilege?


A sitting president's ability to declass doesn't carry over into those caveats?


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> A sitting president's ability to declass doesn't carry over into those caveats?


Of course it does, but this post-facto justification from Kash Patel that Pres. Trump declassified every document that he laid eyes on doesn’t make any sense at all.  He’s just lying about it.

Edit: And after that, they still wouldn’t be covered under executive privilege


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> Of course it does, but this post-facto justification from Kash Patel that Pres. Trump declassified every document that he laid eyes on doesn’t make any sense at all.  He’s just lying about it.
> 
> Edit: And after that, they still wouldn’t be covered under executive privilege


I concur that he would not be able to downgrade/declassify after he left office.  But the argument on the table is that he declassed everything he possessed before he left office.  And AFAIK he never said "everything he laid eyes on," it's possible but I remember reading that he claimed it about certain topics, like the Russia Collusion hoax.

It's also entirely possible that the alleged declassification is an after-the-fact fabrication.  At the same time, are you willing to concede that he may, in fact, have done so, regardless of how you feel about him or Presidential declass powers?

If he downgraded them to UNCLASS, then he wouldn't need to try to exert executive privilege over classified docs, because they are UNCLASS.


----------



## Topkick (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I concur that he would not be able to downgrade/declassify after he left office. But the argument on the table is that he declassed everything he possessed before he left office


And why wouldn't he?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Topkick said:


> And why wouldn't he?


AFAIK, the downgrade/DECLASS policy he is citing belongs to the sitting president, in his powers as Commander in Chief.  No longer CiC, no longer have those powers.  Unless there is some weird policy I don't know about.


----------



## Topkick (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> AFAIK, the downgrade/DECLASS policy he is citing belongs to the sitting president, in his powers as Commander in Chief.  No longer CiC, no longer have those powers.  Unless there is some weird policy I don't know about.


Sorry, why wouldn’t  he declass everything before taking it?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Topkick said:


> Sorry, why wouldn’t  he declass everything before taking it?


He may have.  I thought I remember reading that he said he declass'd everything dealing with the Russia hoax.  But I don't know what docs he had at his house, and I don't know what else he may have claimed to have downgraded before he left.


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I concur that he would not be able to downgrade/declassify after he left office.  But the argument on the table is that he declassed everything he possessed before he left office.  And AFAIK he never said "everything he laid eyes on," it's possible but I remember reading that he claimed it about certain topics, like the Russia Collusion hoax.
> 
> It's also entirely possible that the alleged declassification is an after-the-fact fabrication.  At the same time, are you willing to concede that he may, in fact, have done so, regardless of how you feel about him or Presidential declass powers?
> 
> If he downgraded them to UNCLASS, then he wouldn't need to try to exert executive privilege over classified docs, because they are UNCLASS.


I grant that it’s possible he did.  And my comment was a bit of an exaggeration.  This is how John Solomon characterized Patel’s declassification statement:



> Kash Patel, former National Security Prosecutor, reacts to the FBI raid of President Trump’s home and offices at Mar-a-lago earlier this week and offers a defense that Trump could have ‘verbally declassified the documents’ while he was President. Patel comments, that the  the President by law is the ultimate arbiter, as a classification authority. If he says it, it's declassified. He doesn't need to go through the bureaucratic rigmarole, written down in appropriate style, that's not what the Constitution says.”  Commenting, that he recalls on number occasions, *"not only did President do it by writing in October of 2020, he did it verbally, multiple times in the White House, whole sets of documents.”*



If this is true, then it’s even worse.  The former president verbally declassified SAP info for the sole purpose of taking it back to Mar A Lago?  Why in the world would you do that? That’s such a brazen disregard for security practices that Hillary should be taking notes!*

Even if this declassification statement is true, if Trump runs and is re-elected he should never see classified information again.  Such flagrant disregard for even basic security practices just boggles my mind.  It’s bad enough that he tweeted about compartmented shit.  Sure, if he did declassify this material, then this whole investigation is a moot point and he dodged charges.  But man, if anyone is paying attention to this had any sort of opinion on Hillary’s emails, they should be extremely pissed about this.

*Hillary was not and never will be president, which is a good thing


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> If this is true, then it’s even worse.  The former president verbally declassified SAP info for the sole purpose of taking it back to Mar A Lago?  Why in the world would you do that? That’s such a brazen disregard for security practices that Hillary should be taking notes!*
> 
> Even if this declassification statement is true, if Trump runs and is re-elected he should never see classified information again.  Such flagrant disregard for even basic security practices just boggles my mind.  It’s bad enough that he tweeted about compartmented shit.  Sure, if he did declassify this material, then this whole investigation is a moot point and he dodged charges.  *But man, if anyone is paying attention to this had any sort of opinion on Hillary’s emails, they should be extremely pissed about this.*
> 
> *Hillary was not and never will be president, which is a good thing


Let's talk "precedent". I completely understand I have only copied your quote, and that those aren't your words. But they do open up a valuable conversation I think we should explore.

The President holds unilateral and plenary power to declassify anything and everything he wants. Literally wave his hand over a box and says *Trumps voice* "Declassified" and poof- no longer classified. That's as far as the process goes. Caveats and read-ins don't matter. _If a president exercises his power alone, does he still have power?_ The charge here- when/if/did he/didn't he declassify what he had prior to leaving office- is an absolute fool's errand. And it rejects the basic premise that we can't get past until it's answered- _Is it appropriate to raid a political opponent's house, ever? Was it appropriate in this instance? Does it follow previous precedent?_

If there was something huge in the raid to get our collective panties in a bunch about, it would have leaked. It didn't, because the democrats want to hold it till after the election. "We found some empty marked folders!"... ruh-roh. That doesn't sound like nuke secrets and it looks less and less likely that he was malicious in nature.

All other issues here are moot not because "whataboutism", but because equal application of the laws in like circumstances is expected in a free and fair society. I COMPLETELY agree with the bolded above.

Hillary had no power to declassify the truly SCI stuff she housed on a personal email server she destroyed *after* she was subpoenaed. No charges, no raids, no inquiry. So, that's the precedent for this stuff now. If you weren't chanting "LOCK HER UP!" a couple years ago, save the drama for me now. (not you directly, @Salt USMC ; the royal and non-specific "you"). So on this case, I agree with the sentiment, but I feel as if you're on the wrong side of it.

The statement isn't, "_Well, if you were mad about Hillary, you should be ready to rain hellfire on this Donald Trump guy! He did it but WORSE!"._

The statement *should be*- _"Like it or not, we set a precedent with a Secretary of State; that precedent is now solidified. This isn't that big of a deal. Let President Trump go in front of congress and shriek 'EVEN IF I DID WHAT WOULD IT MATTER?!' and then he's good."_

Collectively, we have made our bed. Don't complain now that you cant sleep in it. (royal you, not specific).


----------



## AWP (Sep 6, 2022)

I understand that lawyers, DA's and such, want to build an iron clad case before they prefer charges and I am 100 percent onboard with that notion.

The Supreme Court had a..."zealot" feel so strongly about Roe vs. Wade that this person(s) leaked the brief in advance. Our entire government thrives on leaking information it shouldn't. Fox, CNN, MSNBC, Reuters...every fucking news agency has some form of "a source not authorized to comment publicly" phrase ready to go in it's stories. Hell, I'll bet a dollar some reporters have it as a macro so they don't have to type it out or reference a text file with common phrases.

