POLITICS Trump says FBI raiding his Mar-a-Lago home

[EVENKEEL]

52 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

I doubt the FBI would go through the trouble of obtaining a search warrant (and all the scrutiny that comes with doing so for an ex-Prez) unless they were darn certain of what they will find.  But regardless, even if they found nothing, there's already a mountain of evidence related to Jan 6/Georgia that the DOJ can indict Trump on.  The stuff they found here would have only added to the multitude of charges Trump is already facing. 

If the FBI comes up MT handed, it will be a sh@# show for the FBI and rightly so. That will be an investigation all by itself.

 

And, that will give Trump a second wind, no doubt.

[Berkshire]

This wacky woman below is a typical Trump supporter.  She spouts the same nonsense that they all do....including the usual suspects on this thread.  "Hunter laptop, Hillary's e-mails, Dems scared Trump will run and win again....blah, blah, blah."  Don't these people have any new material?

But hey, this is why normal/sane Americans don't take these people seriously.

 

[Truly bizarre video of a woman rallying outside Mar-a-Lago in a giant-sized red “Make America Great Again” hat and spewing wild pro-Donald Trump propaganda after Monday’s FBI raid on the ex-president’s home has been circulating on Twitter and, well, take a look…]

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/watch-wacky-woman-in-giant-maga-hat-demands-to-be-taken-seriously-outside-gates-of-mar-a-lago/ar-AA10wNT7?ocid=wispr&cvid=5e59aa323f2c4b90824db8f2dcc30eb1

 

[LaosLover]

13 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

If the FBI comes up MT handed, it will be a sh@# show for the FBI and rightly so. That will be an investigation all by itself.

 

And, that will give Trump a second wind, no doubt.

Nope. If he took stuff he shouldn't have taken -and then stuck classified documents in a storage closet with a $5 lock on it; and then the government after a year plus of asking for it back finally just went and got it -Well, that's not much of a story. 

 

So in your crazy world, can cars ever be repossessed for non-payment, or should the car owner just cry about unfair treatment and get to keep the car? If it's not your's, and it belongs to someone else, you have to give stuff back. Did your parents ever cover this with you?

 

Why doesn't he just show the warrant? Let's hear a Trump answer to that question. It'll be a bunch of nonsense about non-existent executive privilege. 

 

2nd question: Why has only one president out 45 had this problem?

Edited August 11, 2022 by LaosLover

[Rimmer]

A post with an altered quote has been removed also an off topic post and reply

[placeholder]

27 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

OTT hyperbolic rant, flames and unsupported claims ignored.

 

 On the money subject, wasn't it President Trump that did not accept his salary but donated it to worthy causes(1)? He was an idealist wanting to make America great again, not a money motivated guy like the current one. Because he largely paid for his campaign himself(2) he hasn't beholden to lobbyists like most Presidents which was extremely triggering for these powerful groups that wielded influence of policy making for decades.

 I do not know a single supporter of President Donald Trump that feels like they have been made a sucker. Why would they?

 

supporting evidence of claims made.

 

 

He's such an idealist that his 2017 tax bill especially favors 2 kinds of businesses: limited partnerships and real estate. What constitutes most of Trump's business interests: limited partnerships and real estate.

[LaosLover]

"May" = give you permission to make stuff up and pretend its serious

 

I wonder if I'll get hit by a comet tonight. Well, I may.

 

Made up in the shower "consensus" is another ringer. No wait, that would consensus thoughts -thank you, mind reader. You will be very popular in Thailand with this black magic skill.

 

The above is what a low information person thinks sound smart.

Edited August 11, 2022 by LaosLover

[LarrySR]

Only Trump knows what the FBI found and now Trump is claiming they planted evidence. 
 

[LaosLover]

....Already claiming that evidence was planted on Fox News, claiming that backpacks of stuff was dumped by the FBI into the boxes. So he's now doing Stop The Steal Part Deux (for Mighty Ducks Fans). 

 

Any proof, any backpack found? Do FBI agents typically wear backpacks?  No.

 

Fox News has heard "reports", you see.

 

I suspect those reports -which we will never see or verify- were concocted yesterday. Weird that nobody saw a backpack on the day, huh?

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Only Trump knows what the FBI found and now Trump is claiming they planted evidence. 
 

Only his cult members believe him but he probably has enough of them to get nominated because if he runs it will be against multiple Republicans.

[scorecard]

15 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What was the outcome of that ?

 

"The National Archives did not 'find' anything, they were given, upon request, presidential records in an ordinary and routine process to ensure the preservation of my legacy and in accordance with the Presidential Records Act," Trump said in a written statement.

