You are not logged in. Please register or login.

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 136 

Re: Current Events Thread

slashsfro wrote:

I'm just going to assume that he (Trump) did some really shady shit that forced the FBI/Justice Dept to do this.  I mean what's more likely:  the FBI is "outta get Trump" or that Trump had sensitive info documents and wanted to sell them.

This is the real conspiracy shit people on the left want to ignore.  It doesn't matter that we now know the FBI lied about Russia Gate and that Clinton's campaign lawyer is the one who personally handed over the dossier to the FBI.  It doesn't matter that we have video evidence of the raid on Roger Stone, and now Mar-A-Largo.  No, he's not a normal citizen.  He's a former President and has the sole authority to declassify any document he wants with no input or consideration from others.  Now contrast that with Hillary Clinton, whom we know (this isn't even up for dispute) held classified material she wasn't authorized to have on her private server, deleted all the evidence after a house subpoena, and whose engagement with the FBI was an unrecorded/undocumented conversation where they let her go.

Only if you're a hyper partisan do you look at recent events and dismiss anyone else as a nut and suggest "what's more likely:  the FBI is "outta get Trump" or that Trump had sensitive info documents and wanted to sell them."  You think Trump wants to sell documents, but after FBI agents were fired and charged with federal crimes, after Snowden and everything else, you just outright dismiss any political animus and go back to the Russian truther nonsense.  Trump wanted to sell documents.  Give me a fucking break.

As I said, how you vote is going to determine how you see this.  You need to look no further than Slashfro creating his own conspiracy that he probably thinks makes perfect sense to see this claim is self evident. 

"No one is above the law" as countless citations are shown of people being above the law.  You guys are gonna be really unhappy when this escalates to physical violence.  Vegan soyboys in black garb aren't going to be the victors standing in the end.

slashsfro
 Rep: 52 

Re: Current Events Thread

slashsfro wrote:

Complain all you want about some conspiracy or left wing bullshit you want.  The fact is that no other president has been hit with this Republican or Democrat, ever.

The Justice Department official who oversaw the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified records says there’s simply no comparing the search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence to the case against the former secretary of State.

“People sling these cases around to suit their political agenda but every case has to stand on its own circumstances,” said David Laufman, who led the Justice Department’s counterintelligence section until 2018 and is now a partner at the firm Wiggin and Dana.

Laufman has the credentials to judge the severity of these matters. In addition to the Clinton case, he managed the investigation of David Petraeus, the former general and CIA director who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for mishandling classified material. CNN reported that one of the DOJ officials involved in the Trump investigation is his immediate successor.

“For the department to pursue a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago tells me that the quantum and quality of the evidence they were reciting — in a search warrant and affidavit that an FBI agent swore to — was likely so pulverizing in its force as to eviscerate any notion that the search warrant and this investigation is politically motivated,” he said.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/0 … s-00050691

I do think they should reveal what the search warrant was for.

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 136 

Re: Current Events Thread

I’m not saying the search was invalid. I have no idea. But you’re suggesting Trump was going to sell classified information. That is an outrageous claim not based on any evidence. My point was that despite objective evidence of the FBI acting inappropriately, you’re choosing to dismiss any possibility this might be improper, and go a step further by suggesting Trump did this to sell classified information.

You don’t see how outrageous, partisan and conspiracy theory drivel such a claim is?

misterID
 Rep: 473 

Re: Current Events Thread

misterID wrote:

They should have definitely explained things. Even a press conference if they felt a raid on a former president was warranted.

Btw, they’re now trying to get the media and dems to stop calling it a “raid.” It’s a little too late  for that!

misterID
 Rep: 473 

Re: Current Events Thread

misterID wrote:



neutral

Randall Flagg
 Rep: 136 

Re: Current Events Thread

misterID wrote:



neutral


If Garland didn't know and Biden wasn't given a courtesy heads up, that is outrageous.  People act like getting a warrant is all the justification you need, but in the same mindset argue Breonna Taylor was murdered.  How many wacky rulings has a judge made, and because agents found a federal judge willing to sign off on a warrant against Trump, no further evaluation is needed. 

If true, this is truly a rogue action, and shame on the agents who are now putting Garland, Biden and Democrats in a toxic political situation.  We're talking about the National Archives here, no top secret blue prints to a working antimatter engine and warpdrive.

misterID
 Rep: 473 

Re: Current Events Thread

misterID wrote:

What makes me think this is believable is that if it were purely political, there’s no way they would have done this at the same time they just passed major legislation. It totally dwarfed that and ripped it from the headlines.

slashsfro
 Rep: 52 

Re: Current Events Thread

slashsfro wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:

I’m not saying the search was invalid. I have no idea. But you’re suggesting Trump was going to sell classified information. That is an outrageous claim not based on any evidence. My point was that despite objective evidence of the FBI acting inappropriately, you’re choosing to dismiss any possibility this might be improper, and go a step further by suggesting Trump did this to sell classified information.

You don’t see how outrageous, partisan and conspiracy theory drivel such a claim is?

Ok, I'll own up to that part, speculating about Trump. 

I generally dismiss the part about the FBI acting inappropriately/screwing up because generally speaking I have to tendency to believe in the competence of people and in this case, organizations.  It has probably happened a few times in the past, but in this case where there is history being made, I tend to think that they must have some hard solid evidence/justification for this.  Because this is generally not done.

LOL, there's no way that Garland didn't know this at all.  That's a bad excuse.  Not even I can buy that.

Axl S
 Rep: 112 

Re: Current Events Thread

Axl S wrote:

So Garland did know about it and personally signed off on it.

Him saying Biden only found out when the media reported about it. I’d be shocked if that’s true. That’s said DOJ are supposed to have independence, he strictly doesn’t need to know. Still doubt there’s some conspiracy involving the WH and Dem top brass to get Trump - as mentioned by me and others, this has killed all feel good news on passing the IRA and it makes no sense politically to do that.

Also, nuclear documents! Why the hell does he have those?! Got to upgrade slashsfro theory to unlikely but plausible.

We’ll know things definitively soon.

I’d be shocked if Garland bets his legacy on this high profile & high risk approach for just document retrieval though. That would be just be a stupid thing to do. So, makes me suspect there’s something else here.

Axl S
 Rep: 112 

Re: Current Events Thread

Axl S wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:

We're talking about the National Archives here, no top secret blue prints to a working antimatter engine and warpdrive.


Want to walk this back? 16

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB