• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,280
Points
1,090
People are really getting their buns in knot lol. No one yet knows what this is for.

Given how many republicans have turned on Trump and that Wray is a Trump appointee maybe it’s the republicans who don’t want him running again and are scared he will.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
7,254
Points
1,110
You never give up. A massive investigation with highly discredited premises whiffed on its main objective - to prove that the campaign colluded with Russians - and you keep rolling out the consolation prize honourable mentions, of which none of the Americans were convicted of colluding with Russians to interfere in or influence the US election.

And it's beside the point. The vital ground here is perception of propriety and impartiality. People expect serious relevant charges to be brought against political figures when public agencies take a swing at them. False statement convictions won't do. Whatever emerges from a hunt for classified documents will be proudly displayed by the government, and immediately compared in the public arena to the instances of classified materials which made their way through Hillary Clinton's insecure private server. Nit-picking over scope, scale, etc won't matter. And the government will lose that battle for moral advantage.
Give up what? Like you, I’m just another random, somewhat interested observer on the internet.

I don’t think for a second that the alleged mishandling of classified documents is the extent of Trump’s legal woes. This is merely what took place today.

Of note, generally if a search is lawfully executed, and in the course of doing so evidence of other offences is discovered, that can become useable for investigations. I won’t speculate as to whether a search of Trump’s private office would have uncovered other documents of legal significance. It certainly cannot be ruled out.

However you slice it, not a good day for him.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,060
They apparently took out approx 100 document boxes of paper. They didn't read what it was, just took it all. Likely taking all the hard drives and any other storage medium. Once they get to a safe location, then they'll go looking for something they can indict him for. It's a fishing expedition. They're desperate. They know if he gets in, a lot of people are going to be fired and/ or jailed. They were already bleeding party members to the GOP. This is going to get bad. They overstepped so boldly and carelessly it won't get by those voters that put honesty and integrity above party politics. There was other, legal, less obvious and effective ways to to get the documents they wanted, but decided they needed to showboat. Trumps team were already cooperating and working with the Archives on the who the legal owner was. No need for the raid.

Or maybe something is about to go down that they needed attention drawn away from. It's gotta be big if they decided raiding a former POTUS and fishing for something to indict with, was a good idea.

However, I think this might backfire spectacularly. Which will push Trump higher and Biden much lower, if that's even possible. So I care even less now.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,192
Points
1,090
They apparently took out approx 100 document boxes of paper. They didn't read what it was, just took it all. Likely taking all the hard drives and any other storage medium. Once they get to a safe location, then they'll go looking for something they can indict him for. It's a fishing expedition. They're desperate. They know if he gets in, a lot of people are going to be fired and/ or jailed. They were already bleeding party members to the GOP. This is going to get bad. They overstepped so boldly and carelessly it won't get by those voters that put honesty and integrity above party politics. There was other, legal, less obvious and effective ways to to get the documents they wanted, but decided they needed to showboat. Trumps team were already cooperating and working with the Archives on the who the legal owner was. No need for the raid.

Or maybe something is about to go down that they needed attention drawn away from. It's gotta be big if they decided raiding a former POTUS and fishing for something to indict with, was a good idea.

However, I think this might backfire spectacularly. Which will push Trump higher and Biden much lower, if that's even possible. So I care even less now.
How is it show boating? The raid occurred at 9am, they left at 3pm, wore plain clothes and it was Trump him self who came out first to say the raid occured. Show boating did occur but not by the DoJ or FBI from my perspective.
 

lenaitch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,506
Points
1,040
They apparently took out approx 100 document boxes of paper. They didn't read what it was, just took it all. Likely taking all the hard drives and any other storage medium. Once they get to a safe location, then they'll go looking for something they can indict him for. It's a fishing expedition. They're desperate. They know if he gets in, a lot of people are going to be fired and/ or jailed. They were already bleeding party members to the GOP. This is going to get bad. They overstepped so boldly and carelessly it won't get by those voters that put honesty and integrity above party politics. There was other, legal, less obvious and effective ways to to get the documents they wanted, but decided they needed to showboat. Trumps team were already cooperating and working with the Archives on the who the legal owner was. No need for the raid.

Or maybe something is about to go down that they needed attention drawn away from. It's gotta be big if they decided raiding a former POTUS and fishing for something to indict with, was a good idea.

However, I think this might backfire spectacularly. Which will push Trump higher and Biden much lower, if that's even possible. So I care even less now.
You want that they should camp out in his house and set up office to pick through the documents? Where's the authority for that?

A number of variables at play, but a typical 'banker's box' can hold about 2500 pages. If 100 boxes is accurate, that's potentially a quarter of a million documents to review. If digital memory devices are involved, who knows how much they could hold. Review could take weeks or months.

The hyper polarization that afflicts the US - and us, apparently - is a cancer. Everything one side = good; the other side = bad, and all the public institutions are apparently in somebody's, (always the wrong somebody it seems) pocket.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
7,254
Points
1,110
You want that they should camp out in his house and set up office to pick through the documents? Where's the authority for that?