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-took-classified-material-white-house-florida-national-archives-says-2022-02-18/

And the bottom line for me is very simple - I wouldn't believe/trust anything he said/wrote. He's told so many lies and untruths, twisted so many things deliberately to create divisions and make unrue claims; time to elect different, genuine intelligent people. 

[scorecard]

13 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

You are likely correct. I doubt they would seek jail time for an ex prez. It would be precedent setting, and it would be absolutely lovely to see. But, I doubt it will happen. Unfortunately. 

But it seems it's time for such a precedent, otherwise it will happen again and again. 

[The Hammer2021]

On 8/9/2022 at 7:37 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

That is obviously untrue.

He is not yet convicted. That doesn't mean he didn't do the crimes.

Nor does  it mean you haven't  done crimes! Or me! Or any of us! Has Trump been charged? Has he been found guilty of any crime? Has he been convicted of any crime? No to all of these.

[LaosLover]

Like the mindreader above me, I want to make a clairvoyant premonition about the next Trumpy post:

 

"Uh, just asking backpack questions. Is it not my right to quibble endlessly about possibly non-existent backpacks? If they can fake-backpack him, you're next. Only he is saving you, please send money. Do your own backpack research. Don't buy the lame stream media narrative".

 

Life enhancing principle: If you're in a bar, and some low info type starts going on knowingly about "the narrative," change your seat.

 

The made up by Fox "narrative" is the hallmark of people who wish they were smart, but view books as kryptonite.

[SunnyinBangrak]

16 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Only Trump knows what the FBI found and now Trump is claiming they planted evidence. 
 

"

In an interview with DailyMail.com, Eric Trump said that because staff refused to turn off the surveillance cameras at the request of the FBI, the Mar-a-Lago cameras captured agents raiding areas that they weren't authorized to.

"There's 30 agents there," he recalled on Wednesday. "They told our lawyer...'You have to leave the property right now. Turn off all security cameras.'"

https://www.newsweek.com/eric-trump-says-mar-lago-security-cameras-captured-fbi-acting-improperly-during-raid-1732672

 

So contrary to the FBI's belief all cameras were turned off, they weren't. So any untoward things the FBI did at Mar a Lago will all be on film. Anything planted will be have been caught. Sounds like another case where the investigation is a far bigger scandal and crime than what was being investigated. No flies on Eric Trump!

[The Hammer2021]

The FBI HAD A RAT

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2022/08/10/fbi-had-informant-inside-trumpworld-that-led-to-raid-n2611559

[The Hammer2021]

3 minutes ago, LaosLover said:

Like the mindreader above me, I want to make a clairvoyant premonition about the next Trumpy post:

 

"Uh, just asking backpack questions. Is it not my right to quibble endlessly about possibly non-existent backpacks? If they can fake-backpack him, you're next. Only he is saving you, please send money. Do your own backpack research. Don't buy the lame stream media narrative".

 

Life enhancing principle: If you're in a bar, and some low info type starts going on knowingly about "the narrative," change your seat.

 

The made up by Fox "narrative" is the hallmark of people who wish they were smart, but view books as kryptonite.

Nope. Just read different  books and don't regard the NYT, WP or other  mainstream  media as Koranic truth.

[billd766]

19 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Only Trump knows what the FBI found and now Trump is claiming they planted evidence. 
 

Actually the FBI knows as they executed the warrant and they of course would have informed the DoJ and probably the National Archives.

[LaosLover]

1 minute ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

"

In an interview with DailyMail.com, Eric Trump said that because staff refused to turn off the surveillance cameras at the request of the FBI, the Mar-a-Lago cameras captured agents raiding areas that they weren't authorized to.

"There's 30 agents there," he recalled on Wednesday. "They told our lawyer...'You have to leave the property right now. Turn off all security cameras.'"

https://www.newsweek.com/eric-trump-says-mar-lago-security-cameras-captured-fbi-acting-improperly-during-raid-1732672

 

So contrary to the FBI's belief all cameras were turned off, they weren't. So any untoward things the FBI did at Mar a Lago will all be on film. Anything planted will be have been caught. Sounds like another case where the investigation is a far bigger scandal and crime than what was being investigated. No flies on Eric Trump!

Yeah, they have a tape that proves he was done wrong -and yet, and yet.....no tape. They have the warrant that prove he was hard done by -and yet, and yet.....no warrant. They have secret service people gagging to verify that he didn't grab the steering wheel, and yet, and yet............

 

Your belief that the FBI were morons and unable to spot security camera's is.......

[LaosLover]

3 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

Nope. Just read different  books and don't regard the NYT, WP or other  mainstream  media as Koranic truth.

Can you share the goldmine you will be gleaning to get your backpacker facts?

[Bkk Brian]

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

OTT hyperbolic rant, flames and unsupported claims ignored.

 

 On the money subject, wasn't it President Trump that did not accept his salary but donated it to worthy causes(1)? He was an idealist wanting to make America great again, not a money motivated guy like the current one. Because he largely paid for his campaign himself(2) he hasn't beholden to lobbyists like most Presidents which was extremely triggering for these powerful groups that wielded influence of policy making for decades.

 I do not know a single supporter of President Donald Trump that feels like they have been made a sucker. Why would they?

 

supporting evidence of claims made.

 

(1)https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1341/take-no-salary/

 

( 2)"Trump has paid for the majority, but not all, of his presidential campaign out of his own pocket. Trump's self-funding accounts for 72 percent of his campaign spending so far ($45.7 million in campaign loans and $63.3 million in expenditures as of May 31). Trump raised the remainder from mostly small donors."

https://www.npr.org/2016/07/14/485699964/every-position-donald-trump-has-taken-on-how-he-is-funding-his-campaign

All that wasted money, the art of the deal did not work out so well for him, no wonder he was furious and denied the results

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/05/20/858347477/money-tracker-how-much-trump-and-biden-have-raised-in-the-2020-election

[The Hammer2021]

4 minutes ago, LaosLover said:

Can you share the goldmine you will be gleaning to get your backpacker facts?

Nobody gleans goldmines!

It's an impossible  mixed metaphor to which to reply.

[LaosLover]

So Trumpies:

 

Why THOSE boxes? What's in 'em? Why'd he feel the need to take them? And then hold on them so fiercely? Do any of you believe it was all just stuff he declassified? If so, why keep 'em? He's already walked back the declassification story by the way. 

 

Any curiosity -at all? Or would "the narrative" be unflattering.

 

[Berkshire]

19 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess you know absolutely nothing about the russia investigation. You don't know its genesis, you never read the Mueller Report, and most certainly you never read the SSCI Report written when repubs still held the Senate, and thus authored the SSCI Report.

 

I'll begin your overdue education.

 

1) The investigation began because intel came into CIA that putin was intent on getting 45 elected. That doesn't make 45 guilty, just putin's stooge. The intel was handled entirely 'by the book' by both John Brennan and Pres Obama, this corroborated by the Durham team.in their subsequent investigation.

 

2) There were 140 confirmed contacts between members of 45's campaign team and russians, some of whom were know russian assets. Subsequently, when 45 won and members of his team needed to apply for clearances by filling out the SF86 form, not a single one of these 140 contacts were mentioned, even though it is required by the form/process. Coincidence?  Mass amnesia?

 

3) In December 2016, during the transition, jared was sent to the russian embassy in DC where he tried to set up a secret back channel to putin using the encryption of the embassy. So excited was Amb kislyak that he used an open source phone to pass word back to Moscow, so the call was picked up by NSA. It is highly unlikely jared would do that on his own volition. It is also illegal and he could (still) be charged with 'conspiracy to commit espionage', the same capital offense that got the Rosenbergs their date with Sparky at Sing Sing.

 

4) On one of his first few days after being hired as Campaign Manager, paul manafort flew to Spain where he met russian agent Konstantin Kilimnik. He passed in depth campaign internal data to Kilimnik, which was voter names, addresses, income, education, spending habits, and other data that emerged from an algorithm run on all known personal info. That voter data was then passed to the Internet Research Agency in St Pete, which is a GRU-run disinformation service. The IRA then fabricated stories about Dems or HRC and targeted the voters' social media pages in an attempt to influence votes. Seems odd that that was manafort's first 'duty' as CM.

 

5) The repub-authored SSCI Report noted the 140 contacts, the Kilimnik story, the contact roger stone had with julian assange, who had received hacked emails of the DNC and John Podesta---hacked by a russian clandestine asset---so that 45 had a heads up on what hacked emails were going to be released and when. assange actually promised stone a big data dump on Hillary, and at a campaign rally 45 announced "In the next few days, there is going to be some really interesting news about my opponent". The SSCI report also stated that it was quite clear 45 had obstructed justice and lied in his deposition to the Mueller team. The SSCI report concluded that while it could not categorically link 45 to willful cooperation, it was clear he welcomed the help putin was giving him.

