Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Mar-a-Lago raided

Mar-a-Lago raided

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
780 Posts 20 Posters 38.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

    @George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

    So, if it is about classified documents, well, that's Sandy Berger interesting.

    Well of course it has to do with classified documents, this was never going to be a drug bust.

    To be clear, the distinction I’ve made above about overreach is whether they conducted the raid simply because there are classified documents there, or if they believe specific documents will implicate someone in specific federal crimes.

    George KG Offline
    George KG Offline
    George K
    wrote on last edited by
    #64

    @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

    Well of course it has to do with classified documents, this was never going to be a drug bust.

    Agreed. But "classified" has a wide definition. Are we talking "national security" classified or "evidence of a crime" classified?

    To be clear, the distinction I’ve made above about overreach is whether they conducted the raid simply because there are classified documents there, or if they believe specific documents will implicate someone in specific federal crimes.

    The Dersh disagrees (if you watch the video). His point is that a warrant for a raid should only be issued if a subpoena will not suffice or if there's fear of the evidence being destroyed. I'm not sure if that's the case, or, for that matter, if a subpoena was ever issued.

    "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

    The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

    jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
    • 89th8 Offline
      89th8 Offline
      89th
      wrote on last edited by
      #65

      My best friend is FBI, let me text him real quick.

      1 Reply Last reply
      • 89th8 Offline
        89th8 Offline
        89th
        wrote on last edited by
        #66

        Wow! He said not to tell anyone so you all have to promise not to say anything. But…he said there is compelling evidence that Trump is connected to Dewey’s Facebook post.

        1 Reply Last reply
        • George KG George K

          @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

          Well of course it has to do with classified documents, this was never going to be a drug bust.

          Agreed. But "classified" has a wide definition. Are we talking "national security" classified or "evidence of a crime" classified?

          To be clear, the distinction I’ve made above about overreach is whether they conducted the raid simply because there are classified documents there, or if they believe specific documents will implicate someone in specific federal crimes.

          The Dersh disagrees (if you watch the video). His point is that a warrant for a raid should only be issued if a subpoena will not suffice or if there's fear of the evidence being destroyed. I'm not sure if that's the case, or, for that matter, if a subpoena was ever issued.

          jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nycJ Online
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #67

          @George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

          @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

          The Dersh disagrees (if you watch the video).

          I’m not following. Can you tell me the specific statement I’ve made that Dersch disagrees with?

          Only non-witches get due process.

          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
          George KG 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

            @George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

            @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

            The Dersh disagrees (if you watch the video).

            I’m not following. Can you tell me the specific statement I’ve made that Dersch disagrees with?

            George KG Offline
            George KG Offline
            George K
            wrote on last edited by
            #68

            @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

            I’m not following. Can you tell me the specific statement I’ve made that Dersch disagrees with?

            His point is that the process was not followed. There should have been subpoenas issued (and perhaps they were, I don't know) before staging a raid. Perhaps that's what your meaning of overreach is.

            "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

            The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

            jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
            • George KG George K

              @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

              I’m not following. Can you tell me the specific statement I’ve made that Dersch disagrees with?

              His point is that the process was not followed. There should have been subpoenas issued (and perhaps they were, I don't know) before staging a raid. Perhaps that's what your meaning of overreach is.

              jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nycJ Online
              jon-nyc
              wrote on last edited by
              #69

              @George-K but you said he disagreed with me. What did I say that he disagreed with?

              Only non-witches get due process.

              • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
              George KG 1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                @George-K but you said he disagreed with me. What did I say that he disagreed with?

                George KG Offline
                George KG Offline
                George K
                wrote on last edited by
                #70

                @jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                @George-K but you said he disagreed with me. What did I say that he disagreed with?

                I mis-read your post.

                "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • kluursK Offline
                  kluursK Offline
                  kluurs
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #71

                  Given the precedent, the predictable response of the target, and the potential for outrage if things go the way of Geraldo's safe, I have to imagine a high degree of confidence that what they sought would actually be there. I'm sure the judge involved will be doxed

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • Catseye3C Offline
                    Catseye3C Offline
                    Catseye3
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #72

                    From USA Today:

                    Top takeaways from the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago:

                    The raid marks an escalation in law enforcement scrutiny of the former president.
                    Legal analysts say this would have been approved at the highest levels of law enforcement.
                    Under the law, any search would need to be authorized by a federal judge after finding probable cause that a crime had been committed and that evidence of the crime exists in the location to be searched.

