There's one biiiiiiig difference
[QUOTE=ChrisP;2736883]At this point, I must take a moment to salute the indefatigable sacrifice of Elvis2008.
Probably fewer than one in a thousand readers make it anywhere near the end of any of PissVomitMonger's marathons of turgid, unreadable wordsludge likely copy-pasted from one of the unread wacko left fake news publications kept afloat by Soros money. Whenever I try, the sheer volume of falsity, entitlement and illogic soon overwhelms me, and I am forced to retreat, eyes bleeding, to the safety and calm of the Pattaya Forum.
Yet somehow, Elvis regularly rebuts in full these veritable oceans of fake news sewage, standing magnificently astride the parted sea of mendacity like Charlton Heston, leftist lies driven back to the festering dark corners of communism whence they came.
Not all heroes wear capes.[/QUOTE]I, at least, provided the source. You never do.
And what, pray tell, in what I posted, was false?
Are you saying that Trump was in authorized to be in possession of national defense information, namely properly marked classified documents? Because he was not. He can't declassify documents just by waving his magic wand. Furthermore, if he wanted certain documents declassified, that request needed to be memorialized, which means written down. No such memorialization exists. Which means, to everybody with an IQ higher that 6, that it never happened.
Are you saying that he was not put on notice by the USA Government that he was not permitted to retain those documents at Mar-a-Lago? . Because his lawyers said he had no more classified documents on June 3rd. They even signed an affidavit. Which means that Donnie the Dumbass lied to them.
Are you saying that he did not continue to maintain possession of the documents (and allegedly undertook efforts to conceal them in different places throughout the property) up until the FBI finally executed a search warrant earlier this month? Because the FBI found more classified documents when they raided Mar-a-Lago. They were told so by witnesses.
Because if that's what you're saying, then you are abso-freakin-lutely incorrect.
Typical of a communist country raid
[QUOTE=PVMonger;2737122]So you're saying that there were no classified documents in what the Mango Mussolini returned to NARA earlier this year? You're saying that there were no classified documents in what the FBI took on August 8? You're saying that the Mango Mussolini's lawyers told the truth on June 3rd when they said that he had no more classified documents?
Rofl while smdh.[/QUOTE]I am saying it is typical of a third world communist country. FBI / KGB can claim any and every document was there that they want to be there. There is no accountability in a communist regime.
The * that RethugliKKKans believe is amazing
[QUOTE=Travv;2737019]Steve Musal: "I'm not a lawyer. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the majority of the Metropolitan's readers are also not lawyers. And while there are a few exceptions, I know most of my Facebook followers aren't lawyers. And yet, there are many people who seem to be so sure of their understanding about how a grand jury works, that they're willing to take any decision made at face value as proof of innocence or guilt.
That's not actually how a grand jury works. In a grand jury hearing, the prosecution (usually only the prosecution) presents evidence in a relaxed setting to the grand jury, who decide whether to issue an indictment ** whether there is enough evidence to charge someone with a crime. Since, traditionally, the defense doesn't get a say, it's pretty easy to get a grand jury to indict someone in most cases. In fact, it's so easy in most cases that a former New York state chief judge, Sol Wachtler, famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to "indict a ham sandwich. " On a federal level, in 2010 (the last year for which we have statistics), grand juries returned just 11 out of 162,000 violent crime cases without an indictment, according to the FBI's Bureau of Justice Statistics. . . ".
[URL]https://www.mymetmedia.com/indict-ham-sandwich/[/URL]
The sworn affidavit presented to secure the search warrant for Mar-a-Lago used by the FBI to raid Donald Trump's home had what appears to be a crucial error in it, one that could be easily debunked. If the facts detailed by independent journalist Paul Sperry are accurate, this could be enough to obliterate the Department of Justice's case against Trump. . . BREAKING: The FBI affiant who swore to the Mar-a-Lago search warrant appears to have made a critical factual error by stating in the unsealed affidavit: "I do not believe that any spaces within the PREMISES have been authorized for the storage of classified information. " This finding, which is the linchpin of the criminal case vs. Trump, overlooks the fact that: 1) White House records confirm that a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) authorizing the briefing and storage of classified material up to the TS / SCI level had in fact been installed at Mar-a-Lago; and, 2) records show that the Secret Service had recently awarded a nearly $600,000 contract to upgrade physical security within the premises at Mar-a-Lago for Trump's post-presidency transition. . . [URL]https://americafirstreport.com/critical-factual-error-by-fbi-raid-affiant-could-blow-up-the-dojs-case-against-trump/[/URL].[/QUOTE]It takes all of about 30-seconds of internet research to blow up your SCIF argument. Evidently Paul Sperry is as dumb as all of Donnie the Dumbass' supporters, none of whom have enough IQ points to decorate a domino. While the White House Communications Agency did install a SCIF at Mar-a-Lago when Donnie the Dumbass was president, they removed it after he was kicked to the curb by the voters. [URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar-a-Lago[/URL]#text=During%20 Trump's%20 presidency%20 a%20 Sensitive, removed%20 after%20 he%20 left%20 office.