 

6) When looking for possible reasons why putin might have some control or hook into 45, 45's DoJ prohibited Mueller from pursuing any financial angle. Subsequent intel came out that Deutsche Bank had set up numerous SIVs (Special Investment Vehicles) where 'some outsiders' can place funds, and those funds can then be sent to a borrower. SIVs are off balance sheet. DB's SIVs were taking in russian oligarch money and the borrower was....45. While not illegal, the loans are instantly callable, so it certainly suggests a hook, especially for a company run almost solely on debt, not profits.

 

None of this has anything to do with the recent search warrant, but since your comment suggests you have no knowledge of the entire russia thing, I felt it useful to put this here.

Very comprehensive....maybe a little too wordy for the average Trump supporter....5555  But seriously, they're not going to care.  Trump supporters don't want facts, truth, or even reality.  Unfortunately for them, the rest of us--including law enforcement--do live in the real world.  I feel a little sorry for them.  Trump is toast.  One day they're going to wake up and their cult leader will have been indicted.  They're going to whine from here to high heaven and throw a hissy fit for the ages.  It's already starting.  Won't change anything.  AG Garland will finish what he started.   

[billd766]

11 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

"

In an interview with DailyMail.com, Eric Trump said that because staff refused to turn off the surveillance cameras at the request of the FBI, the Mar-a-Lago cameras captured agents raiding areas that they weren't authorized to.

"There's 30 agents there," he recalled on Wednesday. "They told our lawyer...'You have to leave the property right now. Turn off all security cameras.'"

https://www.newsweek.com/eric-trump-says-mar-lago-security-cameras-captured-fbi-acting-improperly-during-raid-1732672

 

So contrary to the FBI's belief all cameras were turned off, they weren't. So any untoward things the FBI did at Mar a Lago will all be on film. Anything planted will be have been caught. Sounds like another case where the investigation is a far bigger scandal and crime than what was being investigated. No flies on Eric Trump!

Then why has Eric Trump and his Daddy published the CCTV tapes yet? If what he has said is true then the FBI may have a problem.

 

The only people that know what areas were to be searched at Mar-a-Lago Are the FBI, the DOJ and Trump.

 

Yet Trump also has not released his copy of the warrant.

 

So how do YOU personally know what went on and what was said?

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

quote "Good job on quitting alcohol though. It doesn't cause me any problems but I do understand that it doesn't really suit people with underlying anger/personality issues.  So, good job quitting.  Horses for courses."

 

FYI I gave up drinking alcohol over 2 years ago as I was drinking 3 or 4 bottles of Hong Thong a week. I figured out that after drinking alcohol for about 60 years it was time my body had a rest from it.

 

Absolutely nothing at all to do with underlying anger/personality issues.

 

Being blunt about it, I was drinking too much so I quit. I have had one shot of whisky in my soda at last New Years Eve, took a mouthful and threw the rest away. At home I have 2 boxes of rum, whisky, vodka etc and they will get drunk by my Thai family at my cremation.

Thanks for sharing.

[Mac Mickmanus]

1 hour ago, LaosLover said:

He's already starting to claim that evidence was planted. So as usual, in Trumpland, no amount of facts or evidence is ever enough.

That isnt true .

Trump has not claimed that evidence was planted 

You are either mistaken  or you are making things up 

[Eric Loh]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That isnt true .

Trump has not claimed that evidence was planted 

You are either mistaken  or you are making things up 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-suggests-fbi-agents-planting-evidence-mar-lago-raid-1732493
 

 

[metisdead]

Reported off topic posts have been removed.

[Mac Mickmanus]

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-suggests-fbi-agents-planting-evidence-mar-lago-raid-1732493
 

 

You link doesn't back up the claim . 

You link says Trump said :  "Everyone was asked to leave the premises, they wanted to be left alone, without any witnesses to see what they were doing, taking or, hopefully not, 'planting.'

 

 

Trump isn't making  claiming  that the FBI planted something , he is saying...................well, read what he said ^ . 

Edited August 11, 2022 by Mac Mickmanus

[OneMoreFarang]

47 minutes ago, The Hammer2021 said:

Nor does  it mean you haven't  done crimes! Or me! Or any of us! Has Trump been charged? Has he been found guilty of any crime? Has he been convicted of any crime? No to all of these.

If you followed the news over the last couple of years you would know that he committed several crimes without any doubt. Why he was not charged or convicted is a problem with politics and the justice system over there.

To have just one obvious example: Obstruction of justice.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/obstruction-justice-mueller-report-heat-map