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

[Infidel Dog]

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 August 14, 2022 by Infidel Dog

[sharkman]

23 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

You're saying everyone else knows what YOU mean when you talk about the 'unlawful control of the FBI'?

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

[Aristides]

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.

[WestCanMan]

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. 

[I am Groot]

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 August 14, 2022 by I am Groot

[sharkman]

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 August 14, 2022 by sharkman

[Aristides]

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?

[WestCanMan]

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.

[WestCanMan]

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. 

[WestCanMan]

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. 

[WestCanMan]

33 minutes ago, sharkman said:

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

That's kind of ironic if you look back at it lol. 

[Aristides]

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.

[Aristides]

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?

[WestCanMan]

24 minutes ago, sharkman said:

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

In general, when threads aren't going well for leftists here, they like to try to twist them into ad-hominem slugfests so that they get shut down. 

[Nationalist]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Trump's term produced the best results anybody has seen in a very long time. 

Paul Ryan was an twerp.

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, I am Groot said:

What results? Of what? 

Of almost everything. You been sleeping?

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

What security clearance do Trump’s lawyers have?

Just answer the question.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

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

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

[WestCanMan]

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.

[Michael Hardner]

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...

[Aristides]

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.

[Yzermandius19]

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

[sharkman]

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 August 15, 2022 by sharkman

[Michael Hardner]

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.

[Michael Hardner]

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.