Jump to content

'Merica officially becomes Venezuela: Maralogo raided by Biden's goon squad


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Affidavits? We don't need no stinking affidavits!

 

This is another case of the FBI's soviet-style of investigation: "You show me the man, I'll show you the crime."

The Republicans are on it like Pit Bulls. They won't let go.

Quote

“I think releasing the affidavit would help. At least that would confirm that there was justification for this raid,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) on “Meet The Press” on Sunday.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/08/gop-flock-to-defend-trump-in-wake-of-mar-a-lago-search

Garland will either have to relent and release the affidavit or get used to not being taken seriously.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Affidavits? We don't need no stinking affidavits!

 

This is another case of the FBI's soviet-style of investigation: "You show me the man, I'll show you the crime."

They're just hoping that by raiding Trump's personal residence they can find something that justifies another witch hunt. 

Details of affidavits and warrants are kept confidential to protect the person being investigated before any charges are laid. 
 

Asking for the affidavit to be made public could be a two edged sword. Who knows what is in it and Republicans should be careful what they ask for because they might get something they didn’t want to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2022 at 7:18 AM, Aristides said:

Please do. Clinton was understandably pissed at the time but how many times did she go to court and lose? When did she want to seize voting machines? Who dd she accuse and who did she call asking them to "find her votes"?

Flynn. They guy who told Trump to suspend the constitution, silence the press and hold an new election under military authority. The guy who took the 5th over 100 times just like his hero.  

Like I said, such things dictatorships are made of.

Are you honestly that stupid or are you kidding?

You'd be correct to say that "Hillary didn't take an honest attempt at a legitimate court battle" but the truth is that "she colluded with foreigners to compile a fake dossier and had her lawyer pimp it to the FBI as "some stuff that I'm handing over as a concerned citizen". That pile of crap formed the basis of a three-year, highly publicized smear campaign by corrupt FBI officials against the duly elected president. Members of the fake media said that Trump was an illegitimate POTUS for years. Some people on this site actually still believe in Russian collusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Do you always answer posts in the form of a question?

No. Oftentimes I'm discussing things with people who have an ability to communicate their views with sufficient clarity others can understand them.

When I encounter those without that ability I naturally ask for clarification.

Edited by I am Groot
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

No. Oftentimes I'm discussing things with people who have an ability to communicate their views with sufficient clarity others can understand them.

When I encounter those without that ability I naturally ask for clarification.

I see. so you like to play games.  Well, everybody needs a hobby.

Edited by sharkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

In general they give us bits and pieces but are reluctant to give us enough to let us see the whole picture of what's going on.

Here's what Garland doesn't want us to see so far:

https://www.axios.com/2022/08/09/trump-raid-mar-a-lago-fbi

So does Representative Turner think classified documents should be made public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Details of affidavits and warrants are kept confidential to protect the person being investigated before any charges are laid. 

That's not even true, and it's not what we're talking about.

Trump and his lawyers had every right to see the warrant that was used to search his home, and that is a key right in a non-authoritarian society. 

That doesn't mean that they were allowed to stall investigators while they read the warrant over in its entirety, but the investigating officers still had to provide them with a warrant (copy) at the time of the search. They are accused of failing to provide a full copy.  

So now what? Do they see what they can find and then provide an amended version of the warrant to include the new stuff? 

FYI providing a warrant identifying the scope of a raid is done to help prevent the exact soviet-style investigation that is taking place against Trump right now. That way police can't just get access to your home by pretending to try to find a marijauna pipe and then just get into the business of rooting through all of your computers, phones, etc, and coming away with private information about you & your family, sensitive information about your business, your religious observances, or anything else that's not named in the warrant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

The Republicans are on it like Pit Bulls. They won't let go.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/08/gop-flock-to-defend-trump-in-wake-of-mar-a-lago-search

Garland will either have to relent and release the affidavit or get used to not being taken seriously.

I think he already crossed that bridge when he tried to call people terrorists just for raising their voices at PTA meetings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So does Representative Turner think classified documents should be made public?

Do you understand the difference between "public" and "Trump & his lawyers"?

