August 13, 2022

"The dust is still settling on what exactly will come of the search — such as, what type of classified information does the FBI suspect Trump to be in possession of?"

"But polling from YouGov conducted on Aug. 9 found that 62 percent of Americans thought it was either 'a very big problem' (45 percent) or 'somewhat of a problem' (17 percent) that Trump allegedly held onto classified documents after leaving office. That said, as we’ve seen with previous investigations of Trump, public opinion is split starkly along partisan lines, and Americans generally remain leery of taking action against him. That same Aug. 9 YouGov poll, for instance, found that 76 percent of Democrats — and 44 percent of independents — said they’d consider it a very big problem, compared with just 12 percent of Republicans. And an Aug. 10 poll from Politico/Morning Consult corroborates this breakdown: 81 percent of Democratic registered voters said the search was based on evidence that Trump had committed a crime, while only 16 percent of Republicans agreed."

189 comments:

Meade said...

Recommend reading “Sundance” over at Conservative Treehouse.

Kevin said...

Having classified documents used to be a big deal.

Then came Hillary.

Leland said...

We don’t know the evidence that he committed the crime, because we can’t see the affidavits all edging the crime. Like the first impeachment, Trump is not allowed to question the accuser. The accuser is assumed to be honest and fair without unjust motive.

Meanwhile, the professionals at the DOJ are unethically leaking information to the media, because they are in the business of politics, not justice.

tim in vermont said...

“If that man gets elected, we’ll all hang from nooses.” - HRC

JPS said...

Well, I would say this sounds extremely serious, if the last umpteen “walls are closing in” stories hadn’t sounded extremely serious and turned out to be bullshit.

What’s fun on Twitter is the number of people who absolutely know things they can’t possibly know. For the Trump-hating left, it’s already been established that the FBI found special nuclear design information that Trump was obviously about to sell to his bestest buddy Putin, and if anyone is skeptical, they’ve just shown they never actually cared about classified infosec or this nation in the first place.

For your he-could-shoot-a-man-on-fifth-Avenue Trump supporters, if he kept any classified documents, they became declassified by the fact of his keeping them. Doesn’t matter what was in them. You know we over-classify anyway.

Sorry, does that sound like both-sidesism?

Amadeus 48 said...

Sundance points out what is hiding in plain sight: the search warrant allowed the raiders to seize every single presidential document onsite that was created after January 20, 2017. The
"Top Secret" stuff is a distraction, although the regime may find it useful.

This is a troll for January 6 stuff.

Lem Ozuna from the Braves said...

I search the web asking "what the FBI find in Mar-a-Lago" I get this...

(NewsNation) — FBI agents found dozens of classified documents during their search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago on Monday, sources confirmed to NewsNation.

Investigators discovered classified documents in two areas: Trump’s personal office above a ballroom and in a storage room near the pool. Sources say there were “boxes everywhere,” with some containing Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). Those are considered some of the highest level of classified documents.

Since the documents are so secretive, it’s unknown whether investigators will ever publicly acknowledge what they’re in reference to, let alone release them.

Classified nuclear weapons documents may have been among the items the FBI found, according to a source cited by the Washington Post.


It seems like more 'reputable' sources, like the ones subscribe at Althouse blog, are holding back reporting what if anything the FBI found.

What's the holdup? Did the FBI find anything?

Sebastian said...

"such as, what type of classified information does the FBI suspect Trump to be in possession of?"

Of course, they went after any document from his tenure, not just "classified." It was a fishing expedition.

Saint Croix said...

Poll them on whether it's a very big problem if the FBI plants documents on an innocent person.

Also ask them if it's a good idea for the FBI to do a search while excluding Trump's lawyers from Trump's house.

Also ask them if it's a good idea for a liberal attorney general who really hates Republicans to try to arrest a former Republican president.

Or you can ask them if you think Merrick Garland, famously kept off the Supreme Court by Republicans, has any emotions at all about that. Are we just supposed to pretend that he's dispassionate and feels nothing?

I mean, there are all kinds of questions you can ask, if you really want to know what people think.

Mike Sylwester said...

On the last full day of his the Trump Presidency -- January 19, 2021 -- Trump ordered the declassification of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane documents. He was informed by the US Attorney General, however, that first some names should be redacted on those documents in accordance with the Privacy Act. Accordingly, on the morning of January 20, Trump's Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, told the Attorney General to react such names and then to declassify the Crossfire Hurricane documents.

Now we are in August 2022. The US Department of Justice should tell the public why the Crossfire Documents still are not declassified. If that order was canceled, then when, why and by whom was it cancelled?

Are the Crossfire Hurricane documents classified Top Secret? If so, then what percentage of the Top Secret documents confiscated from Trump in recent days were Crossfire Hurricane documents?

In comparison, what percent of the confiscated Top Secret documents were related to nuclear weapons? When and why were those nuclear-weapons documents given to President Trump?

=======

FBI official Michael Gaeta received the first "Dossier" reports from Christopher Steele on July 5, 2016.

Before that date, did the FBI ever investigate Donald Trump on suspicion of cooperating with Russian Intelligence?

If so, then what was the code name of that FBI investigation? What were the initial and termination dates of that FBI investigation? When, why and by whom was any such prior investigation of Trump initiated and terminated?

Does the FBI have reason to think that Donald Trump ever obtained any FBI documents about that investigation? Were any such documents confiscated from Trump in the recent raid on his home?

Do the Department of Justice or the FBI intend to inform the public -- or at least to inform the US Congress in secret -- about any such prior investigation of Trump?

=====

During the recent raid on Trump's home, why was his lawyer required to leave the building? Why did the searchers demand that the security cameras be turned off?

n.n said...

Impeachment 3.0: Democrats Bray, Again

jim5301 said...

Serious question:

Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted (assuming he knowingly took home classified information, he never unclassified the information, it was against the law for him to do so, and he knew it was against the law). In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

Mike Sylwester said...

News reports say that the FBI was informed about the presence of classified documents in Trump's home?

* Did that informant inform the FBI on his own initiative?

* Or was the informant recruited, paid or coerced by the FBI to provide such information?

* Was the informant simply a government employee who had participated overtly in the cooperative look at the documents in June?

* Did the informant tell the FBI anything that the FBI did not know already from previous overt discussion and cooperation with Trump?

=======

Did the FBI know or suspect that Trump had copies of the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane that Trump had tried to declassify when he still was President?

If so, had the FBI asked Trump to return such documents?

Does the FBI consider such Crossfire Hurricane documents to be classified as Top Secret?

Was the FBI trying to confiscate any other FBI documents that might not be labeled Crossfire Hurricane but nevertheless describe prior FBI investigations of FBI suspicions that Trump might be collaborating with Russian Intelligence?

If so, then what was the FBI code name for such FBI documents that are not Crossfire Hurricane documents?

Did the FBI indeed confiscate such documents from Trump's home in the recent raid? If so, then how many? Were they classified as Top Secret?

wendybar said...

I still think it's a BIGGER problem that Obama got away with spying on Trump before and after he became President, but since Obama and Clinton and Biden and Pelosi can do whatever they want with no consequences...I don't give a SHIT what Trump has done. He has shown that he loves America WAY more than those I mentioned who are selling us out as fast as they can. As long as they are walking free with multi millions they grifted off of our backs....they can go to hell

Tom T. said...

"A big problem"? They're having to word their questions more generically to get a negative response.

Drago said...

There are now rumors that Our Intrepid And Heroic FBI Junior Stasi-ites discovered both actual materials (easily reconfigured "metal" wiring objects, loosely called paperclips by unknowing laypersons) as well as a secret "documentary" how-to video demonstrating how to convert those materials into something being called a "flux capacitor" by unnamed sources close to the "investigation". (There was something about "possible time travel" too but the unnamed sources became flummoxed and sullen when they could not explain it fully and they needed a Comfort Playdough break)

The unnamed sources then indicated this "flux capacitor" was intended to allow the Evil Trump and select minions to rapidly escape "The Walls That Are Clearly Still Closing In Though It Does Seem Like Its Taking An Inexplicably Long Time" and relocate to their rumored Evil Orbital Starbase For Evilness from which the unnamed sources claim TheBadOrangeMan could launch a First Strike comprised of 10-Megaton Fast Food Warheads (with incredible, really amazing, the best really, ketchup packets) against specific federal agency buildings in DC which the unnamed sources referred to as "The Very Center Of All That Is Right And Just In The World Thus Normal Rules Cannot And Must Not Apply To Them) and where all right thinking people eat sushi and vegan pizzas and most definitely not bugs as is planned for the Deplorables.

Editors Note: the FBI has also become deeply concerned about another potential sinister and no doubt highly makevolent Trumpy "operative" known to insiders only as "the girl with the swishy ponytail" and her foreign-sounding handler, "Laslo". More on that as the story develops and additional Totally Vetted-Trust Us Dossiers are prepared by crack Top Men /TOP MEN(!) agency teams.

Achilles said...

He declassified the documents.

They were not classified.

The Democrats are just lying piece of shit and they know it.

Duke Dan said...

Rather than having paper in boxes he should have just emailed them to his gmail. No one cares about that.

Heartless Aztec said...

The Comey Precedent states that if there is no intent there will be no charges.

rehajm said...

Between the asymmetry of criminal prosecution of political actors and the asymmetry of interrest/lack of interest interest in election integrity the only conclusion can be Democrats suck right now…

Drago said...

Tara Palmeri@taraoalmeri
Epstein's victims name Bruce Reinhart in their crime victims rights act case against the government, accusing him of using inside Justice Department info when he switched sides to work for Epstein https://t.co/EvggrSoZOV

Well, that helps to explain the lefties adoration of Magistrate "judge" Reinhart.

Achilles said...

Meade said...

Recommend reading “Sundance” over at Conservative Treehouse.

Yes. Sundance is an amazing investigative reporter.

Also Zerohedge has good information.

Jack Posobiec at Human Events also makes a good point:

None of the potential charges have anything to do with classified documents.

There is a lot of actual information out there for people who want to know what is really going on.

