4 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Yet found zip

Can you please share with us the source of that information? Or did you get it from the Journal of Making Things Up?

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

How about the FBI executed a legal search, complete with warrants, issued by the Justice department at former president Trump's home at Mar-a-Largo.

 

This of course is the truth, without being inflammatory or biased, as you obviously are.

Yes, there are various words you can use to describe the FBIs actions . 

"Legal search " or "raid" can both be used . 

Using the word "legal search" doesn't mean that is want a raid 

Raid : "a sudden invasion by officers of the law"

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, there are various words you can use to describe the FBIs actions . 

"Legal search " or "raid" can both be used . 

Using the word "legal search" doesn't mean that is want a raid 

Raid : "a sudden invasion by officers of the law"

I’m good with raid.

 

FBI raid in pursuance with a lawfully issued search warrant.

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yeah like Dick and Liz Cheney.

I never thought I'd see the day where I'd applaud anything Dick Cheney said but here we are, and that really tells you something about how bad trump is.

It genuinely blows my mind that anyone would even consider voting for him again.

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m good with raid.

 

FBI raid in pursuance with a lawfully issued search warrant.

It was a beautiful raid. A perfect raid. 

People tell me they have never seen such a perfect raid.

6 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You're trying to imply that the raid was driven by Garland rather than the FBI following the facts and evidence. In other words, the raid was politically motivated, not a result of Trump failing to surrender records illegally kept despite negotiations to get them back.

I was saying that the raid would have had to have the agreement of Garland , he would have had to sign it off , Chris Wray the FBI boss also had a verbal public  conflict with Donald .

   Both Garland and Wray would have been either behind this raid or in agreement with it , they both may have orchestrated it .

   Its a possibility that the raid may have been political .

Lets wait and see what they find first though, before jumping to any conclusions .

  Wait and see what they find first .

If they find nothing , both Garland and Wray will have some explaining to do 

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I was saying that the raid would have had to have the agreement of Garland , he would have had to sign it off , Chris Wray the FBI boss also had a verbal public  conflict with Donald .

   Both Garland and Wray would have been either behind this raid or in agreement with it , they both may have orchestrated it .

   Its a possibility that the raid may have been political .

Lets wait and see what they find first though, before jumping to any conclusions .

  Wait and see what they find first .

If they find nothing , both Garland and Wray will have some explaining to do 

Still walking back your initial ill informed post.

 

Though it’s not all bad news, you’ve demonstrated you can be corrected even if you struggle when it comes to admitting  you were wrong.

 

 

On 8/9/2022 at 6:35 AM, Scott said:

The raid was “unannounced,” Trump said.

Eeeeh! That´s like the whole point with a raid.

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I was saying that the raid would have had to have the agreement of Garland , he would have had to sign it off , Chris Wray the FBI boss also had a verbal public  conflict with Donald .

   Both Garland and Wray would have been either behind this raid or in agreement with it , they both may have orchestrated it .

   Its a possibility that the raid may have been political .

Lets wait and see what they find first though, before jumping to any conclusions .

  Wait and see what they find first .

If they find nothing , both Garland and Wray will have some explaining to do 

That they agreed with the raid is not in question but it's irrational to consider they orchestrated it. They don't have any onus to produce the evidence they found and that would never happen before a criminal prosecution. You discount that they may have been acting on evidence and a complaint from the archives dept.

52 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump supporter histrionics gets picked up by internet analytics.

Or, internet lunatics exposed by internet analytics.

For decades, Republicans fashioned themselves as the party of law and order, something Trump used successfully with his chants of “Lock her up!” in 2016 and, less successfully four years later, with his poaching of Nixonian rhetoric in response to civil rights protests across the country.

 

“You’re either ‘law and order’ or you’re not,” said Michael Brodkorb, a former deputy chair of the Minnesota GOP. “There are a number of Republicans who like to talk about law and order while simultaneously picking which laws and order they want to follow.”

 

He said, “I can see it becoming possibly an issue.”

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/10/takeaways-mar-a-lago-primary-00050768

 

 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Still walking back your initial ill informed post.

 

Though it’s not all bad news, you’ve demonstrated you can be corrected even if you struggle when it comes to ad toting you were wrong.

What word should I have used to describe Garland ?

He is the person whom the FBI need to obtain permission from before conducting raids . 

  I did think calling him the "boss" was quite acceptable .

But which word should I have used instead ?

