Trump Says FBI is Searching Mar-a-Lago!

29,186 Views | 631 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by DiabloWags
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

bearister said:

DiabloWags said:

Trump says that the FBI stole his passports.

Trump Says The FBI Took His Passports In Its Mar-A-Lago Search (yahoo.com)

The Donald only hires the BEST PEOPLE!

For all his accusations of the FBI investigating him for political reasons, Trump has not mentioned that FBI director Christopher Wray is a Republican, that he appointed Wray to his post and that Senate Republicans unanimously voted to confirm him.




Oh no! Without a passport, Trump won't be able to travel abroad to meet with his Russian handlers and pass on the intel...

wait...

errr...... I mean....

He won't be able to fly to Trump Turnberry for a golfing holiday. At least not for 6-12 weeks. Damn.
you get the feeling that anytime anything is misplaced in his house for the next few years (or until he is in jail, whichever is easier) he's going to blame the FBI.

"Melania, where are my keys? Have you seen my keys? The FBI must have stolen them."
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

bearister said:

DiabloWags said:

Trump says that the FBI stole his passports.

Trump Says The FBI Took His Passports In Its Mar-A-Lago Search (yahoo.com)

The Donald only hires the BEST PEOPLE!

For all his accusations of the FBI investigating him for political reasons, Trump has not mentioned that FBI director Christopher Wray is a Republican, that he appointed Wray to his post and that Senate Republicans unanimously voted to confirm him.




Oh no! Without a passport, Trump won't be able to travel abroad to meet with his Russian handlers and pass on the intel...

wait...

errr...... I mean....

He won't be able to fly to Trump Turnberry for a golfing holiday. At least not for 6-12 weeks. Damn.
You get the feeling that anytime anything is misplaced in his house for the next few years (or until he is in jail, whichever is earlier) he's going to blame the FBI.

"Melania, where are my keys? Have you seen my keys? The FBI must have stolen them."
"What's that Barron? You need your adderal so you can focus on school? The FBI must have stolen the bottle."
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

Trump says that the FBI stole his passports.

Trump Says The FBI Took His Passports In Its Mar-A-Lago Search (yahoo.com)


The FBI did take his passports and they returned them. Google buried the link below on page 2 from NBC. On page 1 at the very top of the page, "Trump Claims FBI Seized His Passports in Mar-a-Lago Search" by MSNBC.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trumps-passports-returned-mar-lago-search-doj-official-says-rcna43192
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

DiabloWags said:

Trump says that the FBI stole his passports.

Trump Says The FBI Took His Passports In Its Mar-A-Lago Search (yahoo.com)




Norah O'Donnell WRONG. Fake news.
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:


Oh no! Without a passport, Trump won't be able to travel abroad to meet with his Russian handlers and pass on the intel...

wait...

errr...... I mean....

He won't be able to fly to Trump Turnberry for a golfing holiday. At least not for 6-12 weeks. Damn.

TDS. Seek help. Don't wait.

I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nailed it
GoOskie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Apparently the FBI did accidentally seize Trump's 3 passports - 2 of which were expired (in classic Trump fashion, he still managed to lie and claim that only 1 was expired). And they told him about it before he noticed and they've already returned them - including the expired passports.



I'm curious as to where those passports were. I know they searched Melania's closet and I also keep my passport in my wife's closet.

The stars really are just like us!
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.
Half is a bit too generous.

How does one not know that he believes almost nothing of what he speaks but that he is just a performer? Did everyone forget his past and what he has said before he took on this role?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.

I wouldnt trust the people that tune into him to mow my lawn.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.

I wouldnt trust the people that tune into him to mow my lawn.

I guess not everyone appreciates a tanned scrotum.
MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

DiabloWags said:

GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.

I wouldnt trust the people that tune into him to mow my lawn.

I guess not everyone appreciates a tanned scrotum.
Why would you admit this on a sports board?
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

DiabloWags said:

GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.

I wouldnt trust the people that tune into him to mow my lawn.