Then there is the State owned media and the Biden Regime.

Lem Ozuna from the Braves said...

The most sensitive information the government has is the identity of people helping the US around the world. Every other "secret", in a world where over a dozen nation already have nukes, is relatively minor.

I mean, before Snowden, we could say that was a big secret, knowing who calls who around the world in unsecure communications.

Proof of Alien visitors?

Another question I have is if Trump was so unbalanced and unpredictable as prescient, what was the nation's most sensitive secrets doing at his disposal at the White House?

Nothing ads up in this story.

Lilly, a dog said...

Somebody wake me up when they find the Pee Tape.

Achilles said...

Technofog on Substack also a good source.

Beasts of England said...

‘In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?’

The President has unilateral authority to declassify data. The Secretary of State does not. Hillary had a non-secure server, which put all of her TS/SCI data (not merely confidential information) at risk. Trump had, per the FBI’s admission, cypher locks on his storage facility at Mar-a-Lago. Apples and oranges.

Amadeus 48 said...


"The Comey Precedent states that if there is no intent there will be no charges."

But our elites know that Trump always has malign intent, so they got him!

cfs said...

I can't believe anyone is giving the DOJ/FBI any credit for the possibility that this could be on the up-and-up. Do anyone really think that the same people who have been after Trump for six years, who falsified documents and illegally spied on his campaign and administration, suddenly became true "defenders of the law"?

The DOJ has suddenly created new rules that apply only to former President Trump. THEY have suddenly obtained power over the Presidency to decide what is classified and what is not. From the case law I've seen, the President has full authority to declassify information and the DOJ does not have the authority to re-classify documents the President has declassified. Even the comparisons to HRClinton do not apply. She was not President (much to her and the DOJ's dismay). She did not have authority to declassify information on a whim. It's apples and oranges to compare the two cases.

chickelit said...

jim5301 said...In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

Yes, you're missing something very big: Since Hillary was exculpated and exonerated in time to continue her failed election, it would be one-sided and selective to prevent Trump to run again. Of course, that is your side's goal--to prevent Trump from running. Go ahead and persecute him--he thrives on it. But you dare not ignore the Hillary precedent.

285exp said...

Jim, serious question: if Hillary wasn’t prosecuted for blatantly violating the law on classified material, should Trump be?

chickelit said...

Duke Dan said...Rather than having paper in boxes he should have just emailed them to his gmail. No one cares about that.

The better answer is that he should have did them under Hunter Biden's piles of coke and hookers. That boy is untouchable. That boy could rape a 15-year-old in Times Square and the press would dutifully ignore it.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Jim were you comatose in 2016 or did you forget Hillary and Huma smashing their Blackberry phones after the phones were subpoenaed? In contrast Trump was served a subpoena in June and fully cooperated according to both sides. Then there’s the difference in authority: Trump had the authority to declassify documents at will and Hillary did not. You can start there and try to catch up with the rest of us as we wait for Wray to declare “no reasonable prosecutor would charge Trump,” the way Comey covered for Hillary and Huma and Huma’s pervert husband who copied the top secret data from the secret server.

Balfegor said...

I mean, I'd fall in the "somewhat of a problem" category, with the possibility of moving up or down depending on the contents.

I suspect Trump has retained more documents than most ex-Presidents, simply by virtue of spending more time doing substantive work at his own, luxurious, private residence rather than only working out of the White House, Camp David, or the occasional guesthouse. He probably didn't take most of them when leaving office -- my guess is he just didn't both to pack them up and return them (other than some stuff like his photo albums).

That's a problem, but I wouldn't characterise it as major yet. There ought to be accountability (as with Clinton II's emails, or various senior civil servants who have sought to evade FOIA and records preservation by using non-government systems to conduct government business) but if the government comes down hard on Trump while letting everyone else skate by without even a slap on the wrist, it's going to be pretty obvious what's going on. That said, junior civil service employees doing this sort of thing would almost certainly be penalised heavily or even prosecuted so there's inevitably going to be some glaring inequities no matter what.

Aggie said...

We should all give up pointing out the hypocrites of the Left when dealing with Conservatives. It's not hypocrisy, it's a display of power... and lamenting it just provides tears to slake their thirst while they provide even more extreme examples.

Watching the Legacy Corporate Media cover Trump is like watching fireworks. A loud boom, a big impressive display, and then.....empty sky, with everybody expecting more. But the grownups just want to get home so they put the kids to bed. Conservatives should do that.

Yancey Ward said...

I will simply assert he was hanging onto no classified material, and the DoJ knows it. The leaks to the press are simply outright lies.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

My Biden voting family members were all aghast last night at Anderson Cooper's cluck-clucking over what was found.

There's too much justification support going on in the media for this to be anything but a fishing trip.

Kevin said...

In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

Well, there is no greater argument than selective prosecution, for there is no greater crime against the nation.

What is the law? We can say that it's what's written in the legislation, but those words are parsed and interpreted by judges to determine what they mean. So the law isn't so much what's written, but how it's interpreted.

And before we get to judges, those words are parsed and interpreted by agents of the government to determine who to prosecute and who to let free. So the law is also what's allowed by police and prosecutors.

We are seeing this in real time. What is shoplifting? A District Attorney in San Francisco independently changed the law by failing to prosecute theft less than a certain amount. Criminals began stealing more and police stopped arresting them, knowing they wouldn't be prosecuted. Storekeepers were forced to allow theft and shuttered their stores.

Did the language of the statute change one letter? No.

But at least the law is being applied equally. We are all free to rob in San Francisco.

So what IS the law concerning classified materials? Comey, like the DA in San Francisco, has made a very public change. It cannot be that improper possession is a crime, because that places the Clintons are above the law.

It would mean equal protection under the Constitution is no more.

The people advocating for Trump are not advocating for him personally. Many don't even like him. But they do not wish to live in a country where you are prosecuted on the basis of your identity rather than your behavior.

Because once that is lost, the rest of the Constitution has no meaning.

Bruce Hayden said...

“Now we are in August 2022. The US Department of Justice should tell the public why the Crossfire Documents still are not declassified. If that order was canceled, then when, why and by whom was it cancelled?

“Are the Crossfire Hurricane documents classified Top Secret? If so, then what percentage of the Top Secret documents confiscated from Trump in recent days were Crossfire Hurricane documents?

“In comparison, what percent of the confiscated Top Secret documents were related to nuclear weapons? When and why were those nuclear-weapons documents given to President Trump?”

Pretty much everything that the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division (effectively led by their discredited ADAD Peter Strzok in Crossfire Hurricane, etc) does is likely classified. Some likely highly classified. Probably worse than their sister Counterterrorism Division. Their supposed job is catching spies, and not trying to take down Presidential candidates or sitting Presidents. So, probably the place where a large portion of the FBI’s highly classified documents are produced. Should all their records have been classified? Probably not. But I think that they have been using their power to classify documents a long time for when they have colored outside the lines a bit. All through the investigations into Crossfire Hurricane, RussiaGate, etc, classification was always getting in the way. People couldn’t see stuff because they weren’t cleared for it, etc. Indeed, my memory is that it really slowed down the IG’s investigation quite a bit, as they had to find people with high enough clearances. It also kept many in Congress investigating their malfeasance from seeing most of the relevant documents. Except for Adam Schift, who freely disclosed whatever classified documents he thought advantageous.

As Mike says - what is really critical here is the percentage of the classified material seized in the raid that involves Crossfire Hurricane, RussiaGate, or other malfeasance by the FBI and DOJ Counterintelligence units. One of the reasons that I think that much, probably most, of this is likely related to Crossfire Hurricane, etc is that maybe the first former DOJ officials speaking out on the subject of classified material was Mary McCord, Acting AAG for National Security (she had their Counterintelligence branch under her), and probably the top signature on the approval list for the four fraudulently acquired FISA warrants on Carter Page, that the AG and DAG used to approve (under FISA) the warrants. One of her higher ranking subordinates at the time chimed in the next day.

Krumhorn said...

I think that we can safely wager that folks in the DOJ and CIA have forecast that if, by any chance, Donald Trump were to win the next Presidential election, there will be full-scale Clorox scrubbing of the hallways, offices, and executive dining area of gub’ment headcount followed by a washing of hydrochloric acid to rid the place of those deep state cockroaches that always manage to survive a good cleaning.

I suspect that Trump may regard it as his signal first term failure that he didn’t properly focus on the depth and complexity of the problem, and he likely plans to address it with his undivided attention if he gets another chance. There will be blazing hell to pay…and the deepstaters know it.

- Krumhorn

MartyH said...

In answer to Jim's serious question:

Sequentially, it starts with the classified document double standard. Hillary transmitted numerous Secret and Top Secret documents over a non-secure e-mail system. She used this system while overseas, in unfriendly territory, making its existence known. When its existence was found out, she destroyed evidence. The resulting FBI interrogations were handled with kid gloves. The litany of horribles Comey cited in his press release was long and severe, and yet he recommended against prosecution.

It continues through actions against Trump and his allies-FISA abuse, Flynn persecution, Mueller, impeachment I, etc. In short, the Dems and their allies in the press and government have been practicing scorched earth tactics against a duly elected President from the time he was a candidate.

Had Clinton ever been called out by a significant Dem politician-even today-I might cut the move against Trump some slack. However, if you try engage a Democrat in a compare and contrast exercise, the response is a sarcastic, "But her e-mails!"

Conservatives have been upset by the double standard since at least 2016 and are certainly upset about the double standard now.

As far as the security implications, Conservatives were much more upset about Snowden than Liberals were.

narciso said...

no drago, trump has the original time machine, from his uncle who worked with nikola tesla,
this became a python sketch (see mr neutron, very quickly)

Michael K said...

In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

jim1234 asks "an honest question." HAHAHAHA

The "Crossfire Hurricane" documents were classified "Top Secret" and SCI so only Schiff and Schumer could see them and then only at DNC offices.

madAsHell said...

what type of classified information does the FBI suspect Trump to be in possession of?

Hillary's 30 thousand emails?

