1 minute ago, Gweiloman said:

The way I see it, there will be either a civil war or the rule of law will be thrashed.

In the latter case, the US will end up like other nations with dictatorial rulers.

17 minutes ago, placeholder said:

In the latter case, the US will end up like other nations with dictatorial rulers.

Not necessarily. Singapore is for all intents and purposes, an authoritarian government. No one disputes that the rule of law is alive and well. Same in Malaysia, yet the former corrupt PM was sentenced to over 20 years in jail.

 

Lots of other countries with dictatorial or authoritarian governments that respect the rule of law. Lots of democracies that don’t.

13 minutes ago, placeholder said:

In the latter case, the US will end up like other nations with dictatorial rulers.

Yes, and the dictatorial  leaders will be jailing the opposition on trumped up charges 

29 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

They had a good 2 weeks of going through all the documents before that alleged corrupt judge (heard that on MSNBC) decided on the special master.

 

They could have indicted but I guess they wanted to build up the case further.

You think it takes just two weeks to go through 200,000 pages of documents?

 

FBI seized almost 200,000 pages of documents from Trump at Mar-a-Lago, his lawyers say in new court filing

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/29/fbi-seized-nearly-200000-pages-of-trump-documents-at-mar-a-lago.html

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Bkk Brian

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, and the dictatorial  leaders will be jailing the opposition on trumped up charges 

Well, let's all be thankful that there's nothing like that going on in the case of  Donald Trump where there appears to be a huge amount of actual hard evidence against him. Well, at least as hard as paper. And while it's true that his attorneys have not been real competent, is it conceivable that of their own volition they would deny that any classified documents remained? Of course, anything is possible. And we still have to hear from the actual witnesses who apparently alarmed the Justice Dept enough to obtain a broad warrent to enter the premises of Mar a Lago.

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by placeholder

45 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

You think it takes just two weeks to go through 200,000 pages of documents?

 

FBI seized almost 200,000 pages of documents from Trump at Mar-a-Lago, his lawyers say in new court filing

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/09/29/fbi-seized-nearly-200000-pages-of-trump-documents-at-mar-a-lago.html

You do realise that the DOJ don’t need to go through all 200,000 pages of documents? There have been folks jailed for just illegally having one classified document in their possession.

By the way, there’s no need to post links for me. I’m perfectly capable of typing in a search term on baidu.

 

Trump who is now a citizen holding NO OFFICE has as much legal right (NONE) to possess any of those documents as I do, classified or not. It's hilarious that the much more right wing party which has had a brand of law and order, tough on crime, supports the most extremely criminal president in American history, 

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Jingthing

Just now, Gweiloman said:

You do realise that the DOJ don’t need to go through all 200,000 pages of documents? There have been folks jailed for just illegally having one classified document in their possession.

By the way, there’s no need to post links for me. I’m perfectly capable of typing in a search term on baidu.

 

Perhaps those folks only stole one document. I will post links as I see fit.

16 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Trump who is now a citizen holding NO OFFICE has as much legal right (NONE) to possess any of those documents as I do, classified or not. It's hilarious that the much more right wing party which has had a brand of law and order, tough on crime, supports the most extremely criminal president in American history, 

You are right, if justice is blind. Bet you didn’t realise that Trump could shot someone on some avenue or other and nothing will happen to him.

 

11 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Perhaps those folks only stole one document. I will post links as I see fit.

Yes, all it needs is for the self claimed genius to steal one document and he can be convicted of that already. The DOJ can then charge him for stealing other docs. But of course justice and truth have varying standards in the west.
 

Just trying to save you time and effort on a completely fruitless and futile activity. By all means, carry on.

Edited October 5, 20223 yr by Gweiloman

6 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

You are right, if justice is blind. Bet you didn’t realise that Trump could shot someone on some avenue or other and nothing will happen to him.