I guess not everyone appreciates a tanned scrotum.
Can't you just imagine how he gets together with his elitist friends and laughs at how he can make his audience buy some of the crazy **** he just throws out there?
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.

calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Per the sources, Trump and his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, were consumed by "settling political grievances and personal grudges" and ignored the task of passing sensitive documents to the National Archives.

By contrast, The Times reported, Vice President Mike Pence was focused on the task and got his records back as required.

Trump was so distracted by grievances that he never got round to returning secret documents the FBI found at Mar-a-Lago: NYT (yahoo.com)
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

Per the sources, Trump and his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, were consumed by "settling political grievances and personal grudges" and ignored the task of passing sensitive documents to the National Archives.

By contrast, The Times reported, Vice President Mike Pence was focused on the task and got his records back as required.

Trump was so distracted by grievances that he never got round to returning secret documents the FBI found at Mar-a-Lago: NYT (yahoo.com)


A Yahoo article is referencing a Busines Insider article that's referencing a New York Times article that's using anonymous sources that mentioned 2020 election fraud in the article but nothing about nuclear secrets.....fascinating.
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
Vandalus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
Disclaimer - I came to read this entire thread in one sitting for the first time just now. Seeing it in that context allows for a wonderful meander down the path (in real time) to see how various people were reacting to the news as it was happening. Obviously this is an ever evolving story, with updates seemingly every day that changes and imbues how prior information is processed.

I quote you CB93 because your initial take was, if I may summarize it (acknowledging that your take was thorough, so this will not do it justice), was essentially: "the search warrant may have been strictly speaking legal, but the effect of it is highly political, so unless its something major, this is a major overreach."

Now that you have had the opportunity to digest all of the current updates as to what transpired, do you still believe that this was a massive (or at the least, politically risky and ill advised) move to make, or has your opinion changed on the merits of the action to retrieve the documents in the manner that the feds did?
~Spectemur agendo~
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

DiabloWags said:

GoOskie said:

You have to be a half wit to listen to #ucker for more than a few minutes.

I wouldnt trust the people that tune into him to mow my lawn.

I guess not everyone appreciates a tanned scrotum.
orange balls?
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Vandalus said:

calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
Disclaimer - I came to read this entire thread in one sitting for the first time just now. Seeing it in that context allows for a wonderful meander down the path (in real time) to see how various people were reacting to the news as it was happening. Obviously this is an ever evolving story, with updates seemingly every day that changes and imbues how prior information is processed.

I quote you CB93 because your initial take was, if I may summarize it (acknowledging that your take was thorough, so this will not do it justice), was essentially: "the search warrant may have been strictly speaking legal, but the effect of it is highly political, so unless its something major, this is a major overreach."

Now that you have had the opportunity to digest all of the current updates as to what transpired, do you still believe that this was a massive (or at the least, politically risky and ill advised) move to make, or has your opinion changed on the merits of the action to retrieve the documents in the manner that the feds did?
Good question.

Just to be clear, neither my opinion nor my concern has changed. What has changed is that I am not responding to my concern about the precedent but I am responding to the blind defense of Trump over the rule of law by the far right. My concern was never about whether Trump violated the laws or whether the search was legal. I believe that Trump was either stupid enough, selfish enough or corrupt enough to take classified or top secret information with him.

My concern about the ramification of this move still remains. The fact that the Attorney General has now at least addressed this to the extent that he could has alleviated the concern. However, raiding the home of a former president is clearly an unprecedented action and breaking that norm can lead us down a path of normalizing same type of action (whether the misdeeds rise to Trump level or not - neither party has shied away from using false equivalence) by future administration against their predecessor of the opposite party.

There have been norms that have been broken quite often, whether presidents not speaking ill of their predecessor or whether former president not speaking ill of the current president. Being a president is a tough job where only a person who has experienced it can relate. There was also great effort made to ensure peaceful transition of power, and our democracy relied on folks appreciating the value of our process that enabled such transition.