JAORE said...

Subtract out the 25 percent that still believe Russian collusion and the numbers change a lot.

Also:
"In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution? "

How about selective process?
Hillary admitted wiping the server. She was questioned about this with her (potentially co-defendant) attorney present. There are, reportedly, no recordings of the interview. The server is loudly reported to have been found to have no hacking by Russians (or others). But the FBI never seized the computer for their analysis. How about the head of the FBI determining Hillary was guilty but no one would prosecute.... because the AG met on the tarmac with BJC to discuss grandkids..

DanTheMan said...

I've served a few search warrants in my time.
All of which were required to "particularly describe" the items to be seized. This is to prevent exactly the sort of "let's go see what we can find" warrant that seems to be the case here.

I would think that a warrant for "Every document from January 2017 on" would be overly broad, and make the warrant invalid. A search warrant should have some relation to a specific, underlying crime or crimes, which would then specify the type of evidence they were going to seize, if found.

There's a reason they went to that particular magistrate. They knew he would rubber stamp whatever they asked for.
Given the magistrate's involvement with Epstein, the FBI might have had leverage over him as well.

MartyH said...

Jim -

Let me add that had Trump pursued Hillary in this matter post election I’d be excoriating him today. Instead, he exhibited magnanimity, a quality Democrats sorely lack these days.

Drago said...

Lem: "What's the holdup? Did the FBI find anything?"

No. Not at all.

If they had it would already have leaked. Within hours, if not minutes. But there was never anything there. Just stuff which documented the DOJ/FBI/DIA/NSA criminal behavior so it had to removed before Trump dumped it into the public domain. So the "raid" under utterly corrupt reasons was on!!

Not that they weren't hoping to find something, ANYTHING, that could be used to hurt Trump.

Did you know there are still idiots out there who believe an actual russki pee tape exists? Right here at althouse we have a bunch of those: Inga, gadly, Howard, Left Bank, victoria, Freder, jim5301, etc.

And so now the DOJ/FBI had to leak something in accord with the faked up "warrant" signed by the Clinton's and Epstein's pal Reinhart.

So there's the fully planned leaks about vague "defense documents" and "nuclear related" documents ("related"!) which could mean literally anything.

There's so much Nothing There but so much visible corruption that the democraticals/deep staters ONLY hope is to do exactly what they've been doing: throwing out even more vague words and quotes from unnamed sources, have their little henchpersons on TV take those vague pronouncements and put the necessary rhetorical and twisted and purposefully misdirecting details on the BS on top of BS and hope everyone is so confused by terms, definitions, insider jargon etc that it makes Trump seem guilty of.....well.....something!

It is literally Jan of 2017 all over again with "secret evidence" that some "insiders" have "seen with their own eyes" that will "prove the case" but they "just can't show it to you right now as the "investigation" is ongoing" and besides "its all in plain sight" and "you know Trump just has to be guilty".

And besides, here's a bunch of cool terms that means we are right: kompromat!! Espionage!! Nuclear Secrets!!

It's all shouted like a mantra because the dems know their base so very very well: they are political Hari Krishna's bleating the same things over and over again.

Rusty said...

jim5301 said...
"Serious question:

Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted (assuming he knowingly took home classified information, he never unclassified the information, it was against the law for him to do so, and he knew it was against the law). In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?"
No. He should not be prosecuted. Because to be in possession of classified material would mean that someone other than Trump had access to and purloined said classified material. The archives sensitive materials are audited every six months. The chain of possession is documented closely.(more than two people are aware that the documents are on loan). So unless a Sandy Burger like person walked in and stuffed em down his/her underwear then it is unlikely that Trump has sensitive material in his possession that no one knows about. As much as you desperately wish for this to be true.
The question no one on your side ever asks is; why?

Rusty said...

" Only six or seven people had even knew about the safe"
Trump knows who the mole is now.

Dude1394 said...

I expect this is complete bullshit and like the confiscation of a sitting congressman’s phone all ties into desperately trying to prove something about jan6.
As I understand it obama took tons of documents with him to be sorted out. And I expect that EVERY president has taken tons of documents with them. Then returned them quietly as trump was doing.

There is no justification for this fascist raid.

traditionalguy said...

The bottom line in all of the MSM madness and DC apparatchiks’ spin is that Trump never was our President. He was only a bad dream pretending to be President. And for the crime of impersonating a President he must now finally be tortured to death and the Dem’s Marxist Dictatorship take over.

Jess said...

Fear, and desperation, make people do things that are beyond what a healthy society consider appropriate. That's what this is all about, and I hope their fears come to fruition. May history show them as traitors.

Drago said...

Heartless Aztec: "The Comey Precedent states that if there is no intent there will be no charges."

LOL

There is no such thing as "precedent" in the land of the New Soviet Democraticals. There is only what is needed to win today. It doesn't matter what was said years ago, months ago, weeks ago, days ago, hours or minutes ago.

If the New Soviet Democraticals need to rewrite history, they will.

They are online right now describing in their twisted way why what Hillary did is most definitely NOT a problem while arguing that even with no information on hand, Trump is already guilty and must be immediately imprisoned and executed.

Remember in the 1970's and 1980's when Soviet representatives would argue publicly that the US with its capitalistic system made slaves of everyone while the Soviets provided True Freedom and Peace for their citizens?

Well, welcome to that world. And its right here right now.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Republicans are so stupid. If the parties were switched, Dems would be making this all about impeaching the President and AG for going after a political opponent. Instead, Reps play along like morons with the “well, we need to see the details” loser response. They truly are the Washington Generals of American politics.

Bruce Hayden said...

“ Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted (assuming he knowingly took home classified information, he never unclassified the information, it was against the law for him to do so, and he knew it was against the law). In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?”

The critical distinction here is that Trump ordered the documents declassified, as President, with plenary declassification power, so he could take the documents with him. The bureaucrats said “not so fast - we need to redact some names”. A year and a half later, they are still not formally declassified (according to FOIA requests). This is likely the bureaucrats either refusing to do the job ordered by the President, or, I think much less likely, the order was very quickly countermanded by someone very high up in the FJB Administration. Which means that:
1) Counterintelligence units in the FBI and DOJ classified their Crossfire Hurricane investigation (including much of the paperwork for the 4 fraudulent FISA warrants on Carter Page). They classify much of their work, as a matter of course, but also, very obviously, use classification of documents to escape accountability.
2) Trump tried to get those documents formally declassified at least as early as summer of 2020, and likely earlier.
3) This order by Trump was reiterated by his Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows, after Trump lost the (fixed) election, in order to take the documents with him.
4) the DOJ and FBI bureaucracy in charge of declassifying documents pushed back, stating that they couldn’t formally declassify the documents until names are redacted under the Privacy Act, which they were ordered to do.
5) Trump left office with those documents, believing that they had been formally declassified, as ordered. They never were.
6) The FBI raids Trump for, among other things, those very same documents that their employees, a year and a half earlier, had been ordered to formally declassify, and hadn’t.

Crooked Hillary didn’t try declassifying the classified documents on her illegal email server for a couple of reasons. First, it probably would have given away that she was violating multiple federal laws by using her server for email, instead of the highly secured email system used by most (e.g. Tony Weiner’s wife also had an account on Clinton’s server) of the rest of the State Department. The other thing is that she only had declassification authority for documents created by the State Department. She apparently also had classified documents on her server from the CIA, DOD, etc (for example, the State Dept needed to approve drone strikes, and the plans for them were inevitably classified by the agency requesting the strikes). And it worked -she was able to hide the presence of her email server for 7 1/2 years (from the day she took office in early 2009 up through spring of 2016).

Paddy O said...

"Given the magistrate's involvement with Epstein, the FBI might have had leverage over him as well."

Maybe Trump had some documents related to Epstein's clients or other behavior that he has been holding for the right time or to protect himself.

tim in vermont said...

So what Krumhorn is saying is that if Trump gets elected, they’ll all (figuratively) hang from nooses, like Hillary feared, now that he understands how they operate.

I say it’s too late, a corrupt cabal controls the media, search engines, social media, law enforcement at the federal level, and they are controlled by the cult of global warming, and a collection of sociopaths cynically using those believers, and they have made it simply too much work for the average American to distrust them in a serious way.

J Melcher said...

I notice the terms "baseless" and without evidence" missing from coverage of this event. There are more hints and clues and evidence supporting inferences of 2020 election mischief than we have support for the claims about "nuclear secrets". But no media headline will call out the comments and say they are "repeating baseless assertions" about what material was sought.

RoseAnne said...

Blogger jim5301 said...
Serious question:

Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted (assuming he knowingly took home classified information, he never unclassified the information, it was against the law for him to do so, and he knew it was against the law). In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

Jim, you may want to try the question again. Even without taking into account all your "ifs" and "assuming", your question is still confusing. Trump "didn't take home classified information" knowingly or otherwise. Government employees packed the boxes. Sometimes in the process of a move, things just get screwed up.

gadfly said...

America's opinion, as gathered from a very few folks on "Where Americans Stand On Trump’s Legal Jeopardy" is not news and frankly makes no difference because we can only apply the rule of law to illegal actions.

Logic has left the wild-eyed Trump supporters a long time ago and there is nothing but wild conspiracies afloat on any subject surrounding TFG's obvious actions outside the law - which is exactly what his illegal possession of Top Secret documents is.

The first rule of "blaw-blaw-blaw" is "Talk about anything except the pertinent criminal evidence."

gadfly said...

America's opinion, as gathered from a very few folks on "Where Americans Stand On Trump’s Legal Jeopardy" is not news and frankly makes no difference because we can only apply the rule of law to illegal actions.

Logic has left the wild-eyed Trump supporters a long time ago and there is nothing but wild conspiracies afloat on any subject surrounding TFG's obvious actions outside the law - which is exactly what his illegal possession of Top Secret documents is.

The first rule of "blaw-blaw-blaw" is "Talk about anything except the pertinent criminal evidence."

LilyBart said...


