- 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
What more needs to be determined Re: "legality" of Trump storing documents?
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:15 pm
This is where I get lost in this whole thing.
The FBI/Justice Dept think whatever Trump was doing with these documents was "illegal" and justified the need to barge in and confiscate them all.
They do so.
Now, we're told it's still an "ongoing investigation."
Looking at this affidavit (or at least what I can see of it), isn't it basically an simple either/or situation based on their interpretation of "legality"?
Either what he was doing in holding these was illegal or it isn't (again, based on their interpretation).
What else is necessary to "investigate" with regard to any of this?
The FBI/Justice Dept think whatever Trump was doing with these documents was "illegal" and justified the need to barge in and confiscate them all.
They do so.
Now, we're told it's still an "ongoing investigation."
Looking at this affidavit (or at least what I can see of it), isn't it basically an simple either/or situation based on their interpretation of "legality"?
Either what he was doing in holding these was illegal or it isn't (again, based on their interpretation).
What else is necessary to "investigate" with regard to any of this?
This post was edited on 8/26/22 at 12:16 pm
13
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:16 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
What else is necessary to "investigate" with regard to any of this?
They are still digging, trying their best to find something or make up the next thing...
This raid was/is a distraction...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:31 pm to The Maj
I think the raid was fishing.
They want to find anything to leak to the press
They want to find anything to leak to the press
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:33 pm to Roaad
quote:
I think the raid was fishing.
That and to recover the Russia FISA documents. Trump had them all I believe. They definitely don't want it leaking how shady that whole deal was.
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:38 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
This is where I get lost in this whole thing.
The FBI/Justice Dept think whatever Trump was doing with these documents was "illegal" and justified the need to barge in and confiscate them all.
They do so.
Now, we're told it's still an "ongoing investigation."
Looking at this affidavit (or at least what I can see of it), isn't it basically an simple either/or situation based on their interpretation of "legality"?
Either what he was doing in holding these was illegal or it isn't (again, based on their interpretation).
What else is necessary to "investigate" with regard to any of this?
honest question... would you still have this same sentiment if the FPOTUS in question were a Democrat? would you still ask about the legality of the search, and why the need for the raid?
like i said, just an honest to god question... no "gotcha" attempt, but i'm really interested in what the consensus would be if the scenario was happening to the other party... i doubt i get a real answer, but i'd really like to...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:40 pm to chRxis
quote:
scenario was happening to the other party...
Happening just like this? I would be just as appalled as I am right now...
The funny thing is, there were plenty of opportunities for raids similar to this for prominent Dems but they never seemed to happen... Just magically went away...
Does that bother you?
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:41 pm to chRxis
quote:
honest question... would you still have this same sentiment if the FPOTUS in question were a Democrat? would you still ask about the legality of the search, and why the need for the raid?
I can say anything, but it doesn't really matter because it's NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.
I don't know what my "sentiment" has to do with the question posed here, though.
The point here is, Trump was alleged to have done something "illegal" which supposedly justified this raid. What more needs to be determined to charge him with a crime or not at this point?
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:42 pm to chRxis
quote:
honest question... would you still have this same sentiment if the FPOTUS in question were a Democrat? would you still ask about the legality of the search, and why the need for the raid?
We wouldn’t have to, because the government agencies weren’t weaponized against political opposition under Trump. If they were, people here would have been very vocal about their disagreement. However, this will backfire and I don’t think many who would have been appalled previously will care much when this bites the dems back.
Let me ask you an honest question, are you ok with raiding a political opponents personal residence over documents that the government already reviewed?
This post was edited on 8/26/22 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:43 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Trump wasn't subject to any security clearance.
HE WAS THE SECURITY CLEARANCE.
Everything ay MAR was declassified if he says so.
HE WAS THE SECURITY CLEARANCE.
Everything ay MAR was declassified if he says so.
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:45 pm to The Maj
quote:
Does that bother you?
bother? not really... shite doesn't affect my personal life in any way, on a day to day basis, and i try not to get caught up in faux outrage just for the sake of faux outrage...
i do think that the rules should be applied evenly to both sides, so i guess that answers your question...
quote:
there were plenty of opportunities for raids similar to this for prominent Dems
improperly squirreled away confidential/top secret documents? not sure i remember this happening with any prominent Democrats, but feel free to let me in on this, if this did occur...
and i believe you may be as appalled as you say.... but you'd be in the minority... so many others would be very hypocritical and would be seeking blood, just as much as the Democrats seem to be doing right now
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:46 pm to loogaroo
quote:
Trump wasn't subject to any security clearance.
HE WAS THE SECURITY CLEARANCE.
Everything ay MAR was declassified if he says so.
This is how I interpret the law as well. It's obviously not our our DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE does, though.
I can't figure out what more needs to be determined at this point APPLYING THEIR INTERPRETATION. He was either in violation of it or not. What more is needed to charge with a crime under their interpretation?
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:46 pm to chRxis
quote:
improperly squirreled away confidential/top secret documents?
That didn’t happen here, either. Just say it. You are ok with the government going after those that you disagree with politically.
This post was edited on 8/26/22 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:47 pm to AUstar
quote:
That and to recover the Russia FISA documents.
Does anyone believe if he had those they would be the only copy?
All of the photos I've taken of my family the past 20+ years have been digital, so I have them backed up probably 10 different devices so in case one goes down I have backups.
One can only assume he'd be even more diligent, yes?
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:47 pm to chRxis
quote:
improperly squirreled away confidential/top secret documents? not sure i remember this happening with any prominent Democrats, but feel free to let me in on this, if this did occur...
Hillary Clinton... try to spin it how you wish...
Who was the guy that stuffed documents in his pants? Name escapes me...
quote:
but you'd be in the minority...
I doubt it...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:47 pm to chRxis
quote:
improperly squirreled away confidential/top secret documents? not sure i remember this happening with any prominent Democrats, but feel free to let me in on this, if this did occur...
and i believe you may be as appalled as you say.... but you'd be in the minority... so many others would be very hypocritical and would be seeking blood, just as much as the Democrats seem to be doing right now
This is a meaningless exercise, as I suspected.
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:47 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Let me ask you an honest question, are you ok with raiding a political opponents personal residence over documents that the government already reviewed?
i'm OK with raiding a person who very well could have committed a crime, regardless of political affiliation or lack thereof, if it's deemed to be warranted, such as the case here...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:49 pm to chRxis
quote:
i'm OK with raiding a person who very well could have committed a crime
Every living human being "very well could have committed a crime."
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:49 pm to chRxis
quote:
such as the case here...
Really, you have seen enough evidence to justify raiding a former POTUS for the first time in history...
Would you care to share the specifics with the board since you are so well read in...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:49 pm to The Maj
quote:
Hillary Clinton... try to spin it how you wish...
they ABSOLUTELY should have investigated the shite out of that bitch... 9 out of 10 she was guilty as frick
quote:
Who was the guy that stuffed documents in his pants? Name escapes me...
don't recall this, so dunno...
Posted on 8/26/22 at 12:50 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Every living human being "very well could have committed a crime."
correct... EVERYONE is subject to the law... including Trump.... glad we agree on this...
not sure why you didn't include the rest of my statement... "where it's warranted"
Page 1 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News