All of this broke down with Trump, mostly with Trump doing the breaking of norms for his own ego and benefit, including inciting actions that interrupted the sanctity of the vote and the transition of power. I hated all of that, and that is one of the main reasons I hate Trump. However, the raid was also a breaking from the norm that could add an additional crack to future peaceful transition of power. The only way we counter that is to show a clear and unique set of circumstances that results in serious criminal indictment of Trump. Short of that, this only helped Trump and created a dangerous precedent.

Having said that, in all other circumstances where we were not looking to ensure maximum protection for future transition of power, I have no doubt this was truly justified and Trump is a slimy, corrupt and unpatriotic *******.
Vandalus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:


Good question.

Just to be clear, neither my opinion nor my concern has changed. What has changed is that I am not responding to my concern about the precedent but I am responding to the blind defense of Trump over the rule of law by the far right. My concern was never about whether Trump violated the laws or whether the search was legal. I believe that Trump was either stupid enough, selfish enough or corrupt enough to take classified or top secret information with him.

My concern about the ramification of this move still remains. The fact that the Attorney General has now at least addressed this to the extent that he could has alleviated the concern. However, raiding the home of a former president is clearly an unprecedented action and breaking that norm can lead us down a path of normalizing same type of action (whether the misdeeds rise to Trump level or not - neither party has shied away from using false equivalence) by future administration against their predecessor of the opposite party.

There have been norms that have been broken quite often, whether presidents not speaking ill of their predecessor or whether former president not speaking ill of the current president. Being a president is a tough job where only a person who has experienced it can relate. There was also great effort made to ensure peaceful transition of power, and our democracy relied on folks appreciating the value of our process that enabled such transition.

All of this broke down with Trump, mostly with Trump doing the breaking of norms for his own ego and benefit, including inciting actions that interrupted the sanctity of the vote and the transition of power. I hated all of that, and that is one of the main reasons I hate Trump. However, the raid was also a breaking from the norm that could add an additional crack to future peaceful transition of power. The only way we counter that is to show a clear and unique set of circumstances that results in serious criminal indictment of Trump. Short of that, this only helped Trump and created a dangerous precedent.

Having said that, in all other circumstances where we were not looking to ensure maximum protection for future transition of power, I have no doubt this was truly justified and Trump is a slimy, corrupt and unpatriotic *******.

Thank you for your considered response and comments. I don't necessarily agree with all of them, but I appreciate the thought that has gone into why you feel the way you do.

I personally think that at some level, when the breaker of norms is breaking them with proclivity, you sometimes need to crack a few eggs in order to make the omelet. I do think there will obviously be reprisals, but hopefully our republic will withstand, and the other branches of government will put a check on unwarranted and unjustified searches. This, clearly was not one of them. It seems to me that the feds were okay with knowing that quite likely there was classified materials left behind, but that it's possible it was the surveillance footage that showed them evidence that made the extraordinary and truly unprecedented search justified. It's still a hard call, and I would be very surprised if there wasn't a significant amount of consideration into the likely effect and response the execution of the search warrant would have.

Based on what I know as john q citizen, I tend to think the search was warranted, but I can acknowledge that it's a very close call when considering all aspects.
~Spectemur agendo~
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Republicans can threaten reciprocation all they want. The problem being, that under tRump, almost every claim they make against an opponent is based on unsupported allegations, which plays well on Fox News opinion shows and gets their base inflamed, but it doesn't support an indictment or a guilty jury verdict.

tRumpworld = Unsupported allegation world
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Vandalus said:

calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
Disclaimer - I came to read this entire thread in one sitting for the first time just now. Seeing it in that context allows for a wonderful meander down the path (in real time) to see how various people were reacting to the news as it was happening. Obviously this is an ever evolving story, with updates seemingly every day that changes and imbues how prior information is processed.

I quote you CB93 because your initial take was, if I may summarize it (acknowledging that your take was thorough, so this will not do it justice), was essentially: "the search warrant may have been strictly speaking legal, but the effect of it is highly political, so unless its something major, this is a major overreach."