I really see a difference between how Trump, and many republicans are treated by the govt justice system and agencies, how its being weaponized against political foes, versus how the Dems and their allies are treated. And this is far, far worse for the faith in our system and more 'damaging to democracy' that what Trump is accused of doing. I'm losing faith fast.

All this time people think is a 'big problem' that Trump may have some classified documents, but supported Hillary ('but her emails!"), and ignore the blatant corruption of the Pelosi's and Bidens (and others), the continuous Biden lies....

Our best times are behind us, I think. In history governments fail, economies collapse, and civilizations decline. Its just a sad that I have to watch it happen to mine.

Bender said...

62 percent of Americans thought it was either 'a very big problem' (45 percent) or 'somewhat of a problem' (17 percent) that Trump allegedly held onto classified documents after leaving office.

They though allegations are a problem? Or that the subject of the allegations are a problem?

Or they were asked a bogus and misleading question for their opinion about something that did not happen?

The documents were NOT classified.

LilyBart said...

Rusty said: Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted

BUT she WASN'T. She was defended and her 'crimes' ignored by the same people who tell me I'm a bad person for not joining them in their foaming-at-the-mouth demands that Trump be indicted right now for whatever reason they can drum up. ITs a two-tiered system, and we're tired of it.

Saint Croix said...

In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?

And your feeling is that "selective prosecution" is no big deal?

To have a world where Republicans get one rule of law and Democrats get another is a nightmare fucking world.

We will fight tooth and nail on this "minor" issue.

Arrest crackhead Hunter Biden -- or search his fucking house -- and then we'll talk. Unbelievable.

Sebastian said...

"81 percent of Democratic registered voters said the search was based on evidence that Trump had committed a crime"

See, they already know.

boatbuilder said...

Why don't they poll this question:

Former President Trump sought to declassify the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation, which resulted in the Mueller Investigation and subsequent Mueller Report, focusing on Former President Trump's alleged collusion with Russia in connection with the 2016 election.

The DOJ and the FBI have resisted the declassification of this information.

Do you agree/disagree that the entire Crossfire Hurricane investigation should be made available to the American Public?


I know why they aren't asking that. But I'd like to hear them say why they are not asking that.

Readering said...

Don't spend too much effort thinking up excuses today because he's just going to make some other nutty statement about it all tomorrow.

deepelemblues said...

None of the material was classified. We are seeing propaganda techniques openly used on the body politic and no one cares.

n.n said...

They're hoping to find a baby. However, given diverse... well, several precedents, they are likely to find a fetus perchance an embryo. Let us bray for fair weather.

gadfly said...

Meade said...
Recommend reading “Sundance” over at Conservative Treehouse.

Sorry. I hate to disagree with the boss, but Conservative Treehouse is way off the wall with its anti-elitist populist views, except in the case of Trump anarchism. You likely are not surprised to have me proudly tell you that Sundance will not permit me to post over there. But I am not alone and if you check the responses, few (if any) disagreements show up. He should rename his blog the "Trump Treehouse."

Balfegor said...

Re: DanTheMan:

There's a reason they went to that particular magistrate. They knew he would rubber stamp whatever they asked for.

I've always been defense side, not prosecution side, so perhaps I'm biased, but how often did you see magistrates block search warrants? Because we know from the news that state level warrants can be pretty sloppy (basic stuff like getting the wrong address, etc.) and corporate raids can be pretty indiscriminate about what they seize. My impression has been that the check on government investigative power (much like grand juries) is mostly illusory, and the real check is just self-restraint on the part of prosecutors, since judges are only fed half the story when a warrant is sought. Judges mostly seem to rubber stamp this sort of thing up front and then let people fight it out much later when defendants are trying to get evidence excluded. I don't think there was necessarily forum shopping going on here.

M said...

My husband worked for the government and handled many “top secret” documents. After reading the warrant and what they claimed to have found he says this is BS and he does not like Trump. Anything Trump touched while in office would fall under these headings of “secret”. Which is why his menu was included in the list. “Top secret” menu, lol. Why do Dems think this is a problem and Reps don’t? Because above and beyond partisanship Reps who have worked for the government or as gov. contractors in a real capacity know what document security is like. People who produce real goods like jet airplanes and bridges tend to be conservative. People who produce fantasy goods like Modern Monetary Theory policy tend to be Dems. Dems in government on average don’t know what is going on IRL because they don’t live in the real world themselves.

dwshelf said...

The problem with the poll is that it doesn't give a choice which depends on what crime they thought they were going for.

If it's a technicality, based on secure documents or other document issues, then the whole thing is bogus.

If on the other, hopefully unlikely situation, Trump was believed to have been behaving in an anti-American way with military secrets, that would seem different.

But the poll doesn't allow resolving that question.

Static Ping said...

It is not a useful poll. The topic is something that the large majority of people have no expertise or even basic knowledge. It involves an event for which we have incomplete information and most of the information is self-serving anonymous leaks passed on by journalists that will accept anything at face value because they are stupid.

Any polls about string theory? Perhaps some hot takes from the population on iconoclasm?

Humperdink said...

Eric Swalwell (D-Oz) and his Chinese spy/ paramour, aka Fang Bang, were not immediately available for comment.

Maynard said...

I am still wondering what possible crime the DOJ was investigating that Trump had in his records.

Nuclear secrets? LOL!

Classified material? POTUS has unilateral authority to declassify.

Presidential records for the archives? There is no criminal offense for non-compliance.

Guilty while being an Independent voice? Yes. He needs to be made an example of.

ConradBibby said...

Serious questions for Jim or whoever else is inclined to give the FBI/Deep State the benefit of the doubt on this:

Do you believe that this search and the potential pursuit of charges against Trump are happening for either of the following purposes: (a) trying to keep Trump from being reelected; and (b) demonstrating to the left the administration's willingness to fight Trump tooth and nail?

Do you agree that both (a) and (b) are POLITICAL objectives?

Do you agree or disagree that the administration should not engage in POLITICAL investigations and prosecutions, and that doing so constitutes a violation of civic norms?



DanTheMan said...

Where this ends: Trump in handcuffs.
That's the picture the Dems want, and they will do ANYTHING to get it. And CNN will be there to record the whole thing.

It doesn't matter if the charge is littering. They want him arrested. They won't stop until he is.

William said...

Maybe if some child porn turns up, I would hold it against Trump. Nothing else would make much of a dent. Maybe not even child porn. I'd figure it was a plant. Maybe if the child porn featured his kids. No, even then, I'd figure it was someone with CGI capabilities making it up.....The media, the FBI, the Dems have painted themselves into a corner with Trump. Trump is no Honest Abe, but his lies are less frequent and pernicious than the lies that have been told about him.

Jersey Fled said...

Just for fun, remember when James Comey took classified information home with him when he was fired as FBI Director, then leaked the information through a friend to the New York Times which promptly published it, the purpose of which was to put pressure on the DOJ to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Trump over Russian collusion?

Strangely, the DOJ chose not prosecute him for the several felonies and other misdeeds that he later admitted to in Congessional hearings.

Peglegged Picador said...

Someone up above asked:

"Did the language of the statute change one letter? No."

The answer to that is clearly 'yes,' though...


What became law was S. 139. It had been introduced by Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah) as the Rapid DNA Act of 2017. But sometimes Congress hollows out existing legislation and replaces it entirely with other legislation to move the process forward more quickly. So S. 139 was replaced with H.R. 4478, which extended Section 702 for another five years.

It also had a stipulation editing 18 U.S. Code §1924. It originally read:

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
With Trump’s signing S. 139 into law, that became: “ … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.” And with that, it became a felony.

ConradBibby said...

Another important distinction in regard to HRC was that she set out to purposefully and secretly set up an unsecured server in order to avoid having her otherwise official communications subject to later FOIA requests and subpoena. IOW, she was trying to conduct ostensibly official state business in secret. As I understand it, Trump's alleged misconduct was limited to having a relative handful of his presidential-era documents, which he had already at least sought to declassify, sent to Mar a Lago in full purview of the government at the time. The present administration apparently contends that some subset of the Mar a Lago docs either weren't declassified or have since been re-classified and that this is a serious criminal matter.

Joe Smith said...

Nobody cared about anything (phone calls, taxes, documents, FARA, etc.) until Trump.

Then it was fine-tooth comb/look at everything with an electron microscope.

When will we read the transcripts of Biden's calls?

Never, moron.

Dems aren't stupid like Rs are...

Joe Smith said...

You're heard the sales tactic 'ABC...Always Be Closing.'

The dems are always on offense...relentlessly on offense.

And Rs are always on their back foot...never able to move forward.

If the get the house in the fall they need to unleash the kraken.

And if the White House in '24, mass firings and prosecutions of communists in the government.

Joe Smith said...

'Recommend reading “Sundance” over at Conservative Treehouse.'

Yes...your wife gave me a hard time about that a couple of days ago.

I didn't sum up why and neither did you, but I'm the one who gets 'yelled' at : )

Michael K said...


Blogger Readering said...

Don't spend too much effort thinking up excuses today because he's just going to make some other nutty statement about it all tomorrow.


Do you mean Garfinkle or the Epstein judge?

Gusty Winds said...

It’s a really sad time in America, and in our lives as Americans. If Twitter is any type of gage, these differences are beyond repair, and things are only going to get worse. You can feel it slipping away. The question remains, how far does this two tiered “justice” system go to control the half of America that hasn’t fallen in line?

If you just follow the trajectory over the last six years, it going to go much further.



Big Mike said...

@Althouse, when your “cruel neutrality” goes in one direction and only one direction only, perhaps you aren’t neutral, merely cruel.

Drago said...

Readering: "Don't spend too much effort thinking up excuses today because he's just going to make some other nutty statement about it all tomorrow."

Previous "nutty" statements by Trump:
- There was no Russia Russia Russia collusion, it was made up
- There was no secret servers communicating between Trump Tower and Alpha Bank
- There never was any Trump Tower deal in Moscow
- Hillary paid for the Hoax Dossier

...this list of "nutty" staements, which are actually quite true statements, is now hundreds of line items long after 7 years of dem/left/deepstate/GOPe lies.