   Lets face it, you thought that I was referring to Christopher Wray and you called me a liar and wrong and it turns out that you were mistaken.

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

What word should I have used to describe Garland ?

He is the person whom the FBI need to obtain permission from before conducting raids . 

  I did think calling him the "boss" was quite acceptable .

But which word should I have used instead ?

   Lets face it, you thought that I was referring to Christopher Wray and you called me a liar and wrong and it turns out that you were mistaken.

How about Attorney General? or AG for short. Or maybe his name?

deleted post.

I just skimmed the many pages of posts that have occurred in the last few hours.  My sympathy to the moderator.

Just now, heybruce said:

Perhaps there are papers that give Trump leverage over other people.

 

Perhaps there are papers that would allow Trump to live in comfortable exile in some "friendly" country.

 

I'm sure if I gave it some thought I could think of other reasons.  It's not difficult to think of reasons Trump might want original documents and transcripts of the briefings and discussions that happened in the White House.

Trump's crime, if that's what it turns out to be, may simply be keeping classified documents he had no business keeping. This investigation doesn't have to be in furtherance of uncovering any other possible crimes.

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That they agreed with the raid is not in question but it's irrational to consider they orchestrated it. 

Do explain why its "irrational" that the boss of the FBI could have orchestrated a raid ?

  Such a high profile raid would have had the involvement of the very top of the FBI , it wouldn't have been junior officers who were responsible .

   Its a distinct  possibility that Wray orchestrated  the raid , far from being an irrational probability .

   But, lets wait for the facts to emerge before making assumptions 

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's a cult.

More like a coalition of wierdos.

6 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Trump's crime, if that's what it turns out to be, may simply be keeping classified documents he had no business keeping. This investigation doesn't have to be in furtherance of uncovering any other possible crimes.

Agreed.  I was replying to a post that asked why Trump would keep classified documents in Mar-a-Lago.

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

How about Attorney General? or AG for short. Or maybe his name?

I had just read a media report which contained the paragraph

 

Any search of a private residence would have to be approved by a judge. The search is also likely to have been approved by FBI Director Christopher Wray, a Trump appointee, and his boss, Attorney General Merrick Garland, who was appointed by President Joe Biden.

 

 

 

And thats the only info I had and I just used the word "Boss" , but next time I was use the words "boss, Attorney General Merrick" Garland,

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I had just read a media report which contained the paragraph

 

Any search of a private residence would have to be approved by a judge. The search is also likely to have been approved by FBI Director Christopher Wray, a Trump appointee, and his boss, Attorney General Merrick Garland, who was appointed by President Joe Biden.

 

 

 

And thats the only info I had and I just used the word "Boss" , but next time I was use the words "boss, Attorney General Merrick" Garland,

Not only did it give his name but it also said "his boss" not "FBI boss".

This thread needs to be archived and written up as a case study in a psychiatric journal.  The level of "what-aboutery" and obfuscation displayed is classic denial behaviour.

We've had:

"But, but, Biden" (both Hunter and Joe).

"I'm not a Trump supporter but... (followed by support for Trump).

"This will be great for Trump in the next election! Ha, ha, ha (but those are not tears of laughter we detect).

"The boss of the FBI, who was a Biden appointee should be investigated!  No, not that boss, the other one!  Which one?  Whichever one was appointed by Biden!"

"This (fact that shows that the rule of law still exists in America, or at least is making a comeback after being crushed by the Trump Presidency, by pointing out that no one is above the law) will only make other countries think that America is a banana republic".

"This sets a bad precedent!" (No, but it may convict a bad president).

 

Not one post from the Trump supporters, whether open or not so open about that status, discussing what could be in the papers that were taken away, or whether he was wrong to be in possession of classified material - which can't be denied because they already retrieved such material from him back in February, when he'd already left the Whitehouse.  Just what-abouts, denials, and but, but, buts.  And that's why it will be extremely difficult to bridge this divide.

 

 

20 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What word should I have used to describe Garland ?

He is the person whom the FBI need to obtain permission from before conducting raids . 

  I did think calling him the "boss" was quite acceptable .

But which word should I have used instead ?

   Lets face it, you thought that I was referring to Christopher Wray and you called me a liar and wrong and it turns out that you were mistaken.

The FBI do not ‘need to obtain permission [from the AG] before conducting raids’.

 

 

Once again you let loose the fact of your lack of understanding what it is you are talking about.

 

I suggest you stop digging.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

Not only did it give his name but it also said "his boss" not "FBI boss".

