Tippaporn

Certain FISA warrants don't come to mind? My memory is not so short.

He's already made a statement on Friday. Trump himself said on his Truth Social platform Friday, "It was all declassified." https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-allies-say-declassified-mar-lago-documents-experts-say-unclear-w-rcna42311

Well, that's an interesting point.

From that article: WASHINGTON — The Republican Party’s post-FBI-raid rally around former President Donald Trump could provide an inadvertent boost to another politician: President Joe Biden. Trump's fundraising is real. Joe Biden's "boost" isn't. No mention of the Dem walkaways in the article.

There's more info. It's coming out by the day.

Since you're on the left and I assume you don't touch base with those on the right then justifiably you would have no idea how this blunder by the DOJ and FBI has galvanised those on the right. I've said it before; I think this is one of the best things that could have happened in a long time. People are fired up like never before. Keep waking up that sleeping giant, I say. You made a claim in your post which I highlighted. Explain this then: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-fundraising-fbi-raid-b2141864.html

It's a logical argument given a small set of facts. But the set is incomplete.

And you know for a fact the status of each document? And whether or not Trump had a right to possess any or all of those docs? I've been asked to provide corroboration to back up my claims. So please do back up your claim of "definitive proof of a felony."

No one other than the MSM is capable of telling the truth in your world? That contention would be too fantastical, and dangerous, to believe. At least for me.

You folks just don't get it that there are people in this world who actually are after the real truth. Whether it goes against Trump or not. Some here believe anything. Anything at all as long as it confirms their Orange Man Bad bias. And if one doesn't agree and doesn't hop on the already overcrowded band wagon then that must mean we're all loony conspiracy theory nuts or Trump sycophants. Much of the world vehemently rejects your false pronunciations. Riddle me this, Lacessit. Why did Newsweek come out with an article quoting two anonymous high level DOJ sources who said they were cleared to state that the DOJ had no knowledge of the raid. https://www.foxnews.com/media/newsweek-blasted-incorrectly-claiming-merrick-garland-didnt-know-about-fbis-trump-raid And Garland doesn't immediately issue a denial. And it took him how long to finally make a public statement? But not answer any questions? Nothing to see here, right? But do give some educated thought to your idea that anyone who sticks up for what they believe is right is automatically a Trump sycophant. Is that the scientific method you've been taught?

Hint: It ain't your precious MSM.

The MSM sure can sound convincing. Especially if you're prone to believe everything they write is gospel. Not all of us suck it up without questioning and willingly ignore so many unaddressed missing pieces. No thanks. I'll wait for the real story. Not the goal sought one-sided version. Most on the left with extreme bias towards Trump have already made up their minds as to the "truth." I'm sure this story will be revisited as more facts come out.

As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong, but all former Presidents hold security clearances for life. If that is indeed true then that would destroy the theory of your post.

Then deal with my contention that you have nada to say to any poster who makes outlandish claims against Trump with no evidence. Don't be evasive on answering. You can if you want but I know the answer already.

That's an impossibility. Be serious, Chomper.

Your fail in logic is that you conclude that just because the FBI took into possession the items they did means that Trump did not have rightful possession of them. As I remember from the NBC article I posted above Trump was engaged in talks with the DOJ. We don't know yet what he had the right to possess and what he did not. The DOJ can make their claims and Trump can make his. It then gets litigated.

Then I put it to you as I did to Chomper. There are so many on the left here speculating this and that but you never ask them to verify any of what they claim to be true. Why are you and others only interested in verifying evidence that goes in Trump's favour but never when it goes against him? I don't need an answer because it's too obvious. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trumps-legal-team-was-talks-justice-department-spring-records-stored-m-rcna42319

Go back and read the many posts speculating about Trump selling classified info to the Russians or selling them for profit and put the onus on them to back up their conspiracy theories. I don't see you challenging them, Chomper. Of course those theories all fit with your accepted narrative of Orange Man bad. Should I laugh now or later?

Only his team? You sure about that? Any evidence you could provide that it's not the case? Other than, "Well I believe. . . . "

"Was he truly cooperating or was he obstructing and delaying?" What one believes about that depends on one's source. I trust the sources I use that confirm he had been fully cooperating. "Better yet was he in possession of items he was not allowed to have in his possession." That remains to be seen, doesn't it? "Do you believe he was allowed by law to keep documents such as he had in his possession?" It doesn't matter what I, you or anyone else believes. Only the truth matters. Which truth no one here knows as yet. Speculate all you want. "Why should he be treated any differently." I never stated Trump should be treated differently. If he's guilty of a crime then send him up. All I've been saying, from the beginning, is wake me up when something concrete emerges. Until then, speculate about all things under the Trump sun as much as you like. Speculation is worthless.

Who told you he wasn't?

Exactly! They were looking for any items illegally in Trump's possession which would be legitimately in violation of those three statutes. But no predicate given as to why the FBI or DOJ believed Trump was in violation of any of those statutes, if indeed he was. If they give no reason as to why then it's what's called called a fishing expedition. Everything discussed here or elsewhere is therefore nothing more than pure speculation that Trump was indeed in violation and some of the most outlandish conspiracy theories are given here as to what Trump's intentions were for possessing whatever documents he had at Mar-a-Lago. Which reasons can be no different to the reasons of any other FPOTUS for taking with them documents into their own personal possession after leaving office.

I highlighted the important part of your post. Why is there no mention of the fact that Trump was fully cooperating with the National Archives and therefore why a raid was necessary? Any takers on answering that question?

"All crimes alleged in a warrant are potential. Whether an actual crime has been committed is for a judge or jury to decide." Well I'm glad that at least you have admitted to the fact that Trump is innocent of any crime until proven guilty. We can speculate all day long as to whether he is or isn't. That's useless, too.

It's an inventory of items taken. So where within that inventory do you find the reason for the raid?