 

Yes, all it needs is for the self claimed genius to steal one document and he can be convicted of that already. The DOJ can then charge him for stealing other docs. But of course justice and truth have varying standards in the west.
 

Just trying to save you time and effort on a completely fruitless and futile activity. By all means, carry on.

This may give you a clue

 

Political fallout, precedent and national security risk are just some of the intangibles Garland will have to consider as he considers what would potentially be the highest-profile criminal case in American history, according to former prosecutors, intelligence agency lawyers and Justice Department officials.

30 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

This may give you a clue

 

Political fallout, precedent and national security risk are just some of the intangibles Garland will have to consider as he considers what would potentially be the highest-profile criminal case in American history, according to former prosecutors, intelligence agency lawyers and Justice Department officials.

So some are above the law, in America. I thought so. Western democracy eh?

2 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

So some are above the law, in America. I thought so. Western democracy eh?

Eh? This is not an east west thing on democratic values. 

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why do they need to have access ?

They didn't have access last time and forced their way in .

Why cant they force their way in again and then have excess to retrieve the documents  ?

They never forced their way in. They served a search warrant before entering and If memory serves correctly they notified his lawyer before entering as well. 

1 minute ago, Dan O said:

They never forced their way in. They served a search warrant before entering and If memory serves correctly they notified his lawyer before entering as well. 

The warrant was used to force Trump to allow them in , forced as being made to allow people in, rather then freely allowing people to enter .

   "We have a warrant "=  forcing your way in 

"Knock-knock" ; Come in = Not forcing your way in 

1 minute ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The warrant was used to force Trump to allow them in , forced as being made to allow people in, rather then freely allowing people to enter .

   "We have a warrant "=  forcing your way in 

"Knock-knock" ; Come in = Not forcing your way in 

Thats the best load of BS I've seen in a while. Not sure what rock you live under but there wasn't any force exercised to enter and with a warrant there's no need for an invitation to come in.

 

To carry this thought further trump was requested in January, May and June to return the outstanding documents in his possession, and he claimed on each occasion he had only to find he lied and hadn't. He did however turn over a complete hard drive from his computer in error which contained CCTV video of unloading the boxes in question into Mar a Largo along with other incriminating documents showing his actions. 

3 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Thats the best load of BS I've seen in a while. Not sure what rock you live under but there wasn't any force exercised to enter and with a warrant there's no need for an invitation to come in.

Yes, not physical force, but force by a warrant .

They were not freely invited in, they used warrant to force their way in .

  Could the Trump household have refused them entry into the property ?

   No they couldn't have , so it was forced 

19 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, not physical force, but force by a warrant .

They were not freely invited in, they used warrant to force their way in .

  Could the Trump household have refused them entry into the property ?

   No they couldn't have , so it was forced 

Hahahah. You apparently have no knowledge about what is lawful and what is not and they have done nothing except extend Trump every available opportunity to fair due process of the law. Im done with you on this so you can move on with the bs unless you have something factual to say.  Have a great day 

1 minute ago, Dan O said:

Hahahah. You apparently have no knowledge about what is lawful and what is not and they have done nothing except extend Trump every available opportunity to fair due process of the law. Im done with you on this so you can move on with the bs unless you have something factual to say.  Have a great day 

Will do, you have a great day as well .

See ya later mate

10 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Hahahah. You apparently have no knowledge about what is lawful and what is not and they have done nothing except extend Trump every available opportunity to fair due process of the law. Im done with you on this so you can move on with the bs unless you have something factual to say.  Have a great day 

I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know if the entry was forceful or not. Trump said his home was raided, even Melania’s underwear drawer was violated. That’s so terrible.

5 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know if the entry was forceful or not. Trump said his home was raided, even Melania’s underwear drawer was violated. That’s so terrible.