Here we are almost a month after the raid with no charges filed and only the barest of details leaked to the press? The same press that would beat the shit out of Trump for his opinions on cereal or favorite colors or type of grass to use on a lawn in Iowa?

All we have are rumor and speculation, a search warrant that probably burned through a dozen Sharpies for the redaction, and the emotion of the internet?

"The day ain't over and all", but this is a farce. This is ridiculous. The DOJ raided a former president, but didn't have an army of lawyers ready to pour over the results of that raid? No one leaked details? No one's taking a month after the raid? This mountain of evidence has not prompted one goddamned soul to leak its contents to the press?

I do not like Trump at all, but this is bullshit.


----------



## Topkick (Sep 6, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> The President holds unilateral and plenary power to declassify anything and everything he wants. Literally wave his hand over a box and says *Trumps voice* "Declassified" and poof- no longer classified. That's as far as the process goes. Caveats and read-ins don't matter. _If a president exercises his power alone, does he still have power?_ The charge here- when/if/did he/didn't he declassify what he had prior to leaving office- is an absolute fool's errand. And it rejects the basic premise that we can't get past until it's answered- _Is it appropriate to raid a political opponent's house, ever? Was it appropriate in this instance? Does it follow previous precedent?_


This is where it gets gray with me. So, if this is true then there is no case. He can say he declassified it and you can't prove he didn't. End of story. But, it's dangerous to give that power to any one person and if something gravely dangerous is discovered missing, it must be recovered. IMO this is all part of an on-going witch-hunt, but maybe some important lessons will be learned.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Topkick said:


> This is where it gets gray with me. So, if this is true then there is no case. He can say he declassified it and you can't prove he didn't. End of story. But, it's dangerous to give that power to any one person and if something gravely dangerous is discovered missing, it must be recovered. IMO this is all part of an on-going witch-hunt, but maybe some important lessons will be learned.


It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now. 

IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there. 

It is true; and there is no case.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now.
> 
> IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there.
> 
> It is true; and there is no case.


I agree.  Especially about the "necessary" part.

I don't know what (formerly?) classified information was in former President Trump's possession and I don't think any of the rest of us on the site do either.  I do know that there was a huge conspiracy against then-Candidate (and later President) Trump and that he was very concerned about a potential cover-up of it after he left office.  Of course, he could also have been concerned about information that would reveal malfeasance on his part, and he took the information with him to obstruct justice.  I have my own opinions, based on my own biases, but right now I don't have enough information to make a decision one way or the other.


----------



## Topkick (Sep 6, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> It's literally been in the constitution since we wrote it. It's not dangerous, it's necessary for the President to retain that power unilaterally, and the only time this has been an issue has been now.
> 
> IMO, you were correct after your second sentence and could have just stopped there.
> 
> It is true; and there is no case.


I want you to be right.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Topkick said:


> I want you to be right.


Well, if history is any indicator, I am not. Is what it is. 


Marauder06 said:


> I agree.  Especially about the "necessary" part.
> 
> I don't know what (formerly?) classified information was in former President Trump's possession and I don't think any of the rest of us on the site do either.  I do know that there was a huge conspiracy against then-Candidate (and later President) Trump and that he was very concerned about a potential cover-up of it after he left office.  Of course, he could also have been concerned about information that would reveal malfeasance on his part, and he took the information with him to obstruct justice.  I have my own opinions, based on my own biases, but right now I don't have enough information to make a decision one way or the other.


Agree with all. No clue what was in the haul; no one does. But something is indeed rotten in the state of Denmark, I believe.


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 6, 2022)

Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?

Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?

Cool cool. That's the type of excuse a kid comes up with after you catch them in a lie. It's Schrodinger's Classification right now. 

If anything, this shows that the declassification process should at least have some sort of formality to it.

Literally a memo that said "I, President Trump, on Day 123, declassify documents abc and xyz" would have prevented all of this.


----------



## Topkick (Sep 6, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?
> 
> Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?



It can both, right?

For example  "I declassified everything so if they found something that wasn't, it must've been planted"

On the other hand, I agree it may be good to officially stamp/ record the files before they leave with a former president.


----------



## Kraut783 (Sep 6, 2022)

I know how the declass for use works and it is a very formal process, and a pain, especially if you are wanting to use another agencies collection for criminal. Saying that, I do wonder what the process is like for Presidential declass...and how does it work, can it be verbal with a follow up LHM...etc.

Who knows.....I am curious how this plays out.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?
> 
> Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?
> 
> ...


I don't recall any serious participant in this conversation saying all the documents were planted by the FBI.

It is widely known that then-President Trump declared, when it was within his power to do so, that he was declassifying everything related to the Russia Hoax and the Clinton email scandal.  Here's a link from Reuters about it, from back in October of 2020. An excerpt:



> “I have fully authorized the total Declassification of any & all documents pertaining to the single greatest political CRIME in American History, the Russia Hoax. Likewise, the Hillary Clinton Email Scandal. No redactions!” Trump wrote on Twitter.




The "Schrödinger's Classification" comment was clever, but I think the Washington Post did it better.

Look, I agree that the classification/declass process sucks.  I don't like it.  But just because we don't like something, or someone, doesn't automatically make it, or them, illegal/criminal.

I don't know what was seized from Mar-a-Lago.  But if it was related, even tangentially, to information that then-President Trump declassified, then it seems to me that the Trump team has a good leg to stand on in this whole thing.  Given the information above, at this point in the investigation, wouldn't you agree?


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I don't recall any serious participant in this conversation saying all the documents were planted by the FBI.
> 
> It is widely known that then-President Trump declared, when it was within his power to do so, that he was declassifying everything related to the Russia Hoax and the Clinton email scandal.  Here's a link from Reuters about it. An excerpt:
> 
> ...


Trump himself at the beginning was posting (truthing? Socialing?) That the FBI was walking in with boxes of documents.

I agree with the rest of the substance of your post. This whole thing hinges on what documents he had.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> *Trump himself at the beginning was posting (truthing? Socialing?) That the FBI was walking in with boxes of documents.*
> 
> I agree with the rest of the substance of your post. This whole thing hinges on what documents he had.


I don't recall that, but I don't follow President Trump's social media.  It certainly sounds like something he would say, lol.

I do remember thinking that it looked like the FBI staged (vs. planted) the material they released in that photo.  I think it was probably done for evidencial purposes, but it sure made it look like Pres Trump just had TS stuff strewn around on the floor, when it was in fact in boxes behind a locked door.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Remember when all the documents were planted by the FBI?
> 
> Now they've all been declassified prior, but nobody knew about it except Trump?
> 
> ...


To your bolded; there is a process. It's called, "This power belongs to the president, and them alone, unless it's the vice president operating in a specific function. They can legit declassify whatever they want." The president's powers are clearly illuminated. 

I would also like to take this time to commend your adherence to your narrative. It is impressive, and I don't say that sarcastically.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

This is the hottest take yet:

Trump FBI raid could have ‘some connection’ to murdered CIA assets, MSNBC's Joy Reid speculates



> "While all of this is happening, we know that in 2021 that there was a rash of deaths of American spies. They were being caught. They were being killed. This is a very real and exigent circumstance. The CIA has admitted to that. *Now, we are not saying* that we know there is some connection between the purloined documents and those events. *But* they did happen at a time when Trump did have custody of some really sensitive information that he should not have had," Reid said.