Browndog said...

Again, pointing out liberal hypocrisy is white noise. They don't share your values, and use your values against you. In fact, they are quite happy their hypocrisy pisses your off.

Two-eyed Jack said...

To those defending the DOJ/FBI here, doesn't this have any "als sie mich holten, gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte" vibe for you at all?

Drago said...

Gadfly the Hopeless: "The first rule of "blaw-blaw-blaw" is "Talk about anything except the pertinent criminal evidence."'

There is no criminal evdence. Which is why you leftists/dems spend so much time and effort to try and conjure it up out of nothing.

Just as you have for 7 years now.

Gospace said...

"But polling from YouGov conducted on Aug. 9 found that 62 percent of Americans thought it was either 'a very big problem' (45 percent) or 'somewhat of a problem' (17 percent) that Trump allegedly held onto classified documents after leaving office.

Shows that 67% of people are completely bamboozled and don't understand how things are classified or unclassified.

If I decided, on my own, to bring something classified home from the subs and show it to everyone because I didn't think it should be classified- I'd be soenfing time in the brig. Same with anyone else on teh sub, including the CO.

If POTUS decides something doesn't need to be classified and brings it home and shows others- it's not clssified. He's the final say, period, end of discussion. He couldn't take anything AFTER he was POTUS- he doesn't have accress after then. Therfore, he doesn't have any classified material. He likely has stuff the FBI doesn't want people to see. Showing they spied on him in vilation of the law. But- it's unclassified. Period.

Jim at said...

The same, stupid leftists who believed every last word on the bullshit Russia hoax are the very same, stupid leftists who believe what's being spewed now.

Know why? Because it's the same, damn play.

Joe Smith said...

Too much 'ongoing investigation' and 'sources and methods' excuses for keeping everything secret.

Remind me; who funds the government again?

Buckwheathikes said...

Tim from Vermont wrote: “If that man gets elected, we’ll all hang from nooses.” - HRC

Would that Trump had actually done this. He'd be rid of these people. That's what he should have done and promised to do (rhetorically). By that, I mean, he promised to bring charges against Hillary Clinton and her co-conspirators for her many crimes while Secretary of State.

She committed massive crimes, including violations of the very same laws that Trump is now accused of committing.

The fact that some corrupt FBI guy declined to bring charges against Hillary Clinton is irrelevant to the commission, or the prosecution, of Hillary Clinton's crimes. She still did those crimes. And she's still at legal jeopardy of being prosecuted for those crimes the very minute an honest Attorney General is appointed. She can still go to jail for those crimes for the rest of her life. And she should still go to jail for those crimes. For the rest of her life.

If, by some miracle, Donald Trump gets to be President again, he had better deal with these criminals as his first and foremost task to saving the country. It is these people who threaten the future of the United States and the next president, whether it's Trump or not, needs to take out these threats just the same as he would any other persons who are clear and present dangers to the United States of America.

ga6 said...

They are still not sure yet but they will know it when they see it, check back next week.

William50 said...

If this had been done during the Carter administration I would have said that it was based on evidence. Since then I think all investigations have been purely political.

rcocean said...

Media lies and puts out a fake narrative
Then polls the public based on the Fake narrative.

German Nazi Newspaper Poll on September 1, 1939

"Should Germany strongly respond to Poland's unprovoked attack on Germany and vicious treatment of innocent Germans in Poland? Yes or NO?

Eleanor said...

They weren't looking for things to use against Trump. They were looking for things he could use against them. The clue is they took the stuff about Roger Stone.

Buckwheathikes said...

Jim 5301 asked: "Assuming that Hillary Clinton WAS prosecuted for having confidential information on her server (as she should have been; I didn't vote for her because of the issue), do people here still think that Trump should not be prosecuted (assuming he knowingly took home classified information, he never unclassified the information, it was against the law for him to do so, and he knew it was against the law). In other words, is there some argument I've missed here other than selective prosecution?"

This begs many questions.

It is an uncontested fact that Hillary Clinton set up a personal email server and started emailing around highly, highly classified information from that server to various people not entitled to receive that information. People such as noted pedophile Anthony Weiner.

When confronted, and subpoenaed for those emails, it is an uncontested admitted fact that Hillary Clinton destroyed about 33,000 of them. After they had been subpoenaed.

It is NOT a fact that, if Trump was in possession of alleged classified documents that his crime is the very same as Hillary Clinton's. Clinton set out to evade our laws. Trump may be in possession of still classified materials entirely by accident and with no intent to possess them.

Nevertheless, Clinton will never be prosecuted. Because we live in a joke country where the criminals are in charge. Trump will be persecuted because these very same criminal elements are in charge of our police (DoJ) and courts. Until we rid our country of these people, these sorts of questions will never really be answerable. Before they destroy it permanently.

We need to remove these people from our country. By force if necessary.

Bender said...

People arguing selective prosecution are ipso facto admitting that Trump committed a crime but for the selectiveness.

YOU ARE NOT HELPING.

Howard said...

Let's pretend we know wtf happened and speculate to fit our confirmation biases.

Dr Weevil said...

PP (12:09pm):
Bold-facing a quotation does not make it more compelling. A law that threatens anyone who is an "officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States" does not apply to the President, who is none of those things: they all work for him, directly or indirectly.

Bender said...

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States...

A president is not an officer of the United States. Nor is he an employee, contractor or consultant of the United States.

Moreover, a president has authority to remove material to any damn place he pleases.

Rabel said...

As of 1:32 CT no one has stated the obvious:

It is a big problem the size of a little problem.

Let's get on the ball!

policraticus said...

You want more Trump?

This is how you get more Trump.

Keep acting like he is the anti-Christ. Keep saying he is an danger to the Republic. Keep acting like our democracy is failing. Keep citing Trump's violations of all norms, standards and traditions, all while you violate norms, standards and traditions in order to do so. Keep failing to provide any actual evidence of malfeasance. Keep that smug, self-righteous school librarian look on your face as you cast your eyes over the seething masses of lumpen prols rallying to the bad orange man.

Keep it up.

Our nation deserves much better than Donald J. Trump. He is manifestly unfit to be returned to office. But if this raid turns up the same kind of nothing-burger that was laboriously produced by Robert Mueller, I fear we're not going to get it.

Stay tuned for TRUMP II, Electric Boogaloo.

hpudding said...

Unsurprisingly, the excuses here shift between insisting evidence was planted to pretending that Hillary Clinton set some kind of standard for how damagingly Trump should be allowed to treat American national security. Two of the standard nonsense examples that have been tested in recent days - along with, of course, the threats to have a “war” over it, which is frankly pretty boring and predictable at this point.

Of course, no evidence was planted if the evidence was material that Trump refused to hand over in the several months of negotiating its return and ignoring a subpoena for it. Those refusals did not deny that he had them.

And if you think Trump should have no standards or respect for our laws or national security based on what his opponent was alleged to have done, you’re already admitting that you care less for America than for Trump’s legal or political fortunes.

This should surprise no one. Trump’s defenders just need someone to follow and they care more for Trump than they do America.

~ Gordon Pasha said...

I’m doubting that 30 FBI agents were read in on the highest security clearances

cfs said...

Eleanor said...
They weren't looking for things to use against Trump. They were looking for things he could use against them. The clue is they took the stuff about Roger Stone.


+++

I thought that was a big clue as well. They want to see if there are any notes in that file or extra information that Trump had in his possession that they weren't aware of. Before Durham can issue his final "report" they have to tie up any loose ends and get rid of anything that does not support the lies that will be contained in that report. I think they were hunting for any and all info Trump had regarding Hillary and the DOJ/FBI's collusion criminal conspiracy.

I suspect Durham's report will be issued before the mid-terms in November and it will excuse all the actions of the government officials. They were duped, poor naive and gullible guys that they were.

effinayright said...

Eleanor said...
They weren't looking for things to use against Trump. They were looking for things he could use against them. The clue is they took the stuff about Roger Stone.
************

The POTUS has a plenary, unchallengeable power to pardon.

Saint Croix said...

The first rule of "blaw-blaw-blaw" is "Talk about anything except the pertinent criminal evidence."

Yeah, that's my view of our esteemed attorney general.

"If I just follow the letter of the law, I can arrest Trump for driving with an expired driver's license. I'm sure I can find something we can arrest him on."

There are idiots on the left who want to make fucking everything a crime. And then the criminal laws are only applied to the people you don't like.

The facade that our police force and our FBI and our prosecutors are all "just doing their jobs" only fucking works if they are not politicized.

If they are politicized, moron, then you create instability, chaos and violent revolution by enforcing the laws against some people and not others.

The equal protection clause has a fucking meaning, deeply felt, that we are all entitled to equal justice under the law.

The left has been bastardizing this provision in an insane way. Black people get one law, white people get another. Democrats get one law, Republicans get another. Fuck you, and remember the lessons of the civil war.

No state shall deny any person the equal protections of the law.

You fuckers don't know what a person is!

effinayright said...

"And she's still at legal jeopardy of being prosecuted for those crimes the very minute an honest Attorney General is appointed."

**********

Mark Levin said the other day he thought the Statute of Limitations had kicked in, and Hillary could no longer be prosecuted.

Gretchen said...

In the minds of Republicans and Independents and the ever-diminishing group of honest Democrats, it is difficult to stomach that the FBI found it necessary to raid Trump's home, demand security cameras were turned off, wouldn't let Trump lawyers be present, had a warrant that was incredibly broad, brought backpacks (in case the fishing expedition could be turned into a gardening expedition of planting) signed off on a judge who was publicly anti-trump and pro-Epstein, especially in light of the fact that Hillary Clinton had a private server that not only hid records from the public, but allowed any bad actors from enemy countries to access any classified documents and communications, when confronted, Hilary destroyed the evidence, blatantly and is unbelievably raising money off her treachery with hats that say "but her emails".

I think it is VERY likely the documents pertain to CrossFire Hurricane, Epstein, the election, or some other corruption within the FBI.

Saint Croix said...

