ozimoron

Actually, it's conceivable that the FBI would never have raided him if it was just a misdemeanour instead of a felony offence. They likely would have confined themselves to a subpoena.

Yes, I quoted what far right sources said., That was to demonstrate the utter wackiness of Trump's base. There is absolutely no issue with quoting the person who said that. The issue arises when someone posts a LINK to an unacceptable source. I posted a link to an approved source. Just a heads up, I report every link to an unapproved source that I see.

Trump himself has admitted to having a copy of the warrant. It shows how diligent the Daily Mail is and how truthful Eric is.

Perez went on to make a lengthy case that the raid was tied to the claims of the repeatedly debunked conspiracy theory QAnon, which argues, against all evidence, that Democratic politicians, Hollywood celebrities and other elites are part of a satanic and cannibalistic child sex abuse ring that only Trump can defeat. "This is all a part of the puzzle I'm trying to put together here, which is that the Deep State, ultimately, this past raid of Mar-a-Lago, it's a threat. It's a threat because they don't want [Trump] to expose the pedophiles that he knows about," said Perez. That's what every single — that's what Jan. 6 was about before they planted all those people from the FBI there… They're coming after him and it's because they don't want him to expose the pedophiles." https://www.rawstory.com/qanon-maralago/

What they need to do is finish their investigation. While I wish they'd finished it a year ago, the reason they didn't is because of all the effort Trump went to to hide evidence and avoid testimony.

If the cops raided your house do you think they'd let you film them?

Months of negotiations failed before the FBI acted. They raided because they had no confidence that a subpoena would get the result they wanted - the documents. I'd characterize that as "fiercely held onto".

That's not what I said, is it?

Last time I promise, he implied it and there's no substantive difference in the minds of those who would amplify that accusation.

Biden would actually pardon him before that happened. The precedent has been set.

They already did. From the above yahoo link Fox News' Jesse Watters said on Tuesday that the FBI "probably" planted evidence when it raided Mar-a-Lago, a claim for which there is no evidence, and which he made little effort to back up. It would take an indictment followed by a conviction to convince me and any reasonable person that the FBI planted evidence. Wouldn't you agree with that? In the meantime is it not tenuous and irresponsible to even imply that it may have happened? Or to amplify the claim on any media?

If anyone claims that the FBI planted evidence is that not a conspiracy theory?

Who thinks we aren't now going to see a flood of right wing claims that the FBI planted evidence on Trump?

I don't know. I asked you for a link which you are required to do under the rules of this forum.

Where? I haven't read that. How very Trumpian, implying a fact without evidence. What's the liklihood that a billionaire in a hundred room mansion has an empty safe?

Everybody always hopes that the police don't plant evidence when they raid. That goes without saying. Trump calculated his remarks to convince millions of his sycophants that the FBI likely did plant evidence. He is sowing the seed for his future public (not court) defense.

It's really tantamount to the same thing. Look at the exceedingly vague hints seized upon by Qanon adherents to manufacture all kinds of claims. Why did Watters claim it as well? Pure coincidence? Nobody is buying your obsequious argument.

Trump CLAIMED it just by implying that it may have occurred. Look for Trump to use more definite language the minute that anything is revealed about what they found. When his lawyer repeats his insinuation it carries even more weight.

She wouldn't have uttered the words at all without Trump's imprimateur. Obviously they know what was going to be found. Like somebody said, this will be the big lie, part two.

Yes he is, even hinting they "may" have planted evidence is doing that. He (and you) know very well that his followers would take that on board, Fox news did.

Did Trump wait until Hilary was sentenced for crime first before firing up the base with his chants of "Lock Her Up"?

Fox News host Jesse Watters claimed the FBI "probably" planted evidence during its Mar-A-Lago raid. He provided no evidence for the outlandish claim, to which a Trump lawyer has also alluded. He also spoke of a "hunch" that the FBI "doctored evidence" to get the warrant — again without evidence. https://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-jess-watters-suggests-113039416.html

If Trump has a scintilla of principle I guess he's going to apologize to Clinton any day now, since he has had an epiphany about the 5th.

Same reason as you are wasting your time with it. It's not a lot of time and I'm very interested in seeing the right defend Trump. I noticed some are just staying away. I'm wondering why you're calling a string of presidential firsts, garbage?

Why Scott Perry stands out in the FBI's investigations of Trump allies Scott Perry, who said this week that the FBI had seized his cell phone, has publicly tied the agency’s actions to its search of Donald Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago. There’s no evidence the two are directly connected — and more details suggest they’re part of two separate investigations. ... But the seizure follows months of growing evidence of Perry’s deep involvement in Trump’s effort to overturn the 2020 election — just as investigators are taking more overt steps to investigate Trump allies’ efforts to deploy the Justice Department in service of disrupting the transition of power. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/10/scott-perry-trump-fbi-investigation-00050901