Antagonist in Chief

[fallout]

Can you cite anything other than the WaPo article about the 'nuclear' story. I mean, we all know how reliable WaPo is... Where dem Russian hookers at?

WaPo is left leaning if you're trying to play that game.

 

[JohnRoberts]

On top of this, I was a little stunned by how eager vast swaths of the right were to go to bat for Trump on this. The man is guilty of violating the Presidential Records Act. We knew this beforehand, because of the 15 boxes that were already returned. So apparently they think that beyond the criming that it's already proven he's done, he's absolutely and completely innocent, and anyone who says different is on a politically motivated witch hunt.

If anything this use of government force to cancel the exPresident is only generating sympathy and support for him. Is the left that afraid of him, or trying to lock him in for 2024 because they believe they can beat him? I am not a skilled mind reader like you'all.

I'd say they were a bunch of fools, but I don't think that's true. I think the politicians and talking heads who have been so eager to go to bat for Trump here are craven, opportunistic sleazebags. They hope that their intended audience are a bunch of fools, easily suckered into believing even the most ridiculous protestations of innocence.

Yes, that is exactly the kind of incivility I was talking about.

In my opinion, the GOP apparatchiki and nomenklatura revealed their true colors in their defense of Trump on this one. No principles, no respect for the govt. they claim that they so fiercely defend. For anyone that cares to look, Trump has laid bare the ugliness that was already inside the GOP--a hidden but fiery infection that Trump brought to the surface in a burst of oozing pus. It's pretty obvious from the outside, but will any of those within the GOP actually notice?

Do you seriously not see the vast asymmetry in DOJs treatment of liberal/progressive politicians and conservatives.

• The Clinton campaign previously had indicated that her personal emails were deleted before Clinton received a congressional subpoena on March 4, 2015. But the FBI said her emails were deleted “between March 25-31, 2015” — three weeks after the subpoena. The campaign now says it only learned when the emails were deleted from the FBI report.

Despite that obvious law breaking, Comey gave her a pass (without the actual authority to do so).

An honest treatment of Hunter Biden's laptop alone could have changed the outcome of the last election. FBI whistleblowers are now coming forward about an active program inside the FBI to suppress the damaging laptop (evidence of Biden family influence pedaling). If the congress flips in November we can expect some serious investigations.

You posted this as I was typing, and I suspect my post will be seen as "mean." I don't think it is.

I'm shocked...(not)

Even superficially, it's clear that Trump had broken the law (those 15 boxes), and that the FBI's warrant was almost certainly justified. And yet, the GOP political machine had to rush to outrage, had to defend Trump and attack the FBI. To anyone with a modicum of self-awareness, this would be utterly embarrassing. But the GOP has proven, yet again, that it is beyond embarrassment.

A modicum of situational awareness suggests that the raid was a "hail mary" subterfuge to search mar-a-lago for some evidence that can be used in the 1/6 political theater. Not unlike the Steele dossier's intentional disinformation, why did the FBI not allow Trump lawyers to observe the search?

[edit] The urgency by DOJ is to do this now, is the informal rule to not make politically damaging moves within 90 days of an election. [/edit]

That's not mean. That's just how it is.

We have dramatically different world views ( seeing two different movies). One of us is less correct than the other.

JR

 

[iturnknobs]

https://thepostmillennial.com/obama...ng-presidential-records-act-covered-documents
I don't recall any FBI raids on the homes of LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, Bush, or Obama

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-obama-allowed-take-white-house-records-but-not-trump-2022-8
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...icans-foolishly-try-roll-obama-tack-rcna42840
https://lawandcrime.com/awkward/nat...-about-barack-obama-and-classified-documents/

 

[AnalogPackrat]

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-obama-allowed-take-white-house-records-but-not-trump-2022-8

Authors of hit piece are a 25 year old recent grad from Boston U and an established lefty who has worked at WaPo and Politico. Obvious bias is obvious.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...icans-foolishly-try-roll-obama-tack-rcna42840

Rachel Maddow Blog? Really?

https://lawandcrime.com/awkward/nat...-about-barack-obama-and-classified-documents/

And a Dan Abrams' outlet hit piece. His sister is a Federal district court judge in NY appointed by Obama. Author is another twenty-something liberal arts grad. Just more bias.

What have these sources and authors written on topics like Fast and Furious or Hunter Biden's laptop/business dealings? The Russiagate hoax? Biden's obvious mental decline. Or Kamala helping bail out rioters in 2020? Or any other controversy on the opposite side of the political spectrum?

 

[JohnRoberts]

Authors of hit piece are a 25 year old recent grad from Boston U and an established lefty who has worked at WaPo and Politico. Obvious bias is obvious.



Rachel Maddow Blog? Really?



And a Dan Abrams' outlet hit piece. His sister is a Federal district court judge in NY appointed by Obama. Author is another twenty-something liberal arts grad. Just more bias.

What have these sources and authors written on topics like Fast and Furious or Hunter Biden's laptop/business dealings? The Russiagate hoax? Biden's obvious mental decline. Or Kamala helping bail out rioters in 2020? Or any other controversy on the opposite side of the political spectrum?

ignore the man (or whatever pronoun they prefer) behind the curtain...

let them rant among themselves.