"I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'."  Classic "post hoc" bs argument.  LOL


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 6, 2022)

Yeah that one is nonsense. From what I've read they've been losing agents since well before Trump.


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> This is the hottest take yet:
> 
> Trump FBI raid could have ‘some connection’ to murdered CIA assets, MSNBC's Joy Reid speculates
> 
> "I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'."  Classic "post hoc" bs argument.  LOL



Yeah, this is the stupidest take possible.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

SpitfireV said:


> Yeah that one is nonsense. From what I've read they've been losing agents since well before Trump.


I have no idea what caused this latest round of spy captures.  I wasn't even aware it happened until I read that article.  Usually though it's an internal CI issue rather than a rogue president.

It's entirely possible that the President took home a NOC list and it got compromised.  I just don't think it's likely.  And I think it's laughable that people are trying to make that argument.  It makes it look like there's no "there" there.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 6, 2022)

I remember reading about it before he was even running and the prevailing theory was a comms stuff up somewhere. I'll try and find some sources this afternoon.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> This is the hottest take yet:
> 
> Trump FBI raid could have ‘some connection’ to murdered CIA assets, MSNBC's Joy Reid speculates
> 
> ...


OMFG. Joy Reid, everyone. 


SpitfireV said:


> Yeah that one is nonsense. From what I've read they've been losing agents since well before Trump.


And what if I told you literally every other theory on "What Trump had" or "What was legal?" is also absolute bullshit, we just haven't had the time for the natural progression to take it's course? For reference, please see...

The Russian Collusion Hoax
The Steele Dossier
The Russia Bounty Story
The FISA Warrants
The Trump Tower Meeting Hoax
Impeachment #1
Impeachment #2
The Hunter Biden Laptop

These things were *also* breathlessly reported as true, smoking guns. What happened? Time, that's all. The claims didn't change, we just had more time to examine them. 

So if you'll excuse me, I have played this game before. I will wait.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 6, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> OMFG. Joy Reid, everyone.
> 
> And what if I told you literally every other theory on "What Trump had" or "What was legal?" is also absolute bullshit, we just haven't had the time for the natural progression to take it's course? For reference, please see...
> 
> ...



OTY. I don't have an opinion on the rest of it but I'm just saying these agent losses have been happening for a while (if it's related to the previous losses).


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

OOCT.


SpitfireV said:


> OTY. I don't have an opinion on the rest of it but I'm just saying these agent losses have been happening for a while (if it's related to the previous losses).


Don't know what OTY means, so I am going to make something up that is the most flattering to me, and then go on. 

OTY = Oh, the YAMS (yams is my posterior chain, glutes included).

Thanks, I do RDLs.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2022)

I think it means "over to  you."  But I like  yours better.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 6, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> I think it means "over to  you."  But I like  yours better.


I like mine better too! This "redefining basic definitions" thing is definitely useful, I can see why politicians do it. Shame I have an actual job with accountability or I would do it more often.


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 7, 2022)

Leaks seem to have started. 

Grain of salt, your mileage may vary, Yada yada.

Foreign nuclear secrets among docs found in Trump raid: report


----------



## JedisonsDad (Sep 7, 2022)

Maybe I’m young, naive, and blissfully ignorant, but I don’t believe it should be made public what documents he may or may not have had.

Managers of affected projects should be discretely notified, and allow them to assess the damage.

Worst case scenario, someone leaks a topic that no foreign enemy was tracking we had knowledge about. Best case scenario, it confirms a suspicion on a list of speculations for a foreign entity.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Sep 8, 2022)




----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 8, 2022)

Cookie_ said:


> Leaks seem to have started.
> 
> Grain of salt, your mileage may vary, Yada yada.
> 
> Foreign nuclear secrets among docs found in Trump raid: report



From the article:  "_In a stunning leak from the Department of Justice..._"  not stunning at all.  Utterly predictable.


----------



## AWP (Sep 8, 2022)

It took this long? What is our country coming to? What have we become when it takes weeks for a leak on this story?


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 8, 2022)

The LIC (Leaking Industrial Complex) has really fallen on hard times recently.

Purely coincidentally, Leaking Industrial Complex is how I refer to my penis.


----------



## AWP (Sep 8, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> The LIC (Leaking Industrial Complex) has really fallen on hard times recently.
> 
> Purely coincidentally, Leaking Industrial Complex is how I refer to my penis.



Pretty early for Post of the Day, but I think is the bar, folks.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 8, 2022)

JedisonsDad said:


> Maybe I’m young, naive, and blissfully ignorant, but I don’t believe it should be made public what documents he may or may not have had.
> 
> Managers of affected projects should be discretely notified, and allow them to assess the damage.
> 
> Worst case scenario, someone leaks a topic that no foreign enemy was tracking we had knowledge about. Best case scenario, it confirms a suspicion on a list of speculations for a foreign entity.


The FBI is holds information back like a collander holds water.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 8, 2022)

It’s amazing what leaks and what doesn’t.  Has Epstein’s client list been published yet?  The only reason I can think of that it hasn’t is they’re holding it in as an October Surprise.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 8, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It’s amazing what leaks and what doesn’t.  Has Epstein’s client list been published yet?  The only reason I can think of that it hasn’t is they’re holding it in as an October Surprise.


The Maxwell case makes me murderously angry. Convict the groomer, not the sexual assaulters. And I can get a live tweet about Amber Heard pooping the bed, literally as it happens in the courthouse- but even _reporting _on the Maxwell case was "too salacious" for the public. 

Fuck this whole timeline.


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 8, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It’s amazing what leaks and what doesn’t.  Has Epstein’s client list been published yet?  The only reason I can think of that it hasn’t is they’re holding it in as an October Surprise.



See, I thought the same thing last election cycle. 

I think the "clientele" might have been to diverse to allow for leaking. It's political/economic suicide.



amlove21 said:


> The Maxwell case makes me murderously angry. Convict the groomer, not the sexual assaulters. And I can get a live tweet about Amber Heard pooping the bed, literally as it happens in the courthouse- but even _reporting _on the Maxwell case was "too salacious" for the public.
> 
> Fuck this whole timeline.



She's still being taken care of in prison. She's apparently much better off cell/privileges wise than other women at her facility. 
(I'm hearing this from a CO that just transfered from there)


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 10, 2022)

As usual the media is stoking the fire with bullshit.  

Former FBI Official: Nuclear Docs Found at Trump’s House Would Fetch a High Price in the Event Someone Was Looking to Sell Out the US


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2022)

RackMaster said:


> As usual the media is stoking the fire with bullshit.
> 
> Former FBI Official: Nuclear Docs Found at Trump’s House Would Fetch a High Price in the Event Someone Was Looking to Sell Out the US


Another shameless hit piece filled with speculation, innuendo, and “anonymous sources.”


----------



## ThunderHorse (Sep 26, 2022)

Sieve, reactivate leaking. 