A number of variables at play, but a typical 'banker's box' can hold about 2500 pages. If 100 boxes is accurate, that's potentially a quarter of a million documents to review. If digital memory devices are involved, who knows how much they could hold. Review could take weeks or months.
Yup. Typical for a search warrant focusing on physical documents. You seize and then examine off site, and it takes a while.

Don’t let any white noise distract from the fact that a federal judge issued the warrant based on a sworn affidavit detailing probable cause that a criminal offence was committed, and that specific, identifiable evidence would be located in the place to be searched. Police don’t get to do this just because they feel like it.
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,169
Points
1,010
Yup. Typical for a search warrant focusing on physical documents. You seize and then examine off site, and it takes a while.

Don’t let any white noise distract from the fact that a federal judge issued the warrant based on a sworn affidavit detailing probable cause that a criminal offence was committed, and that specific, identifiable evidence would be located in the place to be searched. Police don’t get to do this just because they feel like it.

Like the FISC court and the previous instances of three letter agency malfeasance, I'm not sure many Americans are fully trusting anymore when it comes to them and Trump.

I mean "10% for the big guy" and Hunters laptop was Russian disinformation... the list goes on. That's no big deal at all to people on this forum who gleefully follow the constant attempts to bring down OMB (orange man bad).

Even if Trump is cleared in the end, likely a few years from now, this could take him out of the running for 2024... so mission accomplished?
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,169
Points
1,010
Of note, generally if a search is lawfully executed, and in the course of doing so evidence of other offences is discovered, that can become useable for investigations.

This is significant convenience.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
4,147
Points
1,010
Peaceful transfer of power, about which a few people here were sorely vexed by the events during election certification, isn't about ceremonial and process. It depends on losers conceding to winners. For that to happen, losers have to believe winners are not going to be vindictive.

This event, along with the show trial that insists on summoning people to be passed under the harrow and other attempts to use the judicial system to chastise political actors ("the process is the punishment"), militates against peaceful transfer of power.

If something sufficiently grave (the sufficiency will be measured by Republican and independent voters, not by authorities, pundits, or Democrats) is turned up, the damage will be mitigated. Otherwise, the price of the Democratic/neo-con temper tantrum is escalating, but they aren't the only ones who will have to pay the bills.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
7,254
Points
1,110
This is significant convenience

No different from plain view doctrine or other items found in a search. Have you never executed a search warrant before?

EDIT TO ADD: To make this more relatable, an analogy would be if police write and execute a search warrant for drugs, and while in the house they find firearms, stolen ID, and equipment for making fake bank cards. The other items are evidence of other crimes and, because they’re located in the course of executing a lawful search, they can be seized and used as evidence for other offences. The original search still has to be lawful for those items to be useable as evidence. If the original search cannot be defended in court, that evidence would be lost. But it would be absurd to hamstring police and say that they must ignore evidence of other criminal offences if found incidental to another investigation.
 
Last edited:

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,169
Points
1,010
No different from plain view doctrine or other items found in a search. Have you never executed a search warrant before?
And I suggest it is possible, likely even, these investigators went into that house/safe looking for X but really wanted inside in hopes of finding Y. Though that would be "mind reading" past actions are usually good predictors of future behavior.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
7,254
Points
1,110
And I suggest it is possible, likely even, these investigators went into that house/safe looking for X but really wanted inside in hopes of finding Y. Though that would be "mind reading" past actions are usually good predictors of future behavior.
See my past reply regarding probable cause, a judge, a warrant, and a federal offence.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,060
How is it show boating? The raid occurred at 9am, they left at 3pm, wore plain clothes and it was Trump him self who came out first to say the raid occured. Show boating did occur but not by the DoJ or FBI from my perspective.
Because they could've got the documents through other, less intrusive, less spectacular legal means. Trump was already working with the National Archives for the examination and possible turn over of disputed documents. There was zero purpose to the raid except to take his private correspondence and sift through it for wrong doing. They have put their own heads in a noose. They opened the door to raiding as high up as a former POTUS. A decision that will haunt them the rest of their days. They'll be held accountable through impeachment, committee hearings and senate oversight. And they will do it whether Trump is allowed to run or not. Mind, as soon as it comes to Biden being nailed, you can expect him to become too mentally frail to understand what's going on and be questioned.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,060
Unlikely. The people responsible know that if such a gamble fizzled, the blowback would be immense.
Yet that's exactly what they did. They grabbed anything and everything they could lay their hands on in order to suss out his plans, his contacts, his funding. Does anyone seriously think these guys won't use the info they gather on the campaign trail? Like I said. Probably a fishing trip. They manufactured a reason to find intelligence on Trump.

I'll bet dollars to donuts, Trumps private donors will now be known and will have those thousands of new IRS auditors looking for dirt.
 

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,479
Points
1,060
Did we forget the FBI/DOJ did in fact falsify information to courts over Trump in the past?
And there it is. They did it before and nobody went to jail. They will keep doing it until someone does. They lost all credibility when that happened.
 
Top