- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
We got him!
Posted on 8/12/22 at 3:50 pm
Posted on 8/12/22 at 3:50 pm
A dispute over National Archive documents calls for a politically motivated FBI raid on a former President and soon to be Presidential candidate. Man what a miscalculation on their end.
What an absolute gift to the Trump campaign. The biggest loser in all of this is the Republican primary field.
What an absolute gift to the Trump campaign. The biggest loser in all of this is the Republican primary field.
7
Posted on 8/12/22 at 3:50 pm to Stidham8
They tried to get EVERY single document under the Trump presidency. Talk about fishing expedition.
Posted on 8/12/22 at 3:51 pm to Stidham8
Posted on 8/12/22 at 3:52 pm to Stidham8
Again
Posted on 8/12/22 at 4:48 pm to themunch
So much for that narrow scope thing by Garland…. Liar!
Posted on 8/12/22 at 4:56 pm to Stidham8
So The Guardian claims he’s “under investigation”, Newsmaxx says they’re “looking to charge”.
Anything more official than this, or still mostly speculation?
Anything more official than this, or still mostly speculation?
Posted on 8/12/22 at 5:00 pm to Stidham8
Will never happen.
Posted on 8/12/22 at 5:16 pm to Stidham8
Garland had best find something actually damning or else manufacture it, otherwise there should be shitloads of FBI officials heading to jail over this (including Garland himself).
Posted on 8/12/22 at 5:20 pm to Bard
You would think.
Problems are that the FBI circles around to save its shitheads and the DC courts and juries will refuse to convict.
Problems are that the FBI circles around to save its shitheads and the DC courts and juries will refuse to convict.
Posted on 8/12/22 at 5:22 pm to Stidham8
Not to mention the flood of orange votes crossing the Rio Grande.
Dems have legit fricked the pooch bigly.
Dems have legit fricked the pooch bigly.
Posted on 8/12/22 at 5:34 pm to teke184
quote:
Problems are that the FBI circles around to save its shitheads and the DC courts and juries will refuse to convict.
True, but the problem is after things like this happen the first time it becomes easier and easier to justify similar subsequent events. As that becomes easier, moving that line of what's acceptable moves further and further back.
Each movement creates pressure and eventually that pressure pushes back. Hard. I don't think it would be a civil war, but such blatant and obvious partisanship in the justice system could well push more stated into jumping in on a Convention of the States and such a Convention could (theoretically) do something like completely abolish any/all federal law enforcement agencies.
Posted on 8/12/22 at 6:58 pm to Stidham8
"CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES:
ARTICLE. II.
SECTION.1.
...
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
Nowhere in the constitution does it mention that congress can add additional requirements, or that it is necessary to please the democrats.
ARTICLE. II.
SECTION.1.
...
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
Nowhere in the constitution does it mention that congress can add additional requirements, or that it is necessary to please the democrats.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News