Now that you have had the opportunity to digest all of the current updates as to what transpired, do you still believe that this was a massive (or at the least, politically risky and ill advised) move to make, or has your opinion changed on the merits of the action to retrieve the documents in the manner that the feds did?


My concern about the ramification of this move still remains.

...

There have been norms that have been broken quite often, whether presidents not speaking ill of their predecessor or whether former president not speaking ill of the current president.
I tend to agree with what you've written and want to focus on these points. First - I would say that I value the absence of political influence on law enforcement. I'm more comfortable with political influence on policy priorities - eg reducing prosecution of non-violent drug crimes - but I don't have any tolerance for the presidential administration meddling in individual cases for political reasons.

What I find most disappointing is that this norm has been explicitly disclaimed by Trump and his enablers and yet is being disregarded entirely when it's still in place with Biden. I have zero reason to believe Biden is focused on going after Trump. Trump may very well be the only candidate Biden can beat in 2024. Yet all we've heard from disingenuous right wing media is that this was a politically motivated partisan attack. There is no basis for that claim, other than the correlated claim by Trump that the president is the chief law enforcement officer in the land and can choose to meddle in any case that he wants to.

Unfortunately, this "norm" is failing and the only way we can fix it is with a constitutional amendment. I don't think a law would work because SCOTUS and their unitary executive believers would strike it down. A criminal justice system which is vulnerable to meddling from politicians is bad for America and enables authoritarianism and creeping fascism. I don't think this was a big concern 20 years ago but it's major now. I have zero doubt if Trump is elected in 2024 he will spend a disproportionate amount of his time attacking his political enemies with a weaponized FBI. And I know that a few RWNJs will pretend that the FBI was weaponized by Obama and now by Biden, but that is just bunk.

So to tie all of this together, I am concerned about the ramifications of this move even though I don't think there is anything that could have been done to avoid it. Allowing Trump to violate the espionage act and flaunt our lies wasn't a tenable solution and I don't think it would have made sense for Biden to meddle in the FBI/DOJ's work and say "let him keep committing crimes, I don't want people to think I went after him." The concern remains about how people will react but this criminal investigation is clearly warranted.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This all really comes down to the people. The information is out there. If stupidity prevails then Americans don't deserve better. As flawed as our Constitution is about giving power to the people, upcoming elections shouldn't even be close. Tie goes to the fascists. What do the American people want?
he / him
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Has Norah O'Donnell resigned yet? Where is she getting her "information"?
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

calbear93 said:

Vandalus said:

calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
Disclaimer - I came to read this entire thread in one sitting for the first time just now. Seeing it in that context allows for a wonderful meander down the path (in real time) to see how various people were reacting to the news as it was happening. Obviously this is an ever evolving story, with updates seemingly every day that changes and imbues how prior information is processed.

I quote you CB93 because your initial take was, if I may summarize it (acknowledging that your take was thorough, so this will not do it justice), was essentially: "the search warrant may have been strictly speaking legal, but the effect of it is highly political, so unless its something major, this is a major overreach."

Now that you have had the opportunity to digest all of the current updates as to what transpired, do you still believe that this was a massive (or at the least, politically risky and ill advised) move to make, or has your opinion changed on the merits of the action to retrieve the documents in the manner that the feds did?


My concern about the ramification of this move still remains.

...

There have been norms that have been broken quite often, whether presidents not speaking ill of their predecessor or whether former president not speaking ill of the current president.
I tend to agree with what you've written and want to focus on these points. First - I would say that I value the absence of political influence on law enforcement. I'm more comfortable with political influence on policy priorities - eg reducing prosecution of non-violent drug crimes - but I don't have any tolerance for the presidential administration meddling in individual cases for political reasons.

What I find most disappointing is that this norm has been explicitly disclaimed by Trump and his enablers and yet is being disregarded entirely when it's still in place with Biden. I have zero reason to believe Biden is focused on going after Trump. Trump may very well be the only candidate Biden can beat in 2024. Yet all we've heard from disingenuous right wing media is that this was a politically motivated partisan attack. There is no basis for that claim, other than the correlated claim by Trump that the president is the chief law enforcement officer in the land and can choose to meddle in any case that he wants to.

