Mar-a-Lago raided
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 11:55 last edited by
Ms. Strassel gets it.
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:03 last edited by jon-nyc 8 Dec 2022, 12:04
To me “getting it” is realizing you should wait until the facts are out before rendering these judgements. What she is expressing is some sort of tribal faith.
-
To me “getting it” is realizing you should wait until the facts are out before rendering these judgements. What she is expressing is some sort of tribal faith.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:13 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
What she is expressing is some sort of tribal faith.
Yes.
And the names that she mentions (Swallwell, for example) should be forthright to stand up to the same scrutiny.
That's a "standard" that Garland reiterated yesterday. "No one..."
So, shall we talk about Swallwell's laptop and Fang Fang? How about the First Son's lying on a firearm application (a felony)?
If you turn a blind eye to those, it's pretty - tribal.
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:24 last edited by
If a standard exists, it applies equally to all.
-
To me “getting it” is realizing you should wait until the facts are out before rendering these judgements. What she is expressing is some sort of tribal faith.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:26 last edited by Catseye3 8 Dec 2022, 12:28Yes, but in a getting it-ish sort of way. What with the FBI "descending on" Mar-a-Lago like a horde of vampires and all. So much more effecting to read something that leaves your heart thrilling with virtue signalling flavored with rage and hate.
Don't need no stinkin facts, gringo!
Don't know how we're ever going to dial back on these partisan-fueled wars which, not for nuttin, have been greatly exacerbated by Trump's manipulation of the socials.
Chickens are coming home to roost, Donald!
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:26 last edited by
Bias, much?
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:35 last edited by Catseye3 8 Dec 2022, 12:50
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Bias, much?
Might as well. It's not like I can get y'all to respond to my unbiased questions designed to sort out the facts. Quel boring, eh?
And an accusation of bias coming from you is hilarious.
-
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Because it was unprecedented and because so many have tried to get him so many ways.
But your answer would have been the same if it hadn't been unprecedented!
Sorry, I've redd all the posts on this, and it's like y'all are bound and determined to believe what you need to believe, even if you have to corkscrew yourselves to do it. As if two seconds after news of the service emerged, the latest-maneuver-to-get-Trump diatribes were solidly in place.
I don't have a problem seeing it far more simply. NARA had reason to believe Trump had removed and retained documents he shouldn't have when he left office. They attempted to get them back without success, and being worried about the nature of the documents' contents, appealed to DOJ, who says "Where possible it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search," and when those means weren't successful they were left with no choice but the warrant.
IOW, it was Trump who initiated this whole thing by removing documents he shouldn't have. The feds petitioned him to return them without success, and were left with no choice but the search warrant, because they could not afford to leave documents of unknown content floating around unsecured. It seems like the feds gave him a lot of latitude in this, and he has persisted in not cooperating.
I admit I'm not confident in my understanding of this whole thing, but I just can't make it make sense that the warrant is an effort to "get" him. I don't see that Trump left them any choice.
I'm not beating a drum to champion any one line of reasoning. I'm just trying to understand what's going on.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 12:59 last edited by@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Because it was unprecedented and because so many have tried to get him so many ways.
But your answer would have been the same if it hadn't been unprecedented!
Sorry, I've redd all the posts on this, and it's like y'all are bound and determined to believe what you need to believe, even if you have to corkscrew yourselves to do it. As if two seconds after news of the service emerged, the latest-maneuver-to-get-Trump theory was solidly in place.
I don't have a problem seeing it far more simply. NARA had reason to believe Trump had removed and retained documents he shouldn't have when he left office. They attempted to get them back without success, and being worried about the nature of the documents' contents, appealed to DOJ, who says "Where possible it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search," and when those means weren't successful they were left with no choice but the warrant.
IOW, it was Trump who initiated this whole thing by removing documents he shouldn't have. The feds petitioned him to return them without success, and were left with no choice but the search warrant, because they could not afford to leave documents of unknown content floating around unsecured. It seems like the feds gave him a lot of latitude in this, and he has persisted in not cooperating.
