ozimoron

It was US board members I was referring to. I think we are entitled to assume that. I didn't say the court would agree. There's enough evidence out there to remove all reasonable doubt unless both sides are lying.

I think it's fairly safe now to assume that Trump had unauthorized possession of classified documents.

Oh yeah, that's why ALL of Trump's SC picks came from the Federalist Society.

It's not an unreasonable direction to speculate in my opinion. Read some of what Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has to say about the Federalist Society and the supreme court nominations some time. He also refers to dark money behind it all. What we are looking for here is a substantial reason for raiding rather then just a clerical error on Trump's behalf. As well as the probable cause issues. So we do know there's sinister stuff in those documents that Trump doesn't want us to see.

Presumably, Trump was always in possession of his valid travel passport.

An anonymous source at the DOJ? Got anything better or is that enough to satisfy you? And from a parochial newspaper with a reach of 100K.

You already alleged that and I asked you for a link while providing one which has contrary evidence. Where is it?

A classic case of what the right misses in its quest for the holy grail, simple answers to complex questions. A complete lack of nuance here. Sure, the government did say that, we have no choice but "live with it". They also said a lot of other things as well which detract from your "the government doesn't think it's a problem so why should we?" mantra. Living with covid doesn't mean ignoring it and failing to take precautions.

I think it's hilarious too. Why would anyone want to do that?

Please link to where the FBI denied they had the passports. That talking point appears to be fake news. The FBI acknowledged it had had the passports the same day Trump said on his social media platform that FBI agents who conducted the search on Aug. 8 took them. https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/s-s-not-fbi-taking-trumps-passports-rcna43265

Apart from the sheer complexity of Windows and the dozens of mouse clicks required to get anything done in the operating system, I have just spent 12 years not even thinking about antivirus or malware software, let alone install and maintain them, or heaven forbid, actually have to deal with a virus or ransomware. Imagine how much productivity that has earned me.

"The Republican Party has turned itself against electoral democracy." On Tuesday, New York Times columnist Jamelle Bouie delivered a cogent rebuke of the hands-off argument and declared that "fear of what Trump and his supports might do cannot and should not stand in the way of what we must do to secure the Constitution from all its enemies, foreign and domestic." His column followed opinion pieces in the Times by Damon Linker and Rich Lowry warning that the U.S. Department of Justice or others pursuing Trump could set a "dangerous precedent" and provoke future unwarranted probes of Democratic elected officials. https://www.rawstory.com/let-trump-walk/

Perhaps you could find a more ridiculous and nonsensical connotation for "woke" if you tried hard but I doubt it. You're equating not hating minorities with not wishing to serve your country. I think you could do with a little more self introspection here.

Are you the designated troll for today ????

“Trump is representing HIMSELF, with no lawyer at all, in his case against the United States regarding the search of Mar-a-Lago and recovery of government records. The legal term is ‘pro se’ – for himself. “The new Trump Florida court filing is a press release masquerading (tenuously) as a legal brief.” https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2022/08/publicity-stunt-legal-experts-already-seeing-highly-unusual-aspects-in-trump-incompetent-legal-filing/

It's sad that people have the intellect to philosophize they use it to fantasize instead.

You haven't mentioned the possibility that significant numbers of people may be genuinely offended. You are single mindedly focused on a hypothetical edge case in order to deflect from the real issue, actual racism.

Are those who get offended on their own behalf excluded from consideration?

People who are offended.

That's the end of that then. Recusal seems to have passed its use by date.

and the diamond encrusted sword from old mate up there in the desert.

They already got $1.6 billion from a dark money fund run by the Federalist Society, the same society which manipulated the last 3 supreme court appointments. There remains the possibility that dealings between this outfit and Trump are included in those documents. https://www.propublica.org/article/dark-money-leonard-leo-barre-seid

I didn't suggest what he said was nice or acceptable. In fact, I described it as a crime.

In your example, you describe racism against a population in general which is quite different to what we see here. To say that a big nosed person might come from the Middle East is no more racist that suggesting somebody is Asian because they have black hair, oval eyes and a flat nose. Is that racist too, or stereotyping? Racism goes to intent, not the mere words alone.

There's the love letter from Kim and the bugged soccer ball from Vladdy. Can't he keep those?