Or "public" and "the House Intel Committee"? 

FYI the FBI has already lost all credibility, and that's not just coming from me, a FISA court judge said that.

Their joint raids with CNN and their joint collusion witch hunt with CNN didn't help their reputation either. 

The notion that police should be trusted to operate without showing warrants is anathema in free, democratic nations, but the notion that the FBI can be trusted at all right now is absurd. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

That's not even true, and it's not what we're talking about.

Trump and his lawyers had every right to see the warrant that was used to search his home, and that is a key right in a non-authoritarian society. 

That doesn't mean that they were allowed to stall investigators while they read the warrant over in its entirety, but the investigating officers still had to provide them with a warrant (copy) at the time of the search. They are accused of failing to provide a full copy.  

So now what? Do they see what they can find and then provide an amended version of the warrant to include the new stuff? 

FYI providing a warrant identifying the scope of a raid is done to help prevent the exact soviet-style investigation that is taking place against Trump right now. That way police can't just get access to your home by pretending to try to find a marijauna pipe and then just get into the business of rooting through all of your computers, phones, etc, and coming away with private information about you & your family, sensitive information about your business, your religious observances, or anything else that's not named in the warrant.

Trumps lawyers were given the warrant but they weren’t given a copy of the affidavit that led to the warrant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Do you understand the difference between "public" and "Trump & his lawyers"?

Or "public" and "the House Intel Committee"? 

FYI the FBI has already lost all credibility, and that's not just coming from me, a FISA court judge said that.

Their joint raids with CNN and their joint collusion witch hunt with CNN didn't help their reputation either. 

The notion that police should be trusted to operate without showing warrants is anathema in free, democratic nations, but the notion that the FBI can be trusted at all right now is absurd. 

What security clearance do Trump’s lawyers have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Except that the other side doesn't believe that this would solve anything, as the complaints aren't being made in good faith.

You're a sad, ultra-biased joke MH. 

The FBI already has a court-documented history of lying to judges and the media about Trump.

Of course some oversight is necessary when the FBI raids a Trump property. Their "secret reasons" aren't enough.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

1. You're a sad, ultra-biased joke MH. 

2. The FBI already has a court-documented history of lying to judges and the media about Trump.

3. Of course some oversight is necessary when the FBI raids a Trump property. Their "secret reasons" aren't enough.

1. I didn't say anything about my personal opinion other than saying I didn't think Trump would be convicted of anything.

2. I didn't say otherwise.

3. I didn't comment on that.  I just said that the complaints aren't made in good faith.

There strikes, you're irrelevant...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Just answer the question.

I did. If some of this is actually top  secret, only those with the highest security clearance can see it and they aren’t allowed to tell anyone else about it. That is just one of the things that are going to make this interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Affidavits? We don't need no stinking affidavits!

 

This is another case of the FBI's soviet-style of investigation: "You show me the man, I'll show you the crime."

They're just hoping that by raiding Trump's personal residence they can find something that justifies another witch hunt. 

obvious fishing expedition is obvious

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So on the weekend, Alan Dershowitz was interviewed and noted the following about the Trump raid.

He said that (Hilary) Clinton wasn’t searched, investigated or subject to criminal prosecution for her mishandling of classified information.  He went on to emphasize the need for equal treatment under the law regardless of political affiliation.

I googled for this interview, but could find almost nothing in the MSM, whatasurprise.  And so the liberal dupes on this forum get nothing but propaganda, and have no clue how bad it’s getting.

Edited by sharkman
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Aristides said:

That is just one of the things that are going to make this interesting.

I thought I posted on that: secrets stuff only gets summary coverage.  Some fascinating stuff happens but doesn't see the light of day.

I don't think anyone will be serving a sentence for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

And so the liberal dupes on this forum get nothing but propaganda, and have no clue how bad it’s getting.

It's ALL propaganda my friend.

You're literally listening to a dirtbag lawyer. (OJs)

CNN has all kinds of 'former prosecutor ' types on shooting down these examples.  

---+

If you believe either side, I envy you for the entertainment you're getting right now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...