Mr. Fucktard wants to threaten PTA protestors with terrorism, and wants to arrest Trump for not declassifying menus in the appropriate way.

He should be fired and hopefully will be fired, before the year is out. If you can't stand up to the (twitter) mob and just act normal, why the fuck should we have any respect for you, your office, or your FBI?

effinayright said...

Peglegged Picador said...
***********

Bushwa.

That law does not apply to the POTUS, a constitutional officer with the power to declassify anything he likes.

effinayright said...

Anyone want to 'splain to me why a government entity, the GSA, gathered up, packed and shipped the boxes to Mara Lago, if it were illegal for Trump to take custody of them?



Kevin said...

Imagine if Trump was let off and the DOJ was going after Obama.

Gadfly wouldn’t be talking about the “evidence”.

Dave said...


FBI recommends no charges against Clinton in email probe.

Politico reports that Comey said:
"Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before deciding whether to bring charges."


How do you feel about this? I'm relieved. I wouldn't have liked to see a criminal law proceeding skewing and meddling with the political process now that it's so far along.



https://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/07/fbi-recommends-no-charges-against.html

============

For context, I would highly recommend search the keyword "Comey" at
https://althouse.blogspot.com

Extremely informative. The words I have bolded are extremely relevant now. NOTE: Trump has NOT announced his candidacy.

Drago said...

Next key question to answer regarding the actions of our completely and utterly corrupted Federal Bureau Of Democratical Secret Police, is this:

Is it true that the FBI hacks who judge shopped an Epstein fanboy "judge" and pulled this moronic raid on Trump, are they actually members of the FBI Counter-Intelligence Division that was at the heart of the Russia Collusion hoax conspiracy AND are CURRENTLY under investigation by Special Prosecutor John Durham for their previous corrupt practices?

Beause if it is in fact true, then this entire hoaxed up national security BS raid is really all about continuing the corruption coverup (picking up where Mueller/Weissman left off) AND desperately seeking something, anything to feed the dying Jan 6 hoax fedsurrection commission.

Heywood Rice said...

“If that man gets elected, we’ll all hang from nooses.” - HRC

Google this, it's garbage.

DanTheMan said...

>>I don't think there was necessarily forum shopping going on here.

That's just too precious for words. So the FBI just happened to go to a lesser magistrate judge rather than a Article III judge for the most unprecedented search warrant in US history?

Bilwick said...

As a child of the Cold War who lived through the Sixties, I find it amusing that "liberals" now are concerned with national security, and are telling us to trust the FBI.

DanTheMan said...

>>The clue is they took the stuff about Roger Stone.

Remember also they searched Giuliani's home and office while he was Trump's attorney.

Remember that Roger was arrested by 30+ Federal agents, including a SWAT team, and police on a boat in the canal behind his home, as if he was Osama Bin Laden.

Also remember that CNN just happen to be there, but not any other news agency, and that the FBI took him out in to the middle of the street to *made sure* they got a good shot of him being arrested and handcuffed.

This is what they have planned for Trump.

Heywood Rice said...

Also ask them if it's a good idea for the FBI to do a search while excluding Trump's lawyers from Trump's house...

...I mean, there are all kinds of questions you can ask, if you really want to know what people think.



If ask a question that's based on a lie maybe you can get the answers your looking for.


Lindsey Halligan, a Florida-based attorney for former President Donald Trump, was at Mar-a-Lago and spoke with CBS News about the FBI search. Here's her description of what transpired:

Halligan received a call at around 10 a.m. Monday that FBI agents were at Trump's Palm Beach home, Mar-a-Lago, and they had a search warrant.

She was the second Trump attorney to arrive on scene, at about 11 a.m, after the search had begun. Christina Bobb, who used to be a TV host on the far right OAN Network, was already there.

Heywood Rice said...

If POTUS decides something doesn't need to be classified and brings it home and shows others- it's not clssified. He's the final say, period, end of discussion.

Actually there is a procedure that includes filing paperwork which he either did or did not follow. You don't get to end the discussion.

Buckwheathikes said...

policraticus said... "This is how you get more Trump."

The Democrats are birthing millions of Trumps.

Buckwheathikes said...

Mark Levin said the other day he thought the Statute of Limitations had kicked in, and Hillary could no longer be prosecuted.

She can be prosecuted, and jailed. Regardless of any alleged statute of limitations.

Maybe she wins on appeal while she's sitting her ass in the Montgomery jail bein' nowise tired.

Maybe she gets Epsteined in jail waiting for that decision to come down.

You're arguing mere technicalities, sir.

Saint Croix said...

People arguing selective prosecution are ipso facto admitting that Trump committed a crime but for the selectiveness.

YOU ARE NOT HELPING.


Well, your all-caps convinced me.

And your logic!

Seriously, dude, did Martin Luther King Jr. commit a crime when he was locked up?

Selective arrest, selective prosecution, prosecutors using their leeway to do nefarious shit is a serious problem. It's a fairly rare problem in American society (thank God), but when it pops up?

It's fine to be mad about it.

To me it's irrelevant if Trump declassified the documents or didn't declassify the documents. I don't give a shit.

The raid on his house looking for evidence to arrest him because you don't like him is evil as shit.

"Give me a man and I will find the crime."

Andrey Vyshinsky
Prosecutor under Stalin

Heywood Rice said...

My husband worked for the government and handled many “top secret” documents...

Says an anonymous person on the internet called "M", how convincing. Any relation to Q?

Gospace said...

Something mentioned up above- security clearances. If the DoJ actually believed there were TS/SCI documents in Trump’s possession then every single agent involved in the search would have to have a TS/ SCI clearance. I can just about guarantee they didn’t.

The moment the first document marked “TS” was found, if that happened, the entire search would have to be suspended and everyone cleared out while a determination was made as to how to proceed. If any FBI agent touched and stored a TS document they weren’t cleared for- they’re in violation of the law. A search warrant does not give them the power to handle or look at TS documents. Or file them away and catalog them.

As mentioned multiple times by many- as POTUS, Trump had ultimate classification power. Therefore, if he says they were declassed by him while POTUS, they’re declassed. This is all bad theater backfiring on the DoJ and FBI. There are way too many of us who have been in the system at different levels (my clearance was secret) and know people in the system (my wife Top Secret, oldest son Top Secret/SCI, youngest at least TS- 2LT in military intelligence). We all know this stinks to high Heaven.

And that Hillary Clinton should be in jail. Something that I haven’t seen in these threads- every email from her server went to a Pakistani email address. And the recipient didn’t show in the email header. All of our human intelligence assets in China were rounded up and executed while she was Secretary of State. We also have during that time the Pakistanis handling the Democrat congressional emails- something never adequately investigated. All coincidences? No such thing.

Saint Croix said...

The kangaroo trial in the House with no cross examination, no due process, just partisan theater masquerading as a trial is a fucking disgrace.

I don't watch it, because it makes me mad. And so I have not been ranting about this stupid thing. It's irrelevant (I thought) because Trump is out of office and the damn thing has no legal effect whatsoever.

The raid on Trump's house is the difference between the fantasy horseshit going on in the House, and a serious attempt to subvert norms and punish a president you do not like.

This is fucking political.. Do we have to say more than that?

Imagine if Nixon ordered the FBI to raid the offices of the Democratic party. Acceptable? And then imagine Nixon fucking saying, "I didn't know about the raid."

My response, as an American, is that either Nixon or John Mitchell would need to lose their job for that shit.

Some of you fuckers need to look up the word "unprecedented," because I don't think you've heard of this word before.

James K said...

"People arguing selective prosecution are ipso facto admitting that Trump committed a crime but for the selectiveness.

YOU ARE NOT HELPING."

No. Trump is innocent of the allegations against him, for reasons that have been laid out here (He has the power to declassify, the documents were all packed by the GSA), but is being harassed and smeared by the FBI for political purposes. Hillary was in fact guilty of what Trump is being wrongly accused of, and was not prosecuted. See the difference?

Dr Weevil said...

Are there people who've never heard of an 'a fortiori' argument? Or at least do not recognize one? There is no contradiction at all in thinking that (a) Trump did not in fact do the things he's accused of, and (b) even if he had, Hillary had already actually done, on a very large scale, the very things Trump was falsely accused of doing, without being punished at all, which makes for a double standard (b) over and above the false accusation (a).

Jim at said...

Hillary Clinton set some kind of standard for how damagingly Trump should be allowed to treat American national security

Once again, because you're obviously thick between the ears.

There is no comparison between what Trump allegedly did and what Clinton actually did. Trump - as President - had the authority. Hillary - as SoS - did not.

You can pick nits about HOW Trump did it, but it doesn't change the basic facts.

Admit this and save yourself further public displays of stupidity.

Drago said...

Heywood Rice: "Actually there is a procedure that includes filing paperwork which he either did or did not follow. You don't get to end the discussion."

The President, as head of the Executive, can declassify any document he or she wishes (sorry lefties, its just he or a she) at his or her whim.

The President can order classified documents be brought to him or her (get used to it lefties), walk out to the Podium in the Briefing room, and then hand those documents out to the press on the spot.

Period.

If the bureaucracy has some processes that they'd like to have executed the President can choose to allow that or........not.

This is a power that only the President has since the entirety of the Constitutional power of the Executive branch is vested in the single person in that role.

Saint Croix said...

Heywood,

I think Trump's attorney is Christina Bobb.

She's the one who says she was ordered to stay out of the house by armed FBI agents. Described as "senior legal representative for Trump."

That's the Hill. If you don't believe the Hill, also saw it in Business Insider

Your comment is in regard to a local attorney who's also representing Trump, I guess. Okay, fine. Did you read your own citation?

Halligan received a call at around 10 a.m. Monday that FBI agents were at Trump's Palm Beach home, Mar-a-Lago, and they had a search warrant.

She was the second Trump attorney to arrive on scene, at about 11 a.m, after the search had begun. Christina Bobb, who used to be a TV host on the far right OAN Network, was already there.


What you are quoting just says she was "on the scene." That could be outside the house, with Bobb. Not allowed inside.