JR

 

[hodad]

Just more bias.

You attack the authors, not the content. I guess when the facts don't line up with your worldview, you have to find something or someone to attack.

The written inventory — a document provided by investigators after a search — says the FBI took about 20 boxes of items from the Mar-a-Lago Club on Monday, including photo binders, information about the president of France, and a variety of classified material.

One set of documents is listed as “Various classified TS/SCI documents,” a reference to top secret/sensitive compartmented information, a highly classified category of government secrets, in addition to the four sets of top-secret papers.

 

[living sounds]

ignore the man (or whatever pronoun they prefer) behind the curtain...

let them rant among themselves.

JR

Way to go. Alternating insults with the "can we all get along" stick. It would be nice if moderators could behave like adults.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

You attack the authors, not the content. I guess when the facts don't line up with your worldview, you have to find something or someone to attack.

I used the same tactic used by iturnknobs when he called out The Post Millennial piece I posted. I wonder why you didn't call out his offense? Oh, right.

The written inventory — a document provided by investigators after a search — says the FBI took about 20 boxes of items from the Mar-a-Lago Club on Monday, including photo binders, information about the president of France, and a variety of classified material.

One set of documents is listed as “Various classified TS/SCI documents,” a reference to top secret/sensitive compartmented information, a highly classified category of government secrets, in addition to the four sets of top-secret papers.

Yet no specifics. And an open-ended search warrant which included Melania's clothes closet for some reason. Why did the FBI refuse to show Trump's lawyer the warrant until AFTER they tossed the place? Why did they request that security cameras be disabled? Why were no legal or other representatives allowed to observe the search? Does this sound like something you'd accept happening to yourself, a family member, a friend, etc.? Does it sound like the kind of justice system classical liberals would support?

 

[Matador]

why did the FBI not allow Trump lawyers to observe the search?

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=were+trumps+lawyers+at+the+raid+on+maralago

An attorney for Donald Trump who was present when FBI agents were seizing documents from Mar-a-Lago claims the Department of Justice (DOJ) may pursue 'bogus charges' against her boss in a pair of Tuesday interviews.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=were+trumps+lawyers+at+the+raid+on+maralago

I saw the lawyer interviewed at length about what happened. She was called after the FBI had already arrived and entered the house. She asked to see the warrant and was denied. She asked to observe the search and was denied. After the raid ended, she again asked to see the warrant and the agent in charge begrudgingly gave her a copy. She was "present" but outside. Use your brain.

 

[Matador]

I saw the lawyer interviewed at length about what happened. She was called after the FBI had already arrived and entered the house. She asked to see the warrant and was denied. She asked to observe the search and was denied. After the raid ended, she again asked to see the warrant and the agent in charge begrudgingly gave her a copy. She was "present" but outside. Use your brain.

You don't have the slightest clue how a federal search warrant works. Your ignorance runs deep.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

You don't have the slightest clue how a federal search warrant works. Your ignorance runs deep.

Try harder.

https://www.federalrulesofcriminalprocedure.org/title-viii/rule-41-search-and-seizure/
"(B) Inventory. An officer present during the execution of the warrant must prepare and verify an inventory of any property seized. The officer must do so in the presence of another officer and the person from whom, or from whose premises, the property was taken. If either one is not present, the officer must prepare and verify the inventory in the presence of at least one other credible person. In a case involving the seizure of electronic storage media or the seizure or copying of electronically stored information, the inventory may be limited to describing the physical storage media that were seized or copied. The officer may retain a copy of the electronically stored information that was seized or copied."

I thought your crowd were distrustful of law enforcement. But when your political enemies are involved, anything goes. Hypocrites.

 

[JohnRoberts]

You don't have the slightest clue how a federal search warrant works. Your ignorance runs deep.

I saw her interviewed on TV also... she said that she and the other Trump lawyers at Mar-a-largo were not allowed to observe the raid from inside.

Keep spinning...

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I've seen reports that no inventory of removed items was provided before the Feds left, either. You'd think they'd take extra care to dot every i and cross every t in such a highly charged operation, but instead they were arrogant a-holes and apparently flaunted parts of the law.

 

[Matador]

Keep spinning...

What exactly entitles Trump's lawyers to observe the search as it is happening?

 

[Recording Engineer]

You guys believe a lawyer? Let alone, Trump’s? Might as well believe Trump himself! Ha!

 

[AnalogPackrat]

What exactly entitles Trump's lawyers to observe the search as it is happening?

Common sense. But at least there's some surveillance video to help ensure nothing untoward was done in the residence. Where's your answer to the inventory requirement, legal eagle?

As for trusting lawyers, are the DOJ goons any better?

 

[fallout]

You guys believe a lawyer?

You guys believe the government?

 

[Matador]

Where's your answer to the inventory requirement, legal eagle?

You mean, other than the inventory itself? Do you not know about Google Search?

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000182-9397-d085-abb6-bb97a6f90000
I'll note here the inventory was signed by his attorney, on the date of the raid.

If we're going to just make bullshit up, at least make it entertaining bullshit.

 

[fallout]

c. Any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021;

Not a fishing expedition at all.