Redacted I guess
-
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 17:34 last edited by
Uh huh. That was my prediction - that they would release nothing that would actually inform us what was really happening.
They'd better indict and convict, or else Trump will also be 47.
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 18:17 last edited by
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
-
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 18:26 last edited by@89th said in Redacted I guess:
If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner
Or if any other government individual's attorney, right?
-
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 20:01 last edited by@89th said in Redacted I guess:
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
Better back up, cowboy.
I've heard at least three different lawyers (including Turley) talk about how broad this warrant is and how it should have never been signed off on.
Now, if that's the truth, it means this was definitely a fishing expedition. I'm sorry, but we don't do that with a former President in this country. Maybe in a banana republic, but not in America.
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 20:48 last edited by jon-nyc
They obviously aren’t going to tell the targets of the investigation what exactly they know, especially if a potential target has, well, a contentious relationship with the truth.
They also would not want to out their source inside Mar Al Lago.
Also remember the targets of the investigation probably include people other than trump. It wouldn’t be ok to release that info since they wouldn’t have had a chance to object first.
All that leads to a lot of redactions. Pretty much everything we really want to know.
But it will likely come out if there’s an indictment.
-
They obviously aren’t going to tell the targets of the investigation what exactly they know, especially if a potential target has, well, a contentious relationship with the truth.
They also would not want to out their source inside Mar Al Lago.
Also remember the targets of the investigation probably include people other than trump. It wouldn’t be ok to release that info since they wouldn’t have had a chance to object first.
All that leads to a lot of redactions. Pretty much everything we really want to know.
But it will likely come out if there’s an indictment.
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 21:47 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Redacted I guess:
They obviously aren’t going to tell the targets of the investigation what exactly they know
Aren't they required to?
-
@jon-nyc said in Redacted I guess:
They obviously aren’t going to tell the targets of the investigation what exactly they know
Aren't they required to?
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 23:21 last edited by
-
@89th said in Redacted I guess:
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
Better back up, cowboy.
I've heard at least three different lawyers (including Turley) talk about how broad this warrant is and how it should have never been signed off on.
Now, if that's the truth, it means this was definitely a fishing expedition. I'm sorry, but we don't do that with a former President in this country. Maybe in a banana republic, but not in America.
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 23:27 last edited by@Jolly said in Redacted I guess:
@89th said in Redacted I guess:
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
Better back up, cowboy.
If we ever grab drinks in person I’ll tell you how I know.
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 23:43 last edited by
LOL...
That said, it's not surprising that Trump is demanding that ALL of the affidavit be released, unredacted, knowing that that will never happen because of security issues.
He's pandering.
-
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 23:51 last edited by
Yep.
And raking in campaign money with both hands.
-
@Jolly said in Redacted I guess:
@89th said in Redacted I guess:
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
Better back up, cowboy.
If we ever grab drinks in person I’ll tell you how I know.
wrote on 26 Aug 2022, 23:56 last edited by@89th said in Redacted I guess:
@Jolly said in Redacted I guess:
@89th said in Redacted I guess:
I mean, at least there is clarity that this is focused on the classified materials, plus anything else the search found. If any other government employee handled top secret classified information in that manner, they would be in jail. Just to be crystal clear.
Better back up, cowboy.
If we ever grab drinks in person I’ll tell you how I know.
If we ever have drinks in person, I'll tell you about the body a FBI agent dumped in the Mississippi.
-
LOL...
That said, it's not surprising that Trump is demanding that ALL of the affidavit be released, unredacted, knowing that that will never happen because of security issues.
He's pandering.
wrote on 27 Aug 2022, 00:14 last edited by@George-K said in Redacted I guess:
LOL...
That said, it's not surprising that Trump is demanding that ALL of the affidavit be released, unredacted, knowing that that will never happen because of security issues.
He's pandering.
It’s a balancing act. They actually tampered down the volume of the requests for release. They want to be seen as aggrieved victims but they don’t want the actual accusations known.
-
wrote on 27 Aug 2022, 13:49 last edited by
-
wrote on 27 Aug 2022, 14:40 last edited by
-
wrote on 27 Aug 2022, 14:47 last edited by