National security risk review of material Trump kept at Mar-a-Lago resumes after appeals court ruling


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 26, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Sieve, reactivate leaking.
> 
> National security risk review of material Trump kept at Mar-a-Lago resumes after appeals court ruling





> Intelligence officials have resumed their national security risk review of top-secret documents that were seized at former President Donald Trump’s Florida estate, according to a *spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence*



A leak? This was an official press release


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 26, 2022)

Salt USMC said:


> A leak? This was an official press release


... and the difference is?


----------



## amlove21 (Nov 15, 2022)

So, that was fun. Leak indicates that the materials taken from Trump's home in Mar-A-Lago indicate that the evidence collected over a couple months was "mostly centered around Trump's ego and intransigence."

Not secrets. Not close hold. Not nuclear. A bunch of stuff he kept as mementos that he thought was his. And the leak has to come from... either the DOJ or the FBI. Which probably means they're close to dropping this case a la Killary- zero intent to harm. 

Trump urges special master to rule Mar-a-Lago records are his personal property

Played good enough for the mid terms though. Kinda like the student loan forgiveness that everyone knew wasn't constitutionally valid... but hey, played real well in for the midterms.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Nov 15, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> So, that was fun. Leak indicates that the materials taken from Trump's home in Mar-A-Lago indicate that the evidence collected over a couple months was "mostly centered around Trump's ego and intransigence."
> 
> Not secrets. Not close hold. Not nuclear. A bunch of stuff he kept as mementos that he thought was his. And the leak has to come from... either the DOJ or the FBI. Which probably means they're close to dropping this case a la Killary- zero intent to harm.
> 
> ...



Oh you know, just the gubmint and deep state doing everything in its power to subvert an election.


----------



## Marauder06 (Nov 15, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Oh you know, just the gubmint and deep state doing everything in its power to subvert an election.


Nah.  Everyone knows that only Republicans do that kind of thing.  And the Dems are in power.  For a little while longer.


----------



## BloodStripe (Nov 16, 2022)

Marauder06 said:


> It’s amazing what leaks and what doesn’t.  Has Epstein’s client list been published yet?  The only reason I can think of that it hasn’t is they’re holding it in as an October Surprise.


October has come and past. Maybe there will be a Christmas miracle…


----------



## ThunderHorse (Nov 19, 2022)

amlove21 said:


> So, that was fun. Leak indicates that the materials taken from Trump's home in Mar-A-Lago indicate that the evidence collected over a couple months was "mostly centered around Trump's ego and intransigence."
> 
> Not secrets. Not close hold. Not nuclear. A bunch of stuff he kept as mementos that he thought was his. And the leak has to come from... either the DOJ or the FBI. Which probably means they're close to dropping this case a la Killary- zero intent to harm.
> 
> ...


Just got my email telling me I qualified for forgiveness and they're blaming the courts.  How the fuck do these people get away with election manipulation like this?


----------



## Jaknight (Nov 19, 2022)

ThunderHorse said:


> Just got my email telling me I qualified for forgiveness and they're blaming the courts.  How the fuck do these people get away with election manipulation like this?


I mean technically they aren’t lying


----------



## Topkick (Saturday at 9:12 AM)

Former GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger joins CNN

I see things are going just as expected. He didn't even take a nap before announcing this.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Saturday at 9:17 AM)

Just like with the release of his taxes, want to know why we haven't heard anything? Because there is no "there" there. Well there is something going on. The democrats subverting an election and getting away with it. Because somehow this trash is "lawful".


----------



## amlove21 (Saturday at 2:42 PM)

ThunderHorse said:


> Just like with the release of his taxes, want to know why we haven't heard anything? Because there is no "there" there. Well there is something going on. The democrats subverting an election and getting away with it. Because somehow this trash is "lawful".


Exactly. Remember when it was about nuclear secrets? But it wasn’t. It was a raid to put Trump in the news before the election.


----------



## Marauder06 (Saturday at 4:54 PM)

amlove21 said:


> Exactly. Remember when it was about nuclear secrets? But it wasn’t. It was a raid to put Trump in the news before the election.


That's why it's fun to go back and look at what a scandal was originally about, before the gaslighting and memory-holing started.

Raid on President Trump's Home


----------



## Kraut783 (Monday at 6:39 PM)

Classified documents from Biden's time as VP discovered in private office, source says

So much for prosecuting Trump....


----------



## 757 (Monday at 7:00 PM)

Kraut783 said:


> Classified documents from Biden's time as VP discovered in private office, source says
> 
> So much for prosecuting Trump....


----------



## Kraut783 (Monday at 7:28 PM)

To be honest, I don't think people at that level (POTUS/VP/Congress), of either party, just don't treat classified docs like they should, kind of a mix of entitlement and complacency.


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Tuesday at 7:55 AM)

The funniest part is Biden was an "Honorary Professor" 5 years ago...


----------



## Marauder06 (Tuesday at 8:24 AM)

Kraut783 said:


> Classified documents from Biden's time as VP discovered in private office, source says
> 
> So much for prosecuting Trump....


What’s is interesting to me is that the story is the papers were discovered by President Biden’s lawyer.  Why did he just,.. not report it?  A little shred-shred and it never happened.  Right?


----------



## Topkick (Tuesday at 12:58 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> What’s is interesting to me is that the story is the papers were discovered by President Biden’s lawyer.  Why did he just,.. not report it?  A little shred-shred and it never happened.  Right?


Virtue signaling? By self-reporting maybe they think it won't be comparable to the events regarding the orange man?


----------



## Marauder06 (Tuesday at 1:52 PM)

Topkick said:


> Virtue signaling? By self-reporting maybe they think it won't be comparable to the events regarding the orange man?


I just don’t see what the upside was for President Biden for this to be out there.  Unless it is either preemptive (I.e. someone else was going to drop a dime) or it’s covering up something much bigger.


----------



## Topkick (Tuesday at 2:02 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> I just don’t see what the upside was for President Biden for this to be out there.  Unless it is either preemptive (I.e. someone else was going to drop a dime) or it’s covering up something much bigger.


Agree. I'm betting someone, not Biden's people, found the documents first. Then it was " oh shit, this is not going to look good because Trump."


----------



## amlove21 (Tuesday at 2:14 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> What’s is interesting to me is that the story is the papers were discovered by President Biden’s lawyer.  Why did he just,.. not report it?  A little shred-shred and it never happened.  Right?


Because they’re done with Biden. 

Oh, and UPENN can’t exactly explain why the CCP was their biggest donor- by a LOT. Like- $54 million total.


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Tuesday at 3:34 PM)

^Because brotherhood, cooperation, peace on Earth, that's why.


----------



## BloodStripe (Wednesday at 12:52 AM)

I personally believe his lawyer knew they were there for a long time and only after the House was won by the Republicans did he know they’d come looking. This to me implies they were looking to get ahead.


----------



## Gunz (Wednesday at 7:32 AM)

Preemptive damage control is usually the better fork in the road from a PR standpoint. 

The Leftist MSM is scurrying to point out the differences between the Trump and Biden secret papers stash, minimizing the latter.


----------



## Devildoc (Wednesday at 8:39 AM)

Gunz said:


> Preemptive damage control is usually the better fork in the road from a PR standpoint.
> 
> The Leftist MSM is scurrying to point out the differences between the Trump and Biden secret papers stash, minimizing the latter.