Unfortunately, this "norm" is failing and the only way we can fix it is with a constitutional amendment. I don't think a law would work because SCOTUS and their unitary executive believers would strike it down. A criminal justice system which is vulnerable to meddling from politicians is bad for America and enables authoritarianism and creeping fascism. I don't think this was a big concern 20 years ago but it's major now. I have zero doubt if Trump is elected in 2024 he will spend a disproportionate amount of his time attacking his political enemies with a weaponized FBI. And I know that a few RWNJs will pretend that the FBI was weaponized by Obama and now by Biden, but that is just bunk.

So to tie all of this together, I am concerned about the ramifications of this move even though I don't think there is anything that could have been done to avoid it. Allowing Trump to violate the espionage act and flaunt our lies wasn't a tenable solution and I don't think it would have made sense for Biden to meddle in the FBI/DOJ's work and say "let him keep committing crimes, I don't want people to think I went after him." The concern remains about how people will react but this criminal investigation is clearly warranted.
I agree. The sad thing is that what the Trump acolytes in Congress are accusing Biden of doing are the exact things they condoned when Trump actually tried to commit those acts. And they burn the ones who, despite having very conservative policies views, stood up to Trump for putting himself and his power above our democracy and our country.

I don't doubt that Biden did not order the raid. As you stated, I think Biden would lose to almost anyone not Trump. And this will be spun as a political move (irrespective of the facts) and pave the road in the future for an actual political attack using the DOJ (like Nixon used the IRS as a political weapon). And we saw the weakening of the walls between the WH and DOJ during the prior administration, and this precedent will be used as a basis for further deterioration unless we get someone who respects the norms like Cheney. If it is Trump or his acolytes, we are in danger of that protection going away.

By the way, no way a constitutional amendment will ever be effected. This country is too divisive, and too many extremist in the state legislative bodies.
BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"The American people need to be reassured of the integrity in our justice system. And the very appearance of a reoccurrence of politics playing a role in the decisions by the Justice Department demands transparency as never before." - Mike Pence

Release the affidavit.
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

calbear93 said:

Vandalus said:

calbear93 said:

Unit2Sucks said:

So much for the "all they had to do is ask" argument.




I would call a raid a special type of asking for mischievous boys.
Disclaimer - I came to read this entire thread in one sitting for the first time just now. Seeing it in that context allows for a wonderful meander down the path (in real time) to see how various people were reacting to the news as it was happening. Obviously this is an ever evolving story, with updates seemingly every day that changes and imbues how prior information is processed.

I quote you CB93 because your initial take was, if I may summarize it (acknowledging that your take was thorough, so this will not do it justice), was essentially: "the search warrant may have been strictly speaking legal, but the effect of it is highly political, so unless its something major, this is a major overreach."

Now that you have had the opportunity to digest all of the current updates as to what transpired, do you still believe that this was a massive (or at the least, politically risky and ill advised) move to make, or has your opinion changed on the merits of the action to retrieve the documents in the manner that the feds did?


My concern about the ramification of this move still remains.

...

There have been norms that have been broken quite often, whether presidents not speaking ill of their predecessor or whether former president not speaking ill of the current president.
I tend to agree with what you've written and want to focus on these points. First - I would say that I value the absence of political influence on law enforcement. I'm more comfortable with political influence on policy priorities - eg reducing prosecution of non-violent drug crimes - but I don't have any tolerance for the presidential administration meddling in individual cases for political reasons.

What I find most disappointing is that this norm has been explicitly disclaimed by Trump and his enablers and yet is being disregarded entirely when it's still in place with Biden. I have zero reason to believe Biden is focused on going after Trump. Trump may very well be the only candidate Biden can beat in 2024. Yet all we've heard from disingenuous right wing media is that this was a politically motivated partisan attack. There is no basis for that claim, other than the correlated claim by Trump that the president is the chief law enforcement officer in the land and can choose to meddle in any case that he wants to.