You guys will believe anything!
I stopped reading after the first sentence
[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2736897]LOL. It was everything he ever looked at or touched. A note written for hamburgers was specifically included in the warrant. Let me repeat: this was a general warrant and illegal. You still have no clue what that is.
It does not matter. You cannot use general warrants.
You did not read the Atlantic article. He can do exactly that.
How many documents were classified and how long would have copies have taken to be done? Biden sent in 30 people with machine guns. Maybe one with a copy machine would have been more appropriate.
Trump got a subpoena and his last words to NARA were come back and get whatever you want if you need it. They told him to put a lock on the door and he did. I have not played the whatabout card with Hiliary Clinton and Obama but the Attorney General brought it up and said the law was applied equally to everyone. He holds this press conference and it was just 4 minutes of pure bullshit lies: [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEXkitl7rv4[/URL].
You really cannot read between the lines can you? Trump had documents that embarrassed the FBI. He was showing them to people and obviously did not want to give them up. That is what prompted this raid with machine guns. The FBI and Biden did not want him to have those documents.
So the government could destroy documents that embarrassed the FBI? LOL. Trump did not send in people with machine guns.
He did not stall. He complied with the subpoena. How many times do I have to say that? NARA allowed him to keep the documents in his possession and advised him to put a lock on the door. It was only when Trump was showing off the documents they freaked out.
The government knew what he had, fool. They left him be for months and then come up with machine guns. Quit with your legal bullshit. Why would they do that?
Sorry, I do not believe you. You are so deluded that you think that coming in with 30 agents with machine guns to an ex-president's house is appropriate. Sending in machine gun carrying agents to a political opponent is banana republic stuff! WTF is wrong with you that you think this is okay? Just because it is Trump? He is not just an ex-president but an American citizen.
Are you so dense that you cannot see that a biased FBI can be used against you? If Trump wins in 2024, he can pull the exact same stunt with every living Democratic president and political opponent. Some Democratic Senator takes something classified home and Trump can arrest him with the FBI? Do you think Trump is the only one who may have broken this law? Hiliary destroyed documents that were under subpoena. Trump had printed documents that were in a closet. Hiliary had a server on line open to the world. And you think she was the only one?
What harm are you talking about? You are the fools that destroyed the country by going after him from the second he walked into office.
But I am not voting for Trump. I am voting against the FBI, for the Constitution, and against a Banana Republic. The average person is not law abiding but breaks like three laws every day.
Maybe one of these days you will get that when it comes to political opponents, you use the courts to get documents not machine gun carrying agents. Maybe if you think on that real hard, it will get through that dense fucking skull of yours, and it is not just me.
Matt Taibbi is very critical of Trump, and the Wall Street Journal has been as well. They both had the same reaction with this affidavit. This is it?
You dumb Dems think this show of force is the greatest thing since sliced bread. If the Dems indict him on this stupid charge, they just made him president in 2024, but you are so stupid you do not see why. SCOUTUS is not going to let you fools win 2024 in a court room and certainly not over this.[/QUOTE]I stopped reading after the first sentence. If it was a "general warrant", the judge would have never signed off on it. Pull your head out of wherever it is located in your nether regions.
You listed the far left communism in your last post
[QUOTE=JustTK;2737248]What "far left wacko's communism" can you see? You must have a vivid imagination.[/QUOTE]You listed the far left communism in your last post. I will refresh your memory. Here is your list:
- low level of democracy.
- no fair election process.
- brobery / blackmail / extortion / undue influence of money in political process.
- fake news stories to sway government policies.