Although its all insignificant  to my point that the people at the very top gave permission for this raid .

  I'll give in another go :" Christopher H Wray , head of the FBI , would have given permission for this raid , as would his boss , Attorney General Merrick Garland " 

  Do you find that to be clear, understandable and correct ?

   There's no confusion about who is the boss of who and what ?

3 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although its all insignificant  to my point that the people at the very top gave permission for this raid .

  I'll give in another go :" Christopher H Wray , head of the FBI , would have given permission for this raid , as would his boss , Attorney General Merrick Garland " 

  Do you find that to be clear, understandable and correct ?

   There's no confusion about who is the boss of who and what ?

Of course there is no confusion over any of that.

 

It’s aligned with the corrections I and others made to your earlier ill informed nonsense.

 

I just don’t understand your difficulty admitting you were wrong.

 

 

10 hours ago, heybruce said:

4 pretty good years?

 

Anti-science approach to Covid, weakening NATO alliance, weakening Asia Pacific alliances, buddying up to autocrats, trusting Putin over his own intelligence agencies, only legislative accomplishment was a deficit exploding tax cut...

 

Oh yeah, and sitting on his butt watching television while a mob of his supporters were attacking Congress in an attempt to prevent certification of the Presidential election.

All rubbish but expected of course.

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

And if they don't find anything , find  no papers where they can prosecute Trump , if the raid was a pointless endeavour , then the FBI will try to keep that quiet as long as possible .

   They will drag it on for years , making excuses to why they cannot release the papers or make a persecution

If, perhaps, maybe, possibly. All weasel words trying to find any excuse.

 

How about this for an If. It has the same value as your If.

 

And if they do find anything , find  many papers and documents illegally removed from the White House, they can prosecute Trump , if the raid was not a pointless endeavor, then the Trump supporters will try to keep that quiet as long as possible .

 

Trump's supporters will drag it on for years and still never believe one word of it.

21 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do explain why its "irrational" that the boss of the FBI could have orchestrated a raid ?

  Such a high profile raid would have had the involvement of the very top of the FBI , it wouldn't have been junior officers who were responsible .

   Its a distinct  possibility that Wray orchestrated  the raid , far from being an irrational probability .

   But, lets wait for the facts to emerge before making assumptions 

I don't consider that prospect to be at all likely, not even possible. It would have also required the connivance of Biden at that point. Contrary to what Trump kept saying, engaging in witch hunts is doomed to failure and they know it. Trump admits he still had the records, months after starting negotiation with the FBI. What's that about?

 

I think Occam's Razor has the answer here. The FBI felt they could not get the records by negotiation or subpoena so they came and got them.

 

If you want me to speculate about anything, I think some of those records relate to collusion with the Russians and Trump doesn't want to give them up to anyone. Then there's the Zelensky tape. If that's as alleged there's a fatal wound to Trump right there.

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The FBI do not ‘need to obtain permission [from the AG] before conducting raids’.

 

 

Once again you let loose the fact of your lack of understanding what it is you are talking about.

 

I suggest you stop digging.

We are talking about this particular raid and the A.G signed this raid off.

He gave permission for this raid .

  (YES, OK I admit I was wrong , I did use the word "raids" and I should have used the word "raid" to denote this raid in particular that we are talking about and it must have been confusing when I said "raids" instead of *raid* because it seemed like I meant all raids instead of the raid we are talking about )

3 hours ago, Walker88 said:

You make the assumption that this is harrassment.

 

Do you think ex-POTUSs are above the law?

 

Do you know how the classification system works, how the trail is kept, and what classified docs 45 has a right to hold (none)? As I have written above, the system for highly classified (above TS) is complex and sophisticated. The system would know how many hard copies exist and must account for all of them. It seems some highly sensitive docs were unaccounted for.

 

As for Biden being 'dysfunctional' or suffering from dementia...he just got a few critical Bills passed, so if that is dysfunctional, let's have more of it. Biden is now as Biden has always been. He has always spoken freely and made as many gaffes at 30 as he does today. That is a pretty cheap and baseless comment, not backed by reality. It has become a meme, but that does not make it true.

 

3.5% UE, rebuilt NATO and expanded NATO membership, $350 billion debt reduction in FY21 and $1.7 trillion in FY22, and gas back under $4/gal looks pretty functional. Apparently Biden spends an inordinate amount of time actually doing his job, rather than golfing or calling into Fox.

Rebuilt NATO????