They are already on it, hard: "Oh, it was only 10 pages, compared to Trump's 300" or something like that.  The spin control will make contortionists look like inflexible plastic mannikins.


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Wednesday at 9:28 AM)

Gunz said:


> Preemptive damage control is usually the better fork in the road from a PR standpoint.
> 
> The Leftist MSM is scurrying to point out the differences between the Trump and Biden secret papers stash, minimizing the latter.



Remember when sending thousands of sensitive emails to a private server was no big deal? Then four years later having a dozen boxes of documents in an office was treason? Then just another couple years after that, leaving classified documents at another office is no big deal again?


----------



## amlove21 (Wednesday at 11:33 AM)

Biden actually has SCI too which is dope.


----------



## Marauder06 (Wednesday at 11:54 AM)

amlove21 said:


> Biden actually has SCI too which is dope.


I heard speculation this morning that it was stuff he took and hid related to Ukraine, Iran, and other stuff he didn't want Trump finding when he took office.

Seems a little far-fetched since much if not most intel exists in more forms/locations than just in the VP's hands, but hey what do I know.  Could be true.


----------



## amlove21 (Wednesday at 12:54 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> I heard speculation this morning that it was stuff he took and hid related to Ukraine, Iran, and other stuff he didn't want Trump finding when he took office.
> 
> Seems a little far-fetched since much if not most intel exists in more forms/locations than just in the VP's hands, but hey what do I know.  Could be true.


I’m not pretending to know what’s in there. And honestly, it’s gonna be a silly shit show from both sides for a bit, so I’m just gonna watch this one play out.


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Wednesday at 1:17 PM)

amlove21 said:


> Biden actually has SCI too which is dope.



Hahaha yeah right! You mean HAD!! 

....nevermind, you're right. He has and will continue to have one...


----------



## Cookie_ (Wednesday at 1:58 PM)

Is it different when it comes to the details with the Trump docs?

Yes.

Is it still leakage that should be treated seriously?

Also yes.

This feels very much like a "we caught ourselves and are going to use it to make the Trump team's actions/statements even worse in comparison."

It's the whole reason Garland is making a big show of turning it over to a Trump appointed judge. Very dog and pony.



amlove21 said:


> Biden actually has SCI too which is dope.





Marauder06 said:


> I heard speculation this morning that it was stuff he took and hid related to Ukraine, Iran, and other stuff he didn't want Trump finding when he took office.



Imagine if this (the Ukraine docs idea) was actually true, and then Biden gets impeached, Harris resigns in disgrace, and "15th times the charm" McCarthy becomes POTUS.

I don't like seeing the country torn apart, but the chaos goblin section of my brain loves the idea of that scenario.


----------



## amlove21 (Wednesday at 2:08 PM)

Cookie_ said:


> Imagine if this (the Ukraine docs idea) was actually true, and then Biden gets impeached, Harris resigns in disgrace, and "15th times the charm" McCarthy becomes POTUS.
> 
> I don't like seeing the country torn apart, but the chaos goblin section of my brain loves the idea of that scenario.


You’re not wrong about the chaos part.


----------



## Gunz (Wednesday at 2:19 PM)

Washington DC…just another name for Showbiz.


----------



## Marauder06 (Wednesday at 2:59 PM)

What are the major differences, except for the fact that one was selectively-prosecuted, and the other wasn't?


----------



## DA SWO (Wednesday at 3:11 PM)

Cookie_ said:


> Is it different when it comes to the details with the Trump docs?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> ...


Unlikely as Biden would have to be removed from office and Harris resign at the same time.  Dems are not voting to impeach. and Harris won't resign.


----------



## Marauder06 (Wednesday at 3:12 PM)

DA SWO said:


> Unlikely as Biden would have to be removed from office and Harris resign at the same time.  Dems are not voting to impeach. and Harris won't resign.


I predict President Biden will be impeached in the House and acquitted in the Senate.  But short of him dying in office (which is not something I want to happen), he will complete his term.


----------



## Cookie_ (Wednesday at 3:15 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> What are the major differences, except for the fact that one was selectively-prosecuted, and the other wasn't?


Amount of docs, willingness to work with the agencies, actually turning stuff in, etc.
It's different enough to not be the exact same thing like "insert news source" might be doing.

To that same point, it's definitely not a nothing burger like "other news source" is claiming.

I'd be in big trouble if I walked out of a SCIF with documents, and it should be a non-partisan issue that people with the highest clearances just keep doing it with stuff in closets.

I want our leaders to get the same scrutiny an E3 would if this happened to them.



DA SWO said:


> Unlikely as Biden would have to be removed from office and Harris resign at the same time.  Dems are not voting to impeach. and Harris won't resign.



I know. But chaos goblin wants chaos.


----------



## Blizzard (Wednesday at 4:57 PM)

Peter Doocy always has solid game when it comes to calling out the hypocrisy and ineptness of the current administration:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613293073613705218


----------



## JedisonsDad (Wednesday at 5:08 PM)

Blizzard said:


> Peter Doocy always has solid game when it comes to calling out the hypocrisy and ineptness of the current administration:
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613293073613705218


I love that Biden was “surprised to learn” that classified documents were there.

So that means he didn’t know they were there and just didn’t think it was an issue. He forgot he placed them there. So actually misplacing secrets. I wonder how often secrets get misplaced.


----------



## Kraut783 (Wednesday at 5:34 PM)

Marauder06 said:


> I heard speculation this morning that it was stuff he took and hid related to Ukraine, Iran, and other stuff he didn't want Trump finding when he took office.
> 
> Seems a little far-fetched since much if not most intel exists in more forms/locations than just in the VP's hands, but hey what do I know.  Could be true.


Seems pretty far fetched, anything he is given to review is not the original document...


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Wednesday at 5:35 PM)

If the docs were remotely related to Ukraine or Russia I hope somebody gets deep fried. 

Didn't some general get demoted or fired for taking classified documents home under the Obama administration.?

And More Documents 🤣


----------



## AWP (Wednesday at 8:35 PM)

The chaos inspired hypocrisy is so vast I don't even know what or who to pull for right now. 

The older I get, and the "worse" our world becomes, the more I identify with the Joker. "It's all part of the plan." "The thing about chaos"...its fair."

We have multiple presidencies or cabinet officials breaking the law and not one, NOT ONE, will face any scrutiny outside of the media or a neutered Congress.

We deserve better but supporting one of "the above" undermines our ability to right the ship. Fuck everyone involved in this, including us, this board, and our families. We are part of the problem.


----------



## Topkick (Wednesday at 8:44 PM)

AWP said:


> We have multiple presidencies or cabinet officials breaking the law and not one, NOT ONE, will face any scrutiny outside of the media or a neutered Congress


Remember when we thought our leaders, especially our presidents, were the best America has to offer?


----------



## BloodStripe (Yesterday at 12:24 AM)

More documents were found last night. Shocked I tell you. Shocked!


----------



## RackMaster (Yesterday at 11:09 AM)

Don't worry everybody.  They were locked in his garage.  Nothing to see here...


White House confirms Biden aides located Obama-era classified documents at two locations in Wilmington home | CNN Politics


----------



## amlove21 (Yesterday at 11:12 AM)

The vice president can’t declassify the way the president can. 

