Jump to content



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


Scott

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Is a "belief" enough to warrant an armed house invasion then? Guess so.

You use a search warrant, and not a subpoena, when you don’t believe that the person is actually going to comply. Its now quite a few months since so yes I guess so

Edited by Bkk Brian
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

"The timing of the raid may have been related to an FBI rule that advises against “politically sensitive moves” within 90 days of an election, former prosecutor Elie Honig told CNN. The next election is on November 8, 92 days after the raid took place on Monday."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/08/09/heres-what-to-know-about-trumps-document-controversy-that-led-to-mar-a-lago-raid/?sh=3c707a8eb969

That's OK then. ????

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, userabcd said:

Many tales of police and government officials abusing their power.

So which liar to believe? The lying cops of the lying highest government official?

 

The razor says it is more logical to believe the statement with greater oversight...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I cannot prove the existence of the Lord. I cannot disprove it either.

 

Evidence would be good. But where is it? I was hoping that the FBI might like to share.

They are extremely unlikely to reveal that evidence before any trial. If they don't have any I would expect an announcement soonish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, expat_4_life said:

Things become more curious ...

 

Two months before his Florida home was raided by the FBI, former President Donald Trump secretly received a grand jury subpoena for classified documents belonging to the National Archives, and voluntarily cooperated by turning over responsive evidence, surrendering security surveillance footage and allowing federal agents and a senior Justice Department lawyer to tour his private storage locker, according to a half dozen people familiar with the incident. (more to the story in the link below)

 

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-got-grand-jury-subpoena-spring-voluntarily-cooperated-home?utm_source=sf&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twjs

Very, very old news... your point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

They are extremely unlikely to reveal that evidence before any trial. If they don't have any I would expect an announcement soonish.

Agree that they need to at least comment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Now they have those documents . 

What will happen next ?

They need to arrest Donald as quickly as possible and charge him with whatever offense they find necessary 

Why? In depth investigations of criminal organisations often take months or years. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

"The timing of the raid may have been related to an FBI rule that advises against “politically sensitive moves” within 90 days of an election, former prosecutor Elie Honig told CNN. The next election is on November 8, 92 days after the raid took place on Monday."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2022/08/09/heres-what-to-know-about-trumps-document-controversy-that-led-to-mar-a-lago-raid/?sh=3c707a8eb969

Possibly, another possibility being that they obtained the CCTV as confirmed in this article and then had to act based on that within a certain time period:

 

If Trump took documents from the White House to Florida twenty months ago, would a judge want some reason to think that the documents are still there?

Yes. One of the requirements for the search warrant is evidence that the information will be there during the two-week period that the F.B.I. is authorized to do a search—the information is not “stale.” And that’s the term of art that people talk about. Is the information being presented by the F.B.I. to the court stale? What you are looking for is some evidence of recency. 

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/what-the-fbis-raid-of-mar-a-lago-could-mean-for-trump

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Very, very old news... your point? 

It is not old news, there is a long write-up of new information.

 

My point is to add information to the discussion, that's

why I linked a news article.

 

Here is the article
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-got-grand-jury-subpoena-spring-voluntarily-cooperated-home

 

 

Edited by expat_4_life
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You don't provide a link for this claim but if you had attempted to do so you may have discovered that your claim is wrong

 

Lindsey Halligan, another Trump attorney, also confirmed to POLITICO she was present at Mar-a-Lago for the search.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/09/fbi-dozen-boxes-mar-a-lago-trump-lawyer-00050730

Yes, you are correct .

But my point still stands 

The FBI had asked for the CCTV to be switched off and for everyone to leave the area and that is why Donald said that he hoped the  reason for then doing that wasn't because they wanted to plant some material there 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, you are correct .

But my point still stands 

The FBI had asked for the CCTV to be switched off and for everyone to leave the area and that is why Donald said that he hoped the  reason for then doing that wasn't because they wanted to plant some material there 

Again, where's your link? I don't doubt that they did to be honest but I want to see who published it. I can see that as being standard operating procedure for the FBI. Everybody knows the reason Trump claimed it was to create the basis for a new lie and to fire up the base. An honest man would have shut up except to his lawyer.

 

The FBI know this was a high profile raid, you'd have to be in a state of delusion, brought about by a belief that Biden isn't the legitimate president to think they'd just go ahead and fabricate or plant evidence. It's just not rational. This is just super agenda pursuing stuff.

Edited by ozimoron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, expat_4_life said:

It is not old news, there is a long write-up of new information.

 

My point is to add information to the discussion, that's

why I linked a news article.

 

Here is the article
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-got-grand-jury-subpoena-spring-voluntarily-cooperated-home

 

 

But is it the truth? It's by John Solomon who got bounced from thehill.com for his very truth-challenged articles about the so-called Biden scandal in the Ukraine. In fact, justthenews.com was founded by John Solomon.

Edited by placeholder
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

But is it the truth? It's by John Solomon who got bounced from thehill.com for his very truth-challenged articles about the so-called Biden scandal in the Ukraine. In fact, justthenews.com was founded by John Solomon.

Truth, TBH, can't say, but the information is now out there with lots of details.

Consider how breaking news goes, everyone gets a lot of the details wrong when stories first break.

 

False, TBH, can't say either.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, expat_4_life said:

Truth, TBH, can't say, but the information is now out there with lots of details.

Consider how breaking news goes, everyone gets a lot of the details wrong when stories first break.

 

False, TBH, can't say either.
 

But why trust someone like John Solomon who has a long track record of being, shall we say, parsimonious with the truth?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, expat_4_life said:

Things become more curious ...

 

Two months before his Florida home was raided by the FBI, former President Donald Trump secretly received a grand jury subpoena for classified documents belonging to the National Archives, and voluntarily cooperated by turning over responsive evidence, surrendering security surveillance footage and allowing federal agents and a senior Justice Department lawyer to tour his private storage locker, according to a half dozen people familiar with the incident. (more to the story in the link below)

 

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/trump-got-grand-jury-subpoena-spring-voluntarily-cooperated-home?utm_source=sf&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=twjs

What's curious about it?

 

Oh, and "Just The News"........

Capture.JPG

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Of course not typical but given the apparent divisiveness that this action has produced, then at at least a statement from the FBI/DOJ to explain or justify it as much as possible to the public seems appropriate.

Right. I'm sure that those incensed over the action would be placated by an explanation from the FBI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Agree that they need to at least comment. 

Because an explanation from the FBI or Justice Dept would definitely be accepted by those who are now so incensed? Now if these people were prone to believe in conspiracies I would say that releasing some kind of explanation early on would be pointless but since they...oh wait a minute.

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.