I admit I'm not confident in my understanding of this whole thing, but I just can't make it make sense that the warrant is an effort to "get" him. I don't see that Trump left them any choice.
I'm not beating a drum to champion any one line of reasoning. I'm just trying to understand what's going on.
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about. I suspect he brought it on himself, as he is wont to do.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
-
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Because it was unprecedented and because so many have tried to get him so many ways.
But your answer would have been the same if it hadn't been unprecedented!
Sorry, I've redd all the posts on this, and it's like y'all are bound and determined to believe what you need to believe, even if you have to corkscrew yourselves to do it. As if two seconds after news of the service emerged, the latest-maneuver-to-get-Trump theory was solidly in place.
I don't have a problem seeing it far more simply. NARA had reason to believe Trump had removed and retained documents he shouldn't have when he left office. They attempted to get them back without success, and being worried about the nature of the documents' contents, appealed to DOJ, who says "Where possible it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search," and when those means weren't successful they were left with no choice but the warrant.
IOW, it was Trump who initiated this whole thing by removing documents he shouldn't have. The feds petitioned him to return them without success, and were left with no choice but the search warrant, because they could not afford to leave documents of unknown content floating around unsecured. It seems like the feds gave him a lot of latitude in this, and he has persisted in not cooperating.
I admit I'm not confident in my understanding of this whole thing, but I just can't make it make sense that the warrant is an effort to "get" him. I don't see that Trump left them any choice.
I'm not beating a drum to champion any one line of reasoning. I'm just trying to understand what's going on.
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about. I suspect he brought it on himself, as he is wont to do.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:06 last edited by@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about.
I'm very happy -- and unsurprised -- to hear that.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
I can't answer this, because I don't know to what extent NARA (or whoever) did or didn't keep the public apprised. If it was all surreptitious, then boo hiss on them for playing into Trump's hands.
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:09 last edited by
Why are you unsurprised? You already lumped me in with those who you think are contorting themselves to support Trump?
-
Why are you unsurprised? You already lumped me in with those who you think are contorting themselves to support Trump?
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:12 last edited by@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Why are you unsurprised? You already lumped me in with those who you think are contorting themselves to support Trump?
Didn't really mean to do that. I know better. I apologize.
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:22 last edited by
Can we all pause and appreciate how perfect of a news event this was for TNCR back and forth fodder?
I’ve been at the lake all week so I’m just checking in here and there. Can anyone catch me up? All I am aware of is Horace used a derogatory homo word and a horse collapsed in NYC. Anything else major?
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:34 last edited by
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:37 last edited by
-
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Bias, much?
Might as well. It's not like I can get y'all to respond to my unbiased questions designed to sort out the facts. Quel boring, eh?
And an accusation of bias coming from you is hilarious.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 13:54 last edited by@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Bias, much?
Might as well. It's not like I can get y'all to respond to my unbiased questions designed to sort out the facts. Quel boring, eh?
And an accusation of bias coming from you is hilarious.
I admit bias, you don't. Pretty simple, huh?
-
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
Bias, much?
Might as well. It's not like I can get y'all to respond to my unbiased questions designed to sort out the facts. Quel boring, eh?
And an accusation of bias coming from you is hilarious.
I admit bias, you don't. Pretty simple, huh?
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 14:02 last edited by@Jolly said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
I admit bias, you don't. Pretty simple, huh?
What part of "Might as well" did you not get?
-
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about.
I'm very happy -- and unsurprised -- to hear that.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
I can't answer this, because I don't know to what extent NARA (or whoever) did or didn't keep the public apprised. If it was all surreptitious, then boo hiss on them for playing into Trump's hands.
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 14:08 last edited by Jolly 8 Dec 2022, 14:10@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about.
I'm very happy -- and unsurprised -- to hear that.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
I can't answer this, because I don't know to what extent NARA (or whoever) did or didn't keep the public apprised. If it was all surreptitious, then boo hiss on them for playing into Trump's hands.