Unfortunately, this "norm" is failing and the only way we can fix it is with a constitutional amendment. I don't think a law would work because SCOTUS and their unitary executive believers would strike it down. A criminal justice system which is vulnerable to meddling from politicians is bad for America and enables authoritarianism and creeping fascism. I don't think this was a big concern 20 years ago but it's major now. I have zero doubt if Trump is elected in 2024 he will spend a disproportionate amount of his time attacking his political enemies with a weaponized FBI. And I know that a few RWNJs will pretend that the FBI was weaponized by Obama and now by Biden, but that is just bunk.

So to tie all of this together, I am concerned about the ramifications of this move even though I don't think there is anything that could have been done to avoid it. Allowing Trump to violate the espionage act and flaunt our lies wasn't a tenable solution and I don't think it would have made sense for Biden to meddle in the FBI/DOJ's work and say "let him keep committing crimes, I don't want people to think I went after him." The concern remains about how people will react but this criminal investigation is clearly warranted.
I agree. The sad thing is that what the Trump acolytes in Congress are accusing Biden of doing are the exact things they condoned when Trump actually tried to commit those acts. And they burn the ones who, despite having very conservative policies views, stood up to Trump for putting himself and his power above our democracy and our country.

I don't doubt that Biden did not order the raid. As you stated, I think Biden would lose to almost anyone not Trump. And this will be spun as a political move (irrespective of the facts) and pave the road in the future for an actual political attack using the DOJ (like Nixon used the IRS as a political weapon). And we saw the weakening of the walls between the WH and DOJ during the prior administration, and this precedent will be used as a basis for further deterioration unless we get someone who respects the norms like Cheney. If it is Trump or his acolytes, we are in danger of that protection going away.

By the way, no way a constitutional amendment will ever be effected. This country is too divisive, and too many extremist in the state legislative bodies.
Agree with everything. I can't see us amending the constitution for anything, let alone something like this. This in particular is a non-starter because the MAGAts spent the last 4 years telling us that the president can do whatever he wants and can interfere in any criminal investigation he so chooses. They aren't quite singing that tune now, but they would oppose any amendment that would limit their emperor king from carrying out his grievance war if he should win again.

I could see some circumstance under which we do at some point amend the constitution again but it would have to be something that is so clearly bipartisan and uncontroversial. It would either result from some bizarre "originalist" reading of the constitution or from some foreign interference that galvanizes the nation in favor of a change.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So, maybe this is why they searched.

Kash Patel announced a plan to released onto his website classified documents. It's another scheme of trump's to manipulate an election vis-a-vis bad news on opponents.

Who can make sense and follow it all? My goodness.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/weeks-mar-lago-search-ex-214920354.html
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

So, maybe this is why they searched.

Kash Patel announced a plan to released onto his website classified documents. It's another scheme of trump's to manipulate an election vis-a-vis bad news on opponents.

Who can make sense and follow it all? My goodness.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/weeks-mar-lago-search-ex-214920354.html
Looks like he wants to volunteer for the chair. Time to make an example of these people.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

Looks like he wants to volunteer for the chair. Time to make an example of these people.

BearForce2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

So, maybe this is why they searched.

Kash Patel announced a plan to released onto his website classified documents. It's another scheme of trump's to manipulate an election vis-a-vis bad news on opponents.

Who can make sense and follow it all? My goodness.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/weeks-mar-lago-search-ex-214920354.html

The reason why you're confused is because you're hearing lies that are contradicting each other.
I'm so thankful for Arizona, now the whole world knows they cheated. Democrats are election fraud deniers. Even little kids know they steal elections.

Democrats confess their sins through projection. They are everything they accuse others of being.
AunBear89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Talking to the mirror again?
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is why no attorney worth their salt is willing to represent the Orange Buffoon...

ITS A LOSER.


 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.