The difference between Trump and Biden on this issue is that Biden’s docs were discovered 2 November and the news quashed till now, while a raid on Trump was conducted before midterms for memorabilia and not secrets. 

Pretending like these are an apples to apples comparison is not accurate. 

Can’t wait to see what’s in the Biden docs. Maybe it’s not SCI and the VP illegally removed lots of classified docs storing them at his house and also at a CCP funded think tank. 

Oh well nice distraction moving on.


----------



## Devildoc (Yesterday at 11:35 AM)

Biden's team and the mainstream press is spinning this so hard it is hard to keep up. But most of the arguments are farcical.

I think I could eat a can of alphabet soup and crap a better argument.


----------



## Marauder06 (Yesterday at 11:40 AM)

Cookie_ said:


> Amount of docs, willingness to work with the agencies, actually turning stuff in, etc.
> It's different enough to not be the exact same thing like "insert news source" might be doing.
> 
> To that same point, it's definitely not a nothing burger like "other news source" is claiming.


To the first part, I did not believe for a second that the ones initially reported were all of the docs mishandled/potentially compromised by VP/President Biden.  And we didn't even have to wait for very long for that to be proven true.

It's really easy to work with agencies when they are in your pocket politically.

"Actually turning stuff in..." how long did Pres Biden have his docs vs. Pres Trump?  

The important differences are it is plausible that Pres Trump was legally in possession of the documents seized from his residence, given the fact that he had declass authority and claimed that they were declassed.  Then VP Biden had no such authority.  The Trump materials were under lock and key in an area frequently protected by the Secret Service.  The Biden docs were casually tossed in a closet at a university.

The other major difference is the law enforcement involvement.  Law enforcement came after Trump over his docs in a way that it will never come after Biden, or Clinton, or anyone else.  

 The timeline is also highly suspect.  The Biden docs were discovered on 02NOV and the public not informed until January.  What happened in between?  Oh yeah, mid-term elections.

Pres Trump's home was raided in AUG... plenty of time to influence the mid-terms.

Again, the major difference is the selective prosecution.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Yesterday at 11:54 AM)

I listen to the five minute “Apple news” blurb every morning.

In yesterday’s edition, she spent part of her time explaining why Biden’s document scandal was not the same as Trump’s document scandal.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Yesterday at 11:59 AM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> I listen to the five minute “Apple news” blurb every morning.
> 
> In yesterday’s edition, she spent part of her time explaining why Biden’s document scandal was not the same as Trump’s document scandal.


You're listening to propaganda.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Yesterday at 12:12 PM)

R.Caerbannog said:


> You're listening to propaganda.


Yes I am; to the point where the show typically begins with a ‘what’s wrong with Trump’ segment of some type.

I’m either listening to propaganda from the far-right mock the Left or propaganda from the far left demonize the right; I’ve yet to find a source that consistently delivers ‘just the facts’ so I guess it is-what-it-is.

That leaves me only to pick and choose from what‘s available and try my best to read up on what interests me.


----------



## Topkick (Yesterday at 12:20 PM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> I listen to the five minute “Apple news” blurb every morning.
> 
> In yesterday’s edition, she spent part of her time explaining why Biden’s document scandal was not the same as Trump’s document scandal.


We don't have all the facts, but it sounds like Biden's case is actually worse. So in that sense, the scandals do differ.


----------



## Blizzard (Yesterday at 12:23 PM)

RackMaster said:


> Don't worry everybody. They were locked in his garage. Nothing to see here...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Came here for this. 🙂


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613567254104518657


[/QUOTE]


----------



## Marauder06 (Yesterday at 12:58 PM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Yes I am; to the point where the show typically begins with a ‘what’s wrong with Trump’ segment of some type.
> 
> I’m either listening to propaganda from the far-right mock the Left or propaganda from the far left demonize the right; I’ve yet to find a source that consistently delivers ‘just the facts’ so I guess it is-what-it-is.
> 
> That leaves me only to pick and choose from what‘s available and try my best to read up on what interests me.


In my opinion, the difference is that the right mocks the left for things they actually do (see also: Libs of TikTok).  The left, in comparison, regularly demonizes the right for things that are either grossly exaggerated or simply don’t exist (see also:  …too many things for me to list).


----------



## DA SWO (Yesterday at 1:01 PM)

It's o.k. They were in the garage next to a Corvette,  and both were locked.

Left spins this as a non-issue, but Trump's documents in a locked secure area could have caused another 9/11.


----------



## Blizzard (Yesterday at 1:14 PM)

There's simply no way to spin this. If someone wanted the hammer to drop on Trump for his handling of docs, they absolutely need to be calling for that same hammer to drop on Biden. Is his garage a SCIF now? That's acceptable? To @Cookie_ 's early point, let's apply the same standards. Is it OK for an E3 to lock materials in his garage next to the Camaro he's paying 20% interest on? Pretty much the same thing. What would happen to that E3?


----------



## AWP (Yesterday at 1:21 PM)

Full stop.

Are we not addressing why a senile 120 year old has a Corvette? Do you want him behind that wheel?


----------



## RackMaster (Yesterday at 1:23 PM)

AWP said:


> Full stop.
> 
> Are we not addressing why a senile 120 year old has a Corvette? Do you want him behind that wheel?



How else is he supposed to pick up kid's to sniff, at school?


----------



## AWP (Yesterday at 1:26 PM)

RackMaster said:


> How else is he supposed to pick up kid's to sniff, at school?



Get 3rd Group to deliver them and DEVGRU to destroy the evidence.


----------



## Topkick (Yesterday at 1:26 PM)

AWP said:


> Full stop.
> 
> Are we not addressing why a senile 120 year old has a Corvette? Do you want him behind that wheel?



And its powered by fossil fuels


----------



## Marauder06 (Yesterday at 1:26 PM)

AWP said:


> Full stop.
> 
> Are we not addressing why a senile 120 year old has a Corvette? Do you want him behind that wheel?


Got to move all of that TS/SCI around somehow, bro. It’s all good, it was in his GSCIF.  Which was totally locked.  Plus,  ORANGE MAN BAD!!  RACISM!!   EQUUUUIIIITTTYYYY!!!

Don’t hate the player, hate the game.


----------



## amlove21 (Yesterday at 1:37 PM)

AWP said:


> Full stop.
> 
> Are we not addressing why a senile 120 year old has a Corvette? Do you want him behind that wheel?


My man just murdered Corvette. Imagine that front office each time Peter Doocy said ‘Corvette!’ and every time the president mumbled ‘Corvette’. 

Just the sound of stock numbers bottoming out lol.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Yesterday at 2:44 PM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Yes I am; to the point where the show typically begins with a ‘what’s wrong with Trump’ segment of some type.
> 
> I’m either listening to propaganda from the far-right mock the Left or propaganda from the far left demonize the right; I’ve yet to find a source that consistently delivers ‘just the facts’ so I guess it is-what-it-is.
> 
> That leaves me only to pick and choose from what‘s available and try my best to read up on what interests me.


At least you admit it.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Yesterday at 3:41 PM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Yes I am; to the point where the show typically begins with a ‘what’s wrong with Trump’ segment of some type.
> 
> I’m either listening to propaganda from the far-right mock the Left or propaganda from the far left demonize the right; I’ve yet to find a source that consistently delivers ‘just the facts’ so I guess it is-what-it-is.
> 
> That leaves me only to pick and choose from what‘s available and try my best to read up on what interests me.