Educate yourself.
At its base, this becomes a common Executive documents/National archive story. It happened with Obama, which is maybe why Trump tightened the law. Also happened with Clinton and with Bush.
Where this story deviates, hinges on two unassailable facts:
- The Trump hate that exists within a certain echelon of the Justice and certainly exits in the Whitehouse. And the hate Trump has for them. At least I know Trump has good reason.
This propelled the raid.
- The fact that this was a raid, no matter how the Left tries to spin it. So what, if a former POTUS is fighting a subpoena for records? The President has the right to declassify his documents and the fight may be whether the documents have been declassified.
Here this goes off the rails, is a nighttime raid by 30 agents, planned for when Trump was not at home. This could have easily been done by four agents in a van, during normal business hours. No need for the theater, except to send the message...The same message they sent at Stone's home, when they showed up with a SWAT team and a CNN news crew to arrest an elderly man who was not a flight risk.
As Will wrote - and he has a nice amount of Trump hate flowing through his veins - this simply is not done, if you wish to have a functioning society. These are the tactics of a banana republic and anybody who doesn't think the other side will retaliate in kind is a moron.
The gentleman who will most likely be the next Speaker, has already told Garland to keep all of his notes and communications and clear his calendar. I wouldn't be surprised if they impeach him (although that may be over the Border).
Y'all may enjoy the nightly histrionics on PMSNBC or CNN, but this ain't no way to run a country.
-
@Catseye3 said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
@Mik said in Mar-a-Lago raided:
No, you are wrong here. I'm not defending Trump in any way. I'm completely willing to withhold any judgement as to the correctness of the warrant until we see what specifically it was about.
I'm very happy -- and unsurprised -- to hear that.
My criticism is that the public has been kept in the dark and that he and his supporters could very predictably be counted on to gin up outrage and probably mistaken assumptions that improve his chances in 2024. It may in fact have been deliberate on his part to launch his campaign. All that could have been avoided by simply stating what they were after and why from the start.
I can't answer this, because I don't know to what extent NARA (or whoever) did or didn't keep the public apprised. If it was all surreptitious, then boo hiss on them for playing into Trump's hands.
Educate yourself.
At its base, this becomes a common Executive documents/National archive story. It happened with Obama, which is maybe why Trump tightened the law. Also happened with Clinton and with Bush.
Where this story deviates, hinges on two unassailable facts:
- The Trump hate that exists within a certain echelon of the Justice and certainly exits in the Whitehouse. And the hate Trump has for them. At least I know Trump has good reason.
This propelled the raid.
- The fact that this was a raid, no matter how the Left tries to spin it. So what, if a former POTUS is fighting a subpoena for records? The President has the right to declassify his documents and the fight may be whether the documents have been declassified.
Here this goes off the rails, is a nighttime raid by 30 agents, planned for when Trump was not at home. This could have easily been done by four agents in a van, during normal business hours. No need for the theater, except to send the message...The same message they sent at Stone's home, when they showed up with a SWAT team and a CNN news crew to arrest an elderly man who was not a flight risk.
As Will wrote - and he has a nice amount of Trump hate flowing through his veins - this simply is not done, if you wish to have a functioning society. These are the tactics of a banana republic and anybody who doesn't think the other side will retaliate in kind is a moron.
The gentleman who will most likely be the next Speaker, has already told Garland to keep all of his notes and communications and clear his calendar. I wouldn't be surprised if they impeach him (although that may be over the Border).
Y'all may enjoy the nightly histrionics on PMSNBC or CNN, but this ain't no way to run a country.
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 20:27 last edited by
Link to PDF copy of the unsealed search warrant and property receipt:
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=22131380-trump-warrant-unsealed?responsive=1&ti
-
wrote on 12 Aug 2022, 20:31 last edited by
Fishing expedition.
They already knew the boxes were there. They had already asked for a padlock to be installed on the storeroom door.