                    Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka

                    taiwan_girlT 1 Reply Last reply
                    • JollyJ Offline
                      JollyJ Offline
                      Jolly
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #73

                      Now, what happens if there is no "there", there?

                      Or if the violation is so trivial when compared to past violations it appears as purely politically driven?

                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • Catseye3C Catseye3

                        From USA Today:

                        Top takeaways from the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago:

                        The raid marks an escalation in law enforcement scrutiny of the former president.
                        Legal analysts say this would have been approved at the highest levels of law enforcement.
                        Under the law, any search would need to be authorized by a federal judge after finding probable cause that a crime had been committed and that evidence of the crime exists in the location to be searched.

                        taiwan_girlT Offline
                        taiwan_girlT Offline
                        taiwan_girl
                        wrote on last edited by taiwan_girl
                        #74

                        @Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                        From USA Today:

                        Top takeaways from the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago:

                        The raid marks an escalation in law enforcement scrutiny of the former president.
                        Legal analysts say this would have been approved at the highest levels of law enforcement.
                        Under the law, any search would need to be authorized by a federal judge after finding probable cause that a crime had been committed and that evidence of the crime exists in the location to be searched.

                        Interesting. I mean, I think it was known, or at least supposed, that President Trump left the White House with material he was not supposed to. It should have been easy enough to say to him, "hey, not sure if you were aware, but some of the material you took has to stay in the Archives. We will send a truck down to pick them up. Appreciate your cooperation."

                        So, Präsident Trump had to know there were questions about what he took. Why would he not give them back? Is it something that puts him in a bad view? If so, i would have think he would have just destroyed it. 🤷

                        What is it that @George-K says? "Get the popcorn" LOL

                        Catseye3C 1 Reply Last reply
                        • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                          @Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                          From USA Today:

                          Top takeaways from the FBI search at Mar-a-Lago:

                          The raid marks an escalation in law enforcement scrutiny of the former president.
                          Legal analysts say this would have been approved at the highest levels of law enforcement.
                          Under the law, any search would need to be authorized by a federal judge after finding probable cause that a crime had been committed and that evidence of the crime exists in the location to be searched.

                          Interesting. I mean, I think it was known, or at least supposed, that President Trump left the White House with material he was not supposed to. It should have been easy enough to say to him, "hey, not sure if you were aware, but some of the material you took has to stay in the Archives. We will send a truck down to pick them up. Appreciate your cooperation."

                          So, Präsident Trump had to know there were questions about what he took. Why would he not give them back? Is it something that puts him in a bad view? If so, i would have think he would have just destroyed it. 🤷

                          What is it that @George-K says? "Get the popcorn" LOL

                          Catseye3C Offline
                          Catseye3C Offline
                          Catseye3
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #75

                          @taiwan_girl said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                          I mean, I think it was known, or at least supposed, that President Trump left the White House to material he was not supposed to. It should have been easy enough to say to him, "hey, not sure if you were aware, but some of the material you took has to stay in the Archives. We will send a truck down to pick them up. Appreciate your cooperation."

                          I redd in another source that the Archives in fact did request at length for Trump to return the items after he left office, and finally reported his non-response to Justice.

                          As for why he didn't give them back, the answer to that is, because he's Trump and he didn't want to and if he doesn't want to do something he doesn't do it. Because he's Trump.

                          If it's proven that he did destroy documents rightfully belonging to the Archive, then he's in the soup. Like he is for so many other things.

                          Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka

                          JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                          • LuFins DadL Offline
                            LuFins DadL Offline
                            LuFins Dad
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #76

                            Karnak predicts that 45% of the people will defend Trump and attack Justice no matter what was or wasn’t in the documents and 45% of the people will attack Trump and defend Justice no matter what is or isn’t in the documents and everybody will be pointing their fingers at the other side yelling “See?!”

                            The Brad

                            Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                            • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                              Karnak predicts that 45% of the people will defend Trump and attack Justice no matter what was or wasn’t in the documents and 45% of the people will attack Trump and defend Justice no matter what is or isn’t in the documents and everybody will be pointing their fingers at the other side yelling “See?!”