You're going to have to do better journalism if you are going to accuse people of lying.

Bilwick said...

As a child of the Cold War who lived through the Sixties, I find it amusing that "liberals" now are concerned with national security, and are telling us to trust the FBI.

DanTheMan said...

Heywood,
I must applaud your choice of avatar. Uncle Walter, 9/11 Truther...

CRONKITE: In fact, I'm a little inclined to think that Karl Rove,
the political manager at the White House, who is a very clever man, he
probably set up bin Laden to this thing. The advantage to the Republican
side is to get rid of, as a principal subject of the campaigns right now,
get rid of the whole problem of the al Qaqaa explosive dump.

Rabel said...

[Trump lawyer] Halligan says she and Bobb were barred from going inside the complex, forced to remain outside, between the ballroom and residence, on the grounds of Mar-a-Lago.

That's the same thing Bobb said about being kept at the end of the driveway.

Yet, in his public statement our Attorney General said that Trump's lawyer was "on site" without any further clarification.

This was an intentionally misleading statement.

He's a liar.

hpudding said...

Well, Rudy Giuliani says Trump will “raid every one of Biden’s houses” if he becomes president in 2024. Apparently he lacked the presence of mind to realize that he was admitting to believing that the justice system really should be retaliatory and political, at least in the service of his fellow Republicans.

He also said, “Breaking into the home of a former president is a political act.”

Is that so, Rudy?

Well a former president who steals boxes of top secret classified documents is committing a criminal act. How ya like them apples? Former presidents are not allowed to impede criminal investigation or retrieval of government records and they cannot declassify material retroactively once they stop being president at the end of their term.

effinayright said...

And **if you think Trump should have no standards or respect for our laws or national security based on what his opponent was alleged to have done**, you’re already admitting that you care less for America than for Trump’s legal or political fortunes.

This should surprise no one. Trump’s defenders just need someone to follow and they care more for Trump than they do America.
***************

**a strawman di tutti strawmen argument. No one thinks what you claim.

Now explain the difference between a POTUS having plenary power to declassify documents, and a SecState who had no such power.

Also explain why government employees in the General Services Administration packed up and shipped the unclassified docs to Mara Lago, where they remained until last Monday, vs. Hillary never responding to aa subpoena for the docs she secretly kept from public view---and then destroyed a laptop and hard drives containing them.

effinayright said...

Buckwheathikes said...
Mark Levin said the other day he thought the Statute of Limitations had kicked in, and Hillary could no longer be prosecuted.

She can be prosecuted, and jailed. Regardless of any alleged statute of limitations.

Maybe she wins on appeal while she's sitting her ass in the Montgomery jail bein' nowise tired.

Maybe she gets Epsteined in jail waiting for that decision to come down.

You're arguing mere technicalities, sir.
******************

Colossal and ignorant horseshit.

Levin is a lawyer and a constitutional scholar. He makes arguments based to the law and Constitution, while you just make unsupported assertions.

Friendo said...

Heywood (Jablowme) Rice,
You are a ridiculous person. Carry on.

effinayright said...

Heywood Rice said...
**********
Both those attorneys have publicly stated they were not allowed inside Mara Lago while it was being searched, and remained outside the entire time.

The FBI has not contradicted them.

Richard Aubrey said...

One report has it that the fibby office doing the smash and grab is the one being investigated by Durham. Interesting take, no?

Narayanan said...

first you have to kick up dust before it can settle >>> we nay be witnessing mushroom cloud but we have been immunized for toxic exposure for close to 50 years

effinayright said...

"The moment the first document marked “TS” was found, if that happened, the entire search would have to be suspended and everyone cleared out while a determination was made as to how to proceed. If any FBI agent touched and stored a TS document they weren’t cleared for- they’re in violation of the law. A search warrant does not give them the power to handle or look at TS documents. Or file them away and catalog them."
*****************
So...a search for TS documents would have to suspended if any TS documents were found?????

How about this wild scenario:

A couple of the FBI agents did have TS clearance, and advised those who didn't to segregate and put aside any doc bearing a nice bright red Top Secret on its first page, and let the qualified agents deal with them.

It's an idea SO CRAZY it just might have worked!!!

snort

Temujin said...

Americans are largely uninformed or misinformed. And pollsters are notoriously corrupt or lazy in how they arrange their questions, the substance of the questions, and the demographic cut of those being questioned.

It's not worth discussing.

I had a conversation with a dear friend of mine yesterday. We talked briefly about the FBI raiding Trump. He was all in on it and said the FBI would not do it unless there was a good reason. I asked him what he thought their reason was for pushing the Steele dossier, writing up false FISA applications, and overseeing the Russia Collusion case when they knew it was all a fiction story paid for by the Clinton Campaign. He smirked at me. Like I was some looney fringe conspiracy guy. I mentioned to him that these were facts and that even the mainstream press has reluctantly had to admit this. Three years late, sure, but they have admitted it. I also asked him why the FBI spread the lie about Hunter Biden's laptop being 'Russian disinformation'. Again- he smirked at me. I felt my rage growing so I changed the topic to football.

But right there and then it dawned on me. This guy cancels out my vote. He knows nothing, and still, he gets to cancel out my vote. He gets his information from NBC News and CNN and he gets to cancel out my vote.

These polls mean nothing to me. They're questioning people who know nothing.

Mason G said...

If the roles were reversed (Republican witch hunt of Democrats), instead of a Republican response of "well, we need to see the details", Democrats would be screaming bloody murder. You know it, I know it, they know it.

effinayright said...

Drago said...
Heartless Aztec: "The Comey Precedent states that if there is no intent there will be no charges."

LOL

There is no such thing as "precedent" in the land of the New Soviet Democraticals. There is only what is needed to win today. It doesn't matter what was said years ago, months ago, weeks ago, days ago, hours or minutes ago.
**************

When Trump supporters point to Hillary not being prosecuted for openly violating federal law and allowing her sensitive emails on an insecure serverto be hacked by foreign powers, Dems will jeer and call it "whataboutism".

Yet those same DemoCommies raged about "precedent" being violated when Roe v. Wade was overturned.

Democrats are a political version of "The Walking Dead".


Narayanan said...

as assistant to Dr.Watson and Sherlock Holmes asks : do we know what was not taken by FBI / deemed not warrant worthy?

Michael said...

When I think of the FBI I think of two words. Whitey Bulger.

Joe Smith said...

'But right there and then it dawned on me. This guy cancels out my vote. He knows nothing, and still, he gets to cancel out my vote.'

I have this thought every time I see a meth addict pissing his pants on the sidewalk in San Francisco...

Readering said...

Months of this coming. Still think Trump ages out of all this.

Michael K said...

Well a former president who steals boxes of top secret classified documents is committing a criminal act. How ya like them apples? Former presidents are not allowed to impede criminal investigation or retrieval of government records and they cannot declassify material retroactively once they stop being president at the end of their term.

Well, I guess you are one of those ignorant people Temujin was commenting about.

Invincible ignorance.

Michael K said...

If the bureaucracy has some processes that they'd like to have executed the President can choose to allow that or........not.

This is a power that only the President has since the entirety of the Constitutional power of the Executive branch is vested in the single person in that role.


I think this is what the raid was all about. Trump asserted his right to declassify the "Crossfire Hurricane" documents. The Deep State, including Barr but specially the CIA/FBI, dragged this out to the end of his term. I think he decided to have it out now with them in court, probably the Supremes.

Heywood Rice said...

The President can order classified documents be brought to him or her (get used to it lefties), walk out to the Podium in the Briefing room, and then hand those documents out to the press on the spot.

Period.


Nope, there are exceptions and information that has been declassified under one administration can be reclassified under the next.

Buckwheathikes said...

Levin is a lawyer and a constitutional scholar. He makes arguments based to the law and Constitution, while you just make unsupported assertions.

If we still lived in a country that was governed by laws and courts and a legal system, then maybe you'd have a point.

But since we don't, you have no point. We are beyond "laws."

Hillary Clinton can be put in jail by the next president just by him asserting that she is a clear and present danger to the United States of America. Just like Osama bin Laden. Ship her right off to Gitmo where she can go on that "sweat" diet. Maybe lose some of her fat ass.

He can drone her to death if he so desires it.

We'll make it legal later, if necessary. Shouldn't be necessary tho. Since she'll be nothing more than a grease spot and have no "standing" in the courts.

tim in vermont said...

My regard for Sundance has risen since hearing he doesn’t suffer morons.

Bunkypotatohead said...

"Blogger Buckwheathikes said...
policraticus said... "This is how you get more Trump."

The Democrats are birthing millions of Trumps."


They're birthing the next Timothy McVeigh.

effinayright said...

Buckwheathikes said...

Heywood Rice said...
**********************

You're both complete buffoons, utterly ignorant regarding law, the Constitution and politics.

Presidents have NO power to prosecute anyone, or to jail--let alone kill--anyone because HE deems that person a "clear and present danger", which in any case relates to First Amendment issues.

Osama was not "prosecuted"; he was an armed enemy of the United States who made war against us, killing thousands of Americans and in return was killed for doing so.

You don't do Hillary any favors by comparing her to him.

What the fuck would be the point of re-classifying documents that have already been made public?? Does the cliché about "closing the barn door after the horses have escaped" mean anything to you?

Invincible ignorance, indeed.

LakeLevel said...

Democrat Fearless Leader: "We need to get all that evidence about the crap we did in 2016 and 2017 out of the hands of DJT. That idiot didn't release to the public those documents he de-classified at the end of his presidency. He was probably saving it to use in his 2024 campaign."
Democrat Underling: "He won't be able to use it if we seize it because our press lackeys will program the public to ignore it like Hunter's L.."
Democrat Fearless Leader: "Don't ever say that out loud, but yes. Once we say that it is CLASSIFIED and TOP SECRET It will give our press lapdogs all the excuse they need to be willfully ignorant. HAHAHAHA we are so clever."
Democrat Underling: "This is really the best way since then, we won't have to assassinate him."

Sorry but I am really starting to think they are that evil.

hpudding said...

Well, I guess you are one of those ignorant people Temujin was commenting about.

Invincible ignorance.


If this isn’t a lawyer opining on how a former president would have immunity from being prosecuted for the same crimes that they would prosecute anyone else for, then hopefully the legal principle for such an absurdity can be named. But besides the fact that there is none, it shows how woefully ignorant so many Americans are of basic civics.

If it wasn’t a lawyer then it’s possible it could have been a doctor. One of those unlicensed types who would erroneously and idiotically overprescribe opioids for chronic joint pain.

Similarly ignorant as 45, Sidney Powell and the now disbarred Giuliani. Some get disbarred for lying. And others expose themselves to the kind of malpractice suits that everyone acting on the disgraced Sackler family’s orders subject themselves to.

Saint Croix said...

information that has been declassified under one administration can be reclassified under the next.

ha ha ha

I'll just say "ditto" on the horse and the barn.

Fuck, man. Are you even trying?

Heywood Rice said...

What the fuck would be the point of re-classifying documents that have already been made public?? Does the cliché about "closing the barn door after the horses have escaped" mean anything to you? - effinayright

Who said anything about reclassifying documents that have been made public? If, as some have claimed, Trump declassified whatever he had in his storage room there's no reason to assume any of it has been made public. Does he have the right to secretly declassify state secrets and hoard them for his own use? We'll see.

Saint Croix said...

information that has been declassified under one administration can be reclassified under the next.

You declassified them?

We classify them!

Now we can get Trump

I think this was a scene in Animal House.

Double secret probation!

Or maybe the fucking Marx brothers. Listen to yourself. Seriously. Take a moment and think about the paradox.

He declassified them and took them.

We classified them.

Now he's a criminal.

The Constitution specifically forbids the shit you're trying to do.

No bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed.

Jamie said...

Someone up above asked:

"Did the language of the statute change one letter? No."

The answer to that is clearly 'yes,' though...


Picador [she says gently], the quote refers to the law in San Francisco about stealing. Not about classified documents. The subject was selective prosecution, and the writer said that at least under THAT version of ignoring the first language of a statute, we can ALL shoplift $999 of stuff without fear of prosection. (I doubt that this is true - I think that the shoplifter's position on the Intersectionality and Oppression Scale would still be the decider in the prosecutor's office - but the point is that you're arguing against a fact not asserted.)

Saint Croix said...

From the NYT (whose paywall has disappeared, I guess attacking Trump is more important than money)

At least one lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump signed a written statement in June asserting that all material marked as classified and held in boxes in a storage area at Mr. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence and club had been returned to the government, four people with knowledge of the document said.

This was in June. And this was an affidavit, a court document (I think), punishable by perjury or other laws (I think). Not just some attorney talking head babbling on TV. You file court documents, you want to be honest (or else).

All material marked as classified were returned to the government. Trump kept the rest.

So they invaded his home because they didn't believe him?

Because they think he didn't have to power to declassify the docs he kept?

It just seems like a brutish, stupid way to behave. No wonder they wanted to do it under the radar.

What it sounds like, is that it wasn't a move by the DOJ to try to incriminate Trump, or arrest him, or frame him.

What it sounds like, is that Trump had documents that they really, really, really wanted back. Documents that made somebody in the FBI and/or DOJ look bad. So they invaded his house to get them.

So the story has shifted, a little I think? But I still think our attorney general needs to be fired. Although whoever suggested that it was rogue agents under him, that's looking pretty strong.

Saint Croix said...

If we had some sort of right-wing press...

I kind of think the names of the FBI agents who raided Trump's house should be in the newspapers. FBI, DOJ, whoever they fuck they are. Who are they?

Because they are the ones who wanted the docs.

MalaiseLongue said...

Seconding Michael K at 6:48 PM. I was going to ask, "How can the leftists here be so fucking stupid? Then Temujin at 6:03 PM explained it. Thank you.

Saint Croix said...

One of Trump's great attributes is how open he is.

The FBI invades his house. I think the reaction of most people would be to say nothing about it, to keep it quiet.

Because it looks bad when the FBI invades your house. And most of us don't want to look bad.

Trump is absolutely fearless. He immediately announces what is happening. No talking it over with counselors, no calling up his attorneys, no secretive meetings and discussions. He finds out his home is being invaded. And he skips the media and goes right to the people (via the internet). And we all hear about it.

And he was right, of course. His political instincts are fantastic.

It makes me think of Jefferson. "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty..."

Jefferson rocks.

You tell me who you trust more -- the open guy who speaks spontaneously? Or the secret, conspiring, hide it, hide it, hide it political skunk?

Nixon -- secretive bastard

Hillary Clinton -- secretive bastard

The FBI who raided Trump's house to get documents he had declassified and kept -- secretive bastards!

Who are these men who dare, with weapons, to invade the home of a former president? Who are they? They have no right to secrecy. They have no right to hide.

Saint Croix said...

Shine a light and watch the roaches scatter!

Drago said...

Heywood Rice: "Nope, there are exceptions and information that has been declassified under one administration can be reclassified under the next."

LOL

So dumb.

There are no exceptions and it should be "yep" not "nope" because if a new President comes along and reclassifies formerly unclassied documents that have already been made public then....who cares? It would already have been made public.

What are you going to do? Order the public to "forget".

Oh, wait. You are the New Soviet Democraticals. Of course you would order the entire public to forget.

gadfly said...

Shortly before AG Garland stepped up to the mic and murmured “I call you out, muthafucka,” the tangerine squeam tried to ask him how many tanks he had.

The country is on fire,” Mr. Trump is quoted as saying, according to the individual with knowledge of the message, according to The Times. “What can I do to reduce the heat?”


Snarki, child of Loki as the first responder on Lawyers, Guns & Money wrote: "Suck on a bullet."

gadfly said...

tim in vermont said...
My regard for Sundance has risen since hearing he doesn’t suffer morons.

Do you know, tim, that you and I will never really agree on anything but I will say that in all of our disagreements, I don't recall ever calling you anything other than a Trumper, which likely makes you somehow proud.

Just as I am proud to disagree with Sundance, he doesn't respond at all except to exercise his power. Here you don't have any power.

Meade has the power to kill my post but to his favor, he did not.

Rusty said...

Timujin
I had a conversation with a friend that went just like that. When I mentioned Hunter Biden's laptop he'd never heard of it. But he was pretty sure that if it helped Trump it was some kind of RNC disinformation. We are dealing with a group of fellow citizens that have been programmed to be incurious.

Ancient Mariner said...

What about the MILLIONS of documents, many of them classified, that Obama took with him when he left office?

(Yeah, I know. "Whataboutism".)

hpudding said...

"How can the leftists here be so fucking stupid?”

Good thing the leftists who founded the country were smart enough to believe there should be no federal law enforcement, then? Along with wanting to retain an out-of-control monarchy, remain a part of Britain, fighting against independence, etc.

Oh wait. That’s what the conservative colonists at the time, the Tory loyalists, wanted!

Same third of the population then as now. Some things never change.

Narayanan said...

It makes me think of Jefferson. "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people...they are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty..."
=========
what was Jefferson veiw on edumacating the blackies on his plantation in VA?

Patrick Henry was right! said...

Michael said...

When I think of the FBI I think of two words. Whitey Bulger

I think of Richard Jewell.

hstad said...

I've noticed that few in the Media published former President Trump's order 'declassifying' supposedly all documents in his possession. It will be interesting to see how the Courts treat Trump's 'declassifying order'. My guess the DOJ and FBI will ignore it since they are all in with the raids political results. Moreover, how does the DOJ now handle the previous DOJ order on Clinton "she did not have intent"? Truly amazing they picked these stupid people for office.

hombre said...

A different answer from amoral Dems would result after a disclosure that the statute of limitations had not run on Hillary's emails.

Nevertheless, it is beginning to appear that Democrats are irredeemable. Too bad. It puts the integrity of the midterm election at risk.

Bruce Hayden said...

Whitey Bulger

Someone commented that the corruption at FBI HQ probably started in Boston, with the FBI agents that Bulgar had on his payroll. It then moved down to DC with the enactment of the PATRIOT Act, that allowed the FBI to diddle in national security matters. Apparently both Peter Strzok and Jim Comey were Boston alums.

There is mounting evidence that the raid was being driven by the Counterintelligence Division at the FBI, created as a result of the PATRIOT Act. The documents that Trump ordered declassified the day before leaving office (after having spent better than half a year trying to do it through channels) disclosed their perfidy and malfeasance in Crossfire Hurricane and RussiaGate. The plot was run by former CD ADAD Strzok and DD McCade and planned around the latter’s $75k conference room table. They, along with CD attorney Clinesmith, were the only real casualties from the entire scandal on the FBI side. A lot of the miscreants in the CD, as well as the DOJ National Security Division, who approved or participated, are probably sleeping soundly for the first time now in over a year and a half.

Of course they are the ones involved. Who else at the FBI has a bunch of agents with top security clearances to review the documents, and, indeed, to know what to look for? This is their revenge. They were the ones who could go to Garland (looking for justification for the raid) with a list of documents formerly marked as classified that they believed that Trump had - because they knew precisely what documents they wanted to get away from him. And they knew that they hadn’t been formally declassified, despite the President’s direct orders, because the declassifications would have come through them (which suggests that they were the ones who had disobeyed Trump’s order to declassify the documents that showed their perfidy and malfeasance).

Bilwick said...

As a child of the Cold War who also lived through the Sixties, I find it amusing that the Left is now concerned with national security and are telling us to trust the FBI.

Bilwick said...

To the "liberal"New Tories snd State-fellators of "The Hive"--do you really want to lower the temperature

Bilwick said...

To the "liberal"New Tories snd State-fellators of "The Hive"--do you really want to lower the temperature? Ho wasabout lowering the level off statism

TeaBagHag said...

Cults never end well and cultists die hard.
Trumpies would rather drink bleach than admit that their dear leader was a common con-man, full of shit and played them for the rubes they are.