The best show to do that in the Cable News era was Newsnight with Aaron Brown on CNN. This only ran for five years with the last year being 2005.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Yesterday at 3:47 PM)

R.Caerbannog said:


> At least you admit it.


Admit it?

Hell I embrace it.


----------



## Marauder06 (Yesterday at 5:00 PM)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Admit it?
> 
> Hell I embrace it.


Tried to find a good "embrace the chaos" animated meme. 

The results were... inappropriate.  ;)


----------



## Topkick (Yesterday at 5:30 PM)

But the documents were in a locked garage, so...

Democrat suggests classified docs in Biden's home, office may have been 'planted' after second batch found

I hate to see any president fail or our country compromised in anyway but the hypocrisy is just ridiculous.

Trump is baselessly suggesting that the F.B.I. may have planted evidence during its search.


----------



## TLDR20 (Yesterday at 9:04 PM)

AWP said:


> Get 3rd Group to deliver them and DEVGRU to destroy the evidence.



Oh shit.


----------



## compforce (Yesterday at 11:50 PM)

Best line ever...   "I don't care if it's Mar-a-Lago or Car-a-Lago...", Jesse Waters, The Five


----------



## BloodStripe (Today at 6:11 AM)

Topkick said:


> But the documents were in a locked garage, so...
> 
> Democrat suggests classified docs in Biden's home, office may have been 'planted' after second batch found
> 
> ...



Report: Doc Shows Hunter Owned Joe Biden's Delaware House in 2018

Source aside, if somehow Hunter owned the Delaware house in 2018, President Biden needs to be impeached and tried for treason. There is enough circumstantial evidence out there to suggest Hunter is owned by the Chinese.


----------



## amlove21 (Today at 8:04 AM)

BloodStripe said:


> Report: Doc Shows Hunter Owned Joe Biden's Delaware House in 2018
> 
> Source aside, if somehow Hunter owned the Delaware house in 2018, President Biden needs to be impeached and tried for treason. There is enough circumstantial evidence out there to suggest Hunter is owned by the Chinese.


There is enough circumstantial evidence to suggest the Chinese own President Biden; there is enough actual evidence to show Hunter is. No one has cared to accept those facts until now. FBI has had the proof for years.  

Remember when I said that they were gonna get rid of Biden, Harris won't get the party nod to run (because she's a terrible person), Newsome finds his way to the election in '24 (against DeSantis)? Cause here it is. 

Biden gets impeached, the media spins Harris as "part of the problem", CNN gets to use Biden not running as "so neither should Trump!" and Newsome steps into the void in 24, with a mid-23 announcement (about 18 months out seems right). 

This game is stupid.


----------



## Marauder06 (Today at 8:24 AM)

amlove21 said:


> Biden gets impeached, the media spins Harris as "part of the problem", CNN gets to use Biden not running as "so neither should Trump!" and Newsome steps into the void in 24, with a mid-23 announcement (about 18 months out seems right).
> 
> This game is stupid.


IIRC it’s a simple majority in Judiciary and the House for an impeachment.  If so, that’s definitely happening.  It takes a concoction I the Senate for a conviction, which I don’t see happening. 

I think the Democrats would love to claim credit for the first black female President, and there’s no way she gets elected on her own.  Biden steps down or is otherwise no longer in the picture, they get their diversity hire President in under the wire, just in time for someone who can actually govern to be their candidate. 

…whom I hope then gets smoked in the get real election by DeSantis


----------



## Topkick (Today at 8:27 AM)

Agree with @Marauder06. I think the Dems would love for Harris to assume the presidency. They are all about virtue signalling. 

I think Newsom could be the worst choice ever. Even worse than Harris.


----------



## Marauder06 (Today at 8:39 AM)

Topkick said:


> Agree with @Marauder06. I think the Dems would love for Harris to assume the presidency. They are all about virtue signalling.
> 
> I think Newsom could be the worst choice ever. Even worse than Harris.


I’m deeply disappointed that the Republicans didn’t do better in the midterms.  I hope we can pull it together in the next election cycle.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 8:47 AM)

@Marauder06 They are off to a good start IMO, but if the Republicans cut entitlements as they are considering, they won't do as well. I know it needs repair  but too many blue collar people in their sphere rely on it. I dont think they understand the issue very well because it doesn't effect them individually. Here in the midwest, its a game changer which got Trump elected.


----------



## amlove21 (Today at 8:47 AM)

Marauder06 said:


> I’m deeply disappointed that the Republicans didn’t do better in the midterms.  I hope we can pull it together in the next election cycle.


Meh. It worked out with the speaker nom (actually doing what govt is supposed to do- argue on behalf of their constituents). The republicans will just lob initiative after initiative knowing it'll get shot down, but it'll establish a "look, we are trying for common sense things, not taking your stove". 

Biden gets impeached, not convicted. He leaves the office due to "health reasons" about a year out from the election. Harris takes the desk and then gets summarily dismissed for Newsome. Mark the time.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 8:52 AM)

amlove21 said:


> Harris takes the desk and then gets summarily dismissed for Newsome. Mark the time.



Hope that never happens. Newsom is the guy that fills skateparks with dirt while he dines in fancy restaurants without a mask.


----------



## amlove21 (Today at 9:47 AM)

Topkick said:


> Hope that never happens. Newsom is the guy that fills skateparks with dirt while he dines in fancy restaurants without a mask.


They’re all trash. There is no ‘good choice’. 

As close as I’ll get to a party affiliation is this- I can’t say the right can solve all your problems, but all those problems you need fixing either started with (or were absolutely magnified into mutant serious problems) the left. 

You don’t have to be a republican, but I just don’t think you can be a liberal in any sense any longer. And the liberals (the squad, the far left) absolutely drive the Dems.


----------



## Marauder06 (Today at 9:51 AM)

amlove21 said:


> They’re all trash. There is no ‘good choice’.
> 
> As close as I’ll get to a party affiliation is this- I can’t say the right can solve all your problems, but all those problems you need fixing either started with (or were absolutely magnified into mutant serious problems) the left.
> 
> You don’t have to be a republican, but I just don’t think you can be a liberal in any sense any longer. And the liberals (the squad, the far left) absolutely drive the Dems.


I never considered myself as a conservative, or a Republican, and never saw myself through the lens of my own race, gender, or sexuality, until leftists forced it on me.  Now I'm an advocate for all of it.


----------



## Marauder06 (Today at 10:00 AM)

I'm pretty sure we've all seen this meme already, it pretty much sums up my own experience except that after fleeing to the extreme left, the woke progressive got a running start and then launched themselves into me at full speed, sending me stumbling and careening to the right.

That's OK, because I've got my balance now...


----------



## Devildoc (Today at 10:09 AM)

Overton Window, Horseshoe Theory, the whole thing is a damn mess.  We're soon to have an inverse bell curve with a bunch on the far left and a bunch on the far right with no one in the center anymore, because the center gets gaslighted and mocked.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 10:18 AM)

Marauder06 said:


> I never considered myself as a conservative, or a Republican, and never saw myself through the lens of my own race, gender, or sexuality, until leftists forced it on me.  Now I'm an advocate for all of it.



