heybruce

I'm no expert in the criminal justice system, but I'm pretty sure the order of events is: First build a case that will hold up in court. Then arrest the person being charged. Trump is unlikely to run, it would confirm his guilt (though not to his cult followers). So the FBI and Justice Department can continue to move in a careful and thorough manner.

"justified frustration/anger within the American working class." May be off-topic, but I am genuinely curious as to what this justified frustration/anger is and how anyone imagined Trump could or would make it better.

Your new, it's obvious you're still learning how to troll.

One and a half years after the last election, two and a half years before the next Presidential election, how is this suspicious? Should they have let Trump keep these documents until after the 2024 election? What if there were the possibility of him or one of his kids running in 2028; should they have held off until after then? Is everyone who might run for President exempt from criminal investigations, or only Trump?

No, making ex-Presidents above the law is the move of a "tin-pot, banana-republic".

You'll wait for the real story? Really? Do you mean the Breitbart version, or will you hold out for a Qanon take on it?

Pity that he didn't go to the trouble of documenting this action or telling anyone while he was still President. However even if that nonsense holds up, it does not make taking the documents legal, and it certainly doesn't explain what he was doing with them.

I assume that lawyer is in deep.....uh, stuff right now. Of course we've know for some time that good lawyers don't want to work for Trump.

1. Are you arguing that it is technically legal for some of the most damaging information to the country that is available o be arbitrarily declassified and stored in a lax manner that would make foreign intel sources salivate at the possibilities? 2. If the answer to the above is yes, are you ok with this? Wouldn't it reflect poorly on any ex-President who is that irresponsible?

"My analysis is the same as a lot of folks here." Please do share with us how this analysis was conducted. ????

Evidence that Joe Biden was not consulted on this raid. So talk of it being political and the Justice Department being weaponized is wrong.

Hey! The term for all information from credible sources that you don't like is "Fake News". https://thehill.com/homenews/3598071-fbi-agents-found-dozens-of-classified-documents-in-mar-a-lago-search-sources/ https://www.newsweek.com/heres-what-fbi-took-trumps-mar-lago-according-new-report-1733359 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/federal-judge-warrant-property-receipt-from-fbi-raid-of-mar-a-lago

Is your argument that since President Biden has a screwed up son, everything Trump does is ok?

Long ago when I had a TS/BI (kind of a mid-level clearance) I had an assignment in which I had to enter a building through a cipher lock, enter an office in the building through another cipher lock, open a very secure vault, enter the vault and lock the door behind me, then open the safe that contained the material I needed to work with. Everything had to be locked back up in the safe before I could leave the vault, office and building. That material was not nearly as highly classified as the TS/SCI material reportedly taken in this search. https://thehill.com/homenews/3598071-fbi-agents-found-dozens-of-classified-documents-in-mar-a-lago-search-sources/

But there are videos of the search she can watch.

With a normal President there would probably be briefings and discussions of the nuclear capabilities of the US, our allies, and potential enemies, and response options in different scenarios. That would be extremely sensitive material. However I can't imagine Trump taking much interest in such things, so I also don't know what nuclear information might have been in the documents illegally removed from the White House. All we know is that the warrant was legally executed, and that all involved would have known that a move of such magnitude would be investigated and second guessed to h*ll and back, so they would have been extremely careful in following all laws. Interesting that for all the wild speculation about what might be going on, I don't recall any Trump supporters speculating that Trump did nothing illegal.

Really? You've seen the search warrant? Regarding weaponizing the DOJ, do you mean the way Attorney General Barr completely misrepresented the findings of the Mueller Report before it was released? Or Trump's pardoning of political allies? Or are you going all the way back to Trump demanding loyalty from James Comey when he was head of the FBI?

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States That is the oath the President takes when assuming office. "protect and the Constitution of the United States" means defending the government based on the Constitution. The government was under attack, and Trump did nothing. Trump could have called out the National Guard, or he could have started with a simple tweet. These were his supporters attacking the Capitol, a tweet telling them to leave would have taken a lot of steam out of the attack. Trump loves tweeting and never holds back when he disapproves of something. Trump did nothing. I don't care how many words you use in an attempt to rationalize his inaction, there is no getting around the fact that Trump is guilty of dereliction of duty. He was a threat to the nation and will be a renewed threat if he is allowed to return to office. People who put Trump before country are not patriot, they are cult members.

Definitely trolling.

According to the unnamed source: "Newsweek’s source claims Garland had “no prior knowledge” of the time of the raid." According to Merrick Garland: "The only major detail Garland did provide, however, was that he "personally approved" of the execution of the search warrant that occurred Monday evening." https://www.foxnews.com/media/merrick-garland-torched-admitting-he-approved-mar-a-lago-raid-shutter-fbi-immediately They could both be true; Merrick Garland approving the search warrant but leaving the timing up to the FBI. I don't see it as a big deal if so.

Going back to day 1 of Trump's Presidency, do you think his lie about the largest inauguration crowd ever has somehow become true?

Right. What President hasn't lied about his inauguration crowd? Lied about the weather during his inauguration? Lied about his margin of victory? Lied about millions of illegal votes for his opponent? Then on Trump's second day...

I think it's better than the possibility of one or two lawyers following the FBI team around and observing without interfering being able to observe and record everything of significance.

So the Trump clan watched the search as it happened and Trump's lawyer can watch the recording of the raid whenever she wants to. What is the lawyer objecting to?

True, and I find the mental capacity of both old men less than ideal. However I prefer somewhat slow but stable to bat-sh*t crazy.