No force was used and it was shown live on a couple of TV channels. They had to search everywhere as Trump had the documents scattered all over in various rooms, on the floor, mixed in with clothes in the closets according to evidence documents and photos released.  Why should her areas be avoided and how would they know whats in a draw without opening it. Had Trump not removed documents illegally from the Whitehouse and not turned them over on repeated requests there would have been no need for a warrant or a search. 

7 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I’m not a lawyer so I don’t know if the entry was forceful or not. 

It has been reported that locks were broken and that his safe was forced open by the FBI

18 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

It has been reported that locks were broken and that his safe was forced open by the FBI

 A clear violation of Trump’s human rights. How did they open his safe? Safe cracker or crowbar? I reckon the latter.

23 minutes ago, Dan O said:

No force was used and it was shown live on a couple of TV channels. They had to search everywhere as Trump had the documents scattered all over in various rooms, on the floor, mixed in with clothes in the closets according to evidence documents and photos released.  Why should her areas be avoided and how would they know whats in a draw without opening it. Had Trump not removed documents illegally from the Whitehouse and not turned them over on repeated requests there would have been no need for a warrant or a search. 

Many senators and congresspersons have come out and condemned the FBI’s actions. Heavy handed, for a document storage issue. Even Rubio said so. 
 

I hope Clarence won’t be swayed by Virgina and teach the 11th circuit a lesson in proper law and order.

8 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

Many senators and congresspersons have come out and condemned the FBI’s actions. Heavy handed, for a document storage issue. Even Rubio said so. 
 

I hope Clarence won’t be swayed by Virgina and teach the 11th circuit a lesson in proper law and order.

Only people in the govt supporting that sentiment is the Trump legion of fools trying to ride his coattails to stay in office

 

Certainly lawyers will all play there role of contests  anything and everything in minuscule detail to lose people in the shuffle. Apparently its working on this forum.

 

As for document storage he was illegally in possession of govt documents and had not sciff storage capability even if he were to store documents.  

 

He has been afforded every opportunity to due process of law and if anything, in an excess amount. Any other person would have been arrested at the time of the search warrant being exercised and he wasn't.  They are exercising proper legal process and restraint. 

1 hour ago, Dan O said:

Only people in the govt supporting that sentiment is the Trump legion of fools trying to ride his coattails to stay in office

 

Certainly lawyers will all play there role of contests  anything and everything in minuscule detail to lose people in the shuffle. Apparently its working on this forum.

 

As for document storage he was illegally in possession of govt documents and had not sciff storage capability even if he were to store documents.  

 

He has been afforded every opportunity to due process of law and if anything, in an excess amount. Any other person would have been arrested at the time of the search warrant being exercised and he wasn't.  They are exercising proper legal process and restraint. 

From what I can gather, the GOP is totally behind him. The only dissenters are, as you would expect, RINO’s such as Christie and … er … er, ok Christie.

 

As to lawful possession, … let me skip to the next point.

 

You said any other person would have been arrested. But till now, Trump hasn’t even been charged. Is this proper legal process?

3 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

You are right, if justice is blind. Bet you didn’t realise that Trump could shot someone on some avenue or other and nothing will happen to him.

 

 

That isn't true though .

If Trump shot someone, he would face justice like everyone else.

What Trump meant was that his supporters are loyal to him  and he  didnt literally mean what he said 

9 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That isn't true though .

If Trump shot someone, he would face justice like everyone else.

What Trump meant was that his supporters are loyal to him  and he  didnt literally mean what he said 

And here you are, defending him and being loyal. 

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

And here you are, defending him and being loyal. 

What people see in him to admire and be loyal to defies logic.

13 minutes ago, Hummin said:

And here you are, defending him and being loyal. 

I am partial and fair , its the anti trumpers who are biased .

Its a concern  for the free World  if the USA begins  jailing people in opposition to the current Government 

10 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I am partial and fair , its the anti trumpers who are biased .

Its a concern  for the free World  if the USA begins  jailing people in opposition to the current Government 

Oh well, no wonder why this world goes to hell!