I've always been conservative and was proud to be a Republican. However, I always tried to consider the issues and respect the elections process by supporting whomever "we the people" elected. We've been forced to choose sides. I do not agree with Republicans on several issues but its closer to reality for me.


----------



## Marauder06 (Today at 10:38 AM)

Topkick said:


> I've always been conservative and was proud to be a Republican. However, I always tried to consider the issues and respect the elections process by supporting whomever "we the people" elected. We've been forced to choose sides. I do not agree with Republicans on several issues but its closer to reality for me.


I was forced to pick sides, and I chose the side that didn't demonstrate that they hate me personally, and everything I believe in.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 11:09 AM)

Marauder06 said:


> I was forced to pick sides, and I chose the side that didn't demonstrate that they hate me personally, and everything I believe in.



There was a time when I just disagreed with the left on a lot of things. Now it feels they are in a separate universe.


----------



## Blizzard (Today at 12:09 PM)

This is what Georgia is bringing to the table...

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613648072885800961
We are governed by imbeciles.  Complete imbeciles.


----------



## Cookie_ (Today at 1:00 PM)

Topkick said:


> I try not to give credence to conspiracy theorists, but its not a theory if its fact. I could never fully get on board with the Soro's "conspiracy" because I naively believed our government wouldn't allow it.
> 
> Joe Rogan puts leftist mega-donor George Soros on blast: 'He wants cities to fall apart, crime to flourish' | Fox News


And the Koch brothers were doing the exact same thing for roughly the same amount of time.

I wonder what the reason might be that Soros is accused much more frequently or being a pupmaster trying to influence the country when he's just one of multiple rich people doing it?🤔*


Money runs politics. We'll never address that as a country because both the left and right hand of liberal/republican are beneficiaries of the system.

*(Not directed at you/accusing you of anything personally, just a question I always like to ask whenever Soros comes up)

To the topic of classified docs and whether Biden's leakage(as seen now) is as bad as Trump and deserving to be investigated/prosecuted my answer is;


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Today at 1:08 PM)

^But Joe Rogan said it and now Fox carried it so it's definitely not true. 

The gas stove thing is a prime example of how stupid things have become, I mean other than girls thinking they're boys etc., but I mean there are media and redditors making fun of people making fun of the gas stove thing. Holy shit...


----------



## BlackSmokeRisinG (Today at 1:11 PM)

Cookie_ said:


> And *the Koch brothers were doing the exact same thing* for roughly the same amount of time.
> 
> I wonder what the reason might be that Soros is accused much more frequently or being a pupmaster trying to influence the country when he's just one of multiple rich people doing it?🤔*....



Without getting too far into the weeds, the Koch Bros. were the most well known, and probably main example of people on the right doing that. There is a metric shit ton of HNW individuals on the left doing it, see MSN, Hollywood, and our (D) party for examples.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 1:12 PM)

Cookie_ said:


> And the Koch brothers were doing the exact same thing for roughly the same amount of time.
> 
> I wonder what the reason might be that Soros is accused much more frequently or being a pupmaster trying to influence the country when he's just one of multiple rich people doing it?🤔*
> 
> ...



Deleted the post to make changes. I'm not going to rewrite it since you've already replied to it. 

I wouldn't compare the Koch's to Soro's but my point is that any outside influence harmful to the country should not be allowed.
They all know if its harmul or helpful.


----------



## Blizzard (Today at 1:23 PM)

I'm not a fan of the wealthy influence regardless political leaning but it's a reality.  However, one important distinction between the Koch Brothers and Soros is the Koch Brothers are Americans.  Soros absolutley is not.  He may have U.S. citizenship but nothing about him is American.  He's a Hungarian leftist.


----------



## Topkick (Today at 1:55 PM)

Cookie_ said:


> wonder what the reason might be that Soros is accused much more frequently or being a pupmaster trying to influence the country when he's just one of multiple rich people doing it?🤔*




I won't defend Soro's or the Koch's. I also wouldn't question why anyone would question Soro's influence. I've said it before, whataboutism is okay. We can learn from it.


----------



## amlove21 (Today at 2:48 PM)

@Cookie_ here is the difference- Biden clearly violated USC. Trump takes a discussion to get there; ‘intent’ wasn’t part of the liability crime until Comey argued it into existence with (another) criminal case, being Hillary. 

Have documents? Are they classified? Can you declassify? If those answers are ‘yes, yes, no’, then you’re guilty. It’s a liability crime. 

Hillary, Biden- guilty. Trump- needs an investigation but he can declassify at will so it’s moot. 

So that’s the difference. Just wanna be clear. The reason no one gets prosecuted (mark the time) is now that the precedence is set, you can’t actually punish criminals (Hillary, Biden) without absolving Trump for not-even-in-the-same-USC-governed-actions as the other two.


----------



## Marauder06 (52 minutes ago)

amlove21 said:


> @Cookie_ here is the difference- Biden clearly violated USC. Trump takes a discussion to get there; ‘intent’ wasn’t part of the liability crime until Comey argued it into existence with (another) criminal case, being Hillary.
> 
> Have documents? Are they classified? Can you declassify? If those answers are ‘yes, yes, no’, then you’re guilty. It’s a liability crime.
> 
> ...


Additional thoughts:  the President has the ability to pre-emptively pardon anyone, IIRC including himself.  And he has the power to de-classify.  I don't know that he has the power to retroactively declassify.  

So President Biden will get impeached (prediction) but even if there was the political stomach for anything criminal, he can pardon himself, his son, anyone he wants.  Over anything.  So a lot of this is useless while he's still in office.  Maybe we can save it for President DeSantis's administration...


----------



## Cookie_ (35 minutes ago)

amlove21 said:


> @Cookie_ here is the difference- Biden clearly violated USC. Trump takes a discussion to get there; ‘intent’ wasn’t part of the liability crime until Comey argued it into existence with (another) criminal case, being Hillary.
> 
> Have documents? Are they classified? Can you declassify? If those answers are ‘yes, yes, no’, then you’re guilty. It’s a liability crime.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree with your assessment here. 

The Trump doc case goes back to the "if he declassified it in his head and nobody else knows about it, is it declassified?" discussion we've had ad nauseum on here, so I don't wanna rehash that.

Fully agree that the Comey-Hillary thing is basically going to prevent any charges from this moving forward.

Idk if we'll ever get back to holding leaders (of any party) responsible if this goes way you're predicting with your last sentence.





Marauder06 said:


> Additional thoughts:  the President has the ability to pre-emptively pardon anyone, IIRC including himself.  And he has the power to de-classify.  I don't know that he has the power to retroactively declassify.
> 
> So President Biden will get impeached (prediction) but even if there was the political stomach for anything criminal, he can pardon himself, his son, anyone he wants.  Over anything.  So a lot of this is useless while he's still in office.  Maybe we can save it for President DeSantis's administration...



There's a lot of Presidential powers conversations that haven't really been had before that are popping up. Does the President have the ability to declass docs he had after the fact?

Probably 30 different answers proposed for that question (my answer would be "no".)

A self pardon is theoretically possible, but I think that option would be nuclear regardless of party. 
Playing "I'm rubber your glue" with a criminal charge as President is how what, 1/2 of the South American/African dictatorships came about?


----------