                              Aqua LetiferA Offline
                              Aqua LetiferA Offline
                              Aqua Letifer
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #77

                              @LuFins-Dad said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                              Karnak predicts that 45% of the people will defend Trump and attack Justice no matter what was or wasn’t in the documents and 45% of the people will attack Trump and defend Justice no matter what is or isn’t in the documents and everybody will be pointing their fingers at the other side yelling “See?!”

                              That's pretty much where we're at, yeah.

                              Please love yourself.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • HoraceH Offline
                                HoraceH Offline
                                Horace
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #78

                                Sounds like a glorified library book return penalty. Just kidding, it’s not glorified.

                                Education is extremely important.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • Doctor PhibesD Offline
                                  Doctor PhibesD Offline
                                  Doctor Phibes
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #79

                                  I don't understand how anybody can determine whether this was warranted or not at this point.

                                  If he does go to court, jury selection will be freaking hilarious - they'll have to ask non-Americans to take it on.

                                  I was only joking

                                  JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                  • Catseye3C Catseye3

                                    @taiwan_girl said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                                    I mean, I think it was known, or at least supposed, that President Trump left the White House to material he was not supposed to. It should have been easy enough to say to him, "hey, not sure if you were aware, but some of the material you took has to stay in the Archives. We will send a truck down to pick them up. Appreciate your cooperation."

                                    I redd in another source that the Archives in fact did request at length for Trump to return the items after he left office, and finally reported his non-response to Justice.

                                    As for why he didn't give them back, the answer to that is, because he's Trump and he didn't want to and if he doesn't want to do something he doesn't do it. Because he's Trump.

                                    If it's proven that he did destroy documents rightfully belonging to the Archive, then he's in the soup. Like he is for so many other things.

                                    JollyJ Offline
                                    JollyJ Offline
                                    Jolly
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #80

                                    @Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                                    @taiwan_girl said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                                    I mean, I think it was known, or at least supposed, that President Trump left the White House to material he was not supposed to. It should have been easy enough to say to him, "hey, not sure if you were aware, but some of the material you took has to stay in the Archives. We will send a truck down to pick them up. Appreciate your cooperation."

                                    I redd in another source that the Archives in fact did request at length for Trump to return the items after he left office, and finally reported his non-response to Justice.

                                    As for why he didn't give them back, the answer to that is, because he's Trump and he didn't want to and if he doesn't want to do something he doesn't do it. Because he's Trump.

                                    If it's proven that he did destroy documents rightfully belonging to the Archive, then he's in the soup. Like he is for so many other things.

                                    He sent them the 15 boxes they requested.

                                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                    Catseye3C 1 Reply Last reply
                                    • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                                      I don't understand how anybody can determine whether this was warranted or not at this point.

                                      If he does go to court, jury selection will be freaking hilarious - they'll have to ask non-Americans to take it on.

                                      JollyJ Offline
                                      JollyJ Offline
                                      Jolly
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #81

                                      @Doctor-Phibes said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                                      I don't understand how anybody can determine whether this was warranted or not at this point.

                                      If he does go to court, jury selection will be freaking hilarious - they'll have to ask non-Americans to take it on.

                                      You ready?

                                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                      Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
                                      • George KG Offline
                                        George KG Offline
                                        George K
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #82

                                        Andy McCarthy: It’s all about Jan 6.

                                        https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid-its-about-the-capitol-riot-not-the-mishandling-of-classified-information/

                                        "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                                        The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                                        HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                                        • George KG George K

                                          Andy McCarthy: It’s all about Jan 6.

                                          https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid-its-about-the-capitol-riot-not-the-mishandling-of-classified-information/

                                          HoraceH Offline
                                          HoraceH Offline
                                          Horace
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #83

                                          @George-K said in Mar-a-Lago raided:

                                          Andy McCarthy: It’s all about Jan 6.

                                          https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/08/the-fbis-mar-a-lago-raid-its-about-the-capitol-riot-not-the-mishandling-of-classified-information/

                                          That would make sense. But if it’s true, there is no evidentiary smoking gun that instigated the warrant and we’re back to overreach and a roll of the dice that nobody will care, because Trump masterminded a coup.

                                          Education is extremely important.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups