- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Muellers thugs broke in and “felt up Mrs. Manafort lying in bed to see if she had guns”
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:23 am to Willie Stroker
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:23 am to Willie Stroker
quote:
What? Are you suggesting that it should have been done at the convenience of the alleged criminal?
That's certainly how the FBI handled Hillary Clinton. Remember when they searched her house? Neither do I.
1
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:27 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:bullshite!
They were convinced that there were documents in the house that Manafort would attempt to destroy if he knew of the raid.
If that were the case, all they needed to do was show up during the day and knock on the door.
This was conducted as if it was an assault on Pablo Escobar's lair.
No excuse for this BS in America. None!
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:30 am to BigPerm30
quote:
Can some one explain why a no knock raid was appropriate in this instance? Why did the judge or magistrate approve this?
No. I’m pretty sure no one on this forum can answer that question. Maybe save it for a press conference when people that can answer the question are available.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:31 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
bullshite!
If that were the case, all they needed to do was show up during the day and knock on the door.
What the frick are you talking about? A question was asked, I answered it.
That most certainly WAS the reason a no knock warrant was approved. Whether you think that should happen in the US is irrelevant as to the reason it was done in this case.
I swear logic is such a challenge for some of you.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:31 am to Navytiger74
quote:Then she's a fricking stooge!
She’s actually considering whether or not multimilliares with extensive international ties, known assumed identities
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:32 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Then she's a fricking stooge!
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:33 am to BigPerm30
quote:
Can some one explain why a no knock raid was appropriate in this instance? Why did the judge or magistrate approve this?
Manafort was laundering Russian organized crime money through a shell company in Cyprus.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:34 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Then she's a fricking stooge!
How about the newly acquired cell phone in someone else's name. Any red flags there?
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:36 am to Willie Stroker
quote:
No. I’m pretty sure no one on this forum can answer that question. Maybe save it for a press conference when people that can answer the question are available.
The question was already answered by someone familiar with the investigation . The no knock warrant was approved because the warrant specified that there were documents in the house that they were afraid Manafort would destroy if he had advance warning of the search.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:39 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
That's certainly how the FBI handled Hillary Clinton. Remember when they searched her house? Neither do I.
Do you remember when Hillary Clinton was indicted for a criminal offense and a search warrant seeking more than emails was signed by a federal judge? Neither do I.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:39 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:It was approved for the same reason it was requested.
That most certainly WAS the reason a no knock warrant was approved. Whether you think that should happen in the US is irrelevant as to the reason it was done in this case.
It had not one damn thing to do with any sudden destruction of evidence.
It was approved to justify a thuggish home raid, scaring hell out of the occupants, and gain ability to either physically embarrass/abuse occupants including wives/children present or worse.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:41 am to NC_Tigah
quote:So you think federal agents are sadists with nothing better to do than feel up some older lady?
It was approved to justify a thuggish home raid, scaring hell out of the occupants, and gain ability to either physically embarrass/abuse occupants including wives/children present or worse.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:42 am to NC_Tigah
quote:Yet all they did was frisk an occupant
It was approved to justify a thuggish home raid, scaring hell out of the occupants, and gain ability to either physically embarrass/abuse occupants including wives/children present or worse.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:42 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
bullshite!
If that were the case, all they needed to do was show up during the day and knock on the door
Lol
No, that is not how it works when investigating criminal conduct, certainly not on every case, particularly when money laundering and conspiracy against the United States is involved.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:43 am to Willie Stroker
quote:
Do you remember when Hillary Clinton was indicted for a criminal offense and a search warrant seeking more than emails was signed by a federal judge? Neither do I.
Of course you don't, because no federal grand jury was ever empaneled, even though the fricking Director of the FBI said on national TV "she did break the law" and if you are too stupid to understand that Comey did say Hillary broke the law, but that no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute, he did NOT say Hillary didn't break the law, then don't even bother responding.
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:44 am to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
quote:Zero. Zip. There are a dozen legitimate reasons for an international business man to have a burner phone.
How about the newly acquired cell phone in someone else's name. Any red flags there?
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:46 am to Navytiger74
Seems all a bit heavy handed no?
Frisk wife in bed.
House arrest.
Ankle bracelets?
Frisk wife in bed.
House arrest.
Ankle bracelets?
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:48 am to goatmilker
quote:
Seems all a bit heavy handed no?
Frisk wife in bed. No
House arrest.
Ankle bracelets? He's a huge flight risk
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:48 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The nitwit also approved immediate house arrest and gis ankle monitoring.
She is considering now whether Manafort and Gates are guilty, thus needing to remain under house arrest, until they can prove their innocence in Apr 2018.
Unbelievable.
She released them on bond under conditions not uncommon for people with significant foreign ties and the means to flee.
She is not now considering whether Manafort and Gates are guilty. That’s a much later phase. The burden is not on them to prove their innocence. What led you to believe that?
Posted on 11/3/17 at 10:48 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
It was approved for the same reason it was requested.
It had not one damn thing to do with any sudden destruction of evidence.
It was approved to justify a thuggish home raid, scaring hell out of the occupants, and gain ability to either physically embarrass/abuse occupants including wives/children present or worse.
You are not very smart are you? Have you ever applied for a search warrant? I have , thousands of times, you have to put a valid reason on the request to get it approved. I mean thee's an actual fricking record. "I want to intimidate the witness" isn't going to fly and no judge is going to approve that request.
However, "we fear the defendant will destroy records if he has warning" is a valid reason that will pass muster with a judge . So even if you believed the real reason the FBI wanted a no knock warrant was to harrass an old lady, the question was "why did the judge approve of it?" To which I answered correctly, because the FBI made the case that there were records that Manafort would destroy if he had advance warning.
In fact, this is exactly what should have been done in regards to Hillary's email server, and other electronic devices, the FBI should have shown up at 6 am and kicked down the door and confiscated everything before she had a chance to wipe anything with a cloth, but instead they actually gave everyone months to make sure they destroyed evidence before they looked at any devices.
Sometimes it's best just to acknowledge that you have no actual knowledge of how things works and thus acknowledge that your opinion isn't as valid as the opinion of those who do.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News