- This topic has 110 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 9 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
If they are so sure that Trump is disliked by the masses and doesn’t deserve to be president, why must they find every way to besmirch him and terrorize him into staying away?
Saying that he’s disliked by the masses is propaganda. It’s a classic example of The Big Lie. They keep repeating it with the hope that people will eventually believe it.
2cents: just because there were a couple of biased people who hated Trump working on the case, it doesn’t mean the investigation was politically motivated. They were removed from the case. There are racist cops out there. It doesn’t mean that every time they bust a black person they do so for racist reasons. Last I saw, Roger Stone got sentenced to prison for lying about. . . .Russian interference and Trump’s knowledge of coordination with wikileaks! Others got in trouble too for related things. Why would Stone and others lie and tamper with witnesses if everything is kosher?
Similarly here, why won’t Trump release warrant to the public if he has nothing to hide?
Again, the crux of disagreement seems to stem from your starting point that every governmental official is corrupt or biased that they can’t be trusted to do their duties. Thus the rush to assume conspiracies. With your implicit biases, Trump can do no wrong. You have fallen for this trick. And with every conspiracy conservative media machine manufactures in their headlines, they never bother telling you when they are disproven.In the time it takes him to draft one of his “tweetlach” on his new Emes social media site, Trump could clear up all this stuff by releasing a copy of the search warrant and explain why he has refused to return the relevant documents after months of denial that he still held any classified materials. If the DOJ was wrong and there were no classified docs, than the Republicans are entirely within their political rights to yell gevalt.
er – so as I assumed you have nothing. You made some rude allegations about me sticking my head in the sand, not checking for info, getting stuff from conservative media talking out of turn, and more that I’m too disinterested to scroll back to find. I asked for sources for your rude thoughtless false accusations and you have nothing.
So here’s a tip. When you make false accusations toward someone that you can’t back up because you were just spewing, the response should be, “gosh, I was wrong. I actually have no sources for those accusations. I retract my mud slinging”.
Here’s an even better tip, if you have no clue – don’t bother saying it
Akuperma
“Ambiguity as to whether a crime even occurred would result in the search warrant be thrown out ”
Again, you don’t know what crime the warrant alleges (correct me if I’m wrong) I sure don’t . That is all I am saying.
You can certainly argue, as others have, that you suspect (hope?) the justice department did a sloppy job that they don’t actually have any “probable cause” or that they otherwise messed up in some way, or even that the alleged crime is so petty to make the whole thing blatantly partisan. I get that.
But at this point all you have is a suspicion (hope?) nothing more. You don’t know that the fourth amendment was violated. You just hope it was.Again correct me if I am wrong
Just in the DOJ is asking the courts to unseal the warrant due to ‘public interest’. What ya betting that our Xpresident says no. It could hamper his continued fundraising if the warrant is released.
er,
“2cents: just because there were a couple of biased people who hated Trump working on the case, it doesn’t mean the investigation was politically motivated.”
Correct, but that was not the basis of the claim. We now have objective evidence that the origin of the investigation was politically motivated and not based on actual interference concerns.
This is why I stated, that the fact that warrants were obtained does not yet convince me that this was a legitimate investigation.
It seems that more information will be revealed, which will make us smarter.
er,
“Again, the crux of disagreement seems to stem from your starting point that every governmental official is corrupt or biased that they can’t be trusted to do their duties. Thus the rush to assume conspiracies.”
I am not sure how you deduced that.
All I said is that until we learn more, everything is speculation and there is precedence with regards to creating illegitimate investigations against Trump with the sole purpose to contain his political future.
er – again, you made false and rude statements about me and my character. You can’t back it up and won’t retract. Stop rambling on about irrelevant points, either man up and admit you had no idea what you were talking about or come up with a quote.
Or just be quiet.So now there is a story running in WaPo
that the classified documents’ Trump took from the White House were top-secret “nuclear-related” memos etc. (aka pros and cons of dropping a nuclear bomb in the Gulf-of Mexico to assure that Hurricane Dorian extended its path beyond the Weather Bureau’s official forecast and hit Alabama as per his Sharpie-drawn falsified map in 2019)This sounds like a high stake poker. We have to presume that DOJ knee how public this going to be, so they got to have good reasons.. Trump also knows what he has and doesn’t want to get in real legal trouble for no reason because of some nuclear codes that he will get back soon anyway. So something else is playing out. For example,. Trump knows he doesn’t have anything there and he sends a fake informant to the feds to help him launch the campaign and clear away the competitors. Or/and bidenistas are misjudging reaction same way they did in Kabul and Ukraine.. for example, yesterday they were asking to open the warrant saying; see T himself is afraid. That sounded as a brilliant political move by supposed career politicians.. for less than 24 hours
Note a worrisome new argument by a former supreme court wannabe: we have to talk about the investigation because the other side is saying dad things about our department. This is more like French or Russian revolution: you talk about the government, we are opening your files.
2cents:
“I am not sure how you deduced that.” Was just speculation based on posts. That’s why I said it “seems.”“We now have objective evidence that the origin of the investigation was politically motivated.” My understanding is the Feds didn’t learn about the dossier until a couple months after investigation was initiated. If there’s any links you could provide me to see evidence, I am interested.
GH,
“So now there is a story running in WaPo”
I would assume that most people by now know that any stories are just that, stories. At this point, we don’t have many facts one or another.
2cents…..There were highly classified docs removed from Mar a Lago. Trump may claim he retroactively “declassified” everything he stole from the WH. Yes, he could have declassified those docs when he was in the WH and followed a simple procedure to do so. There is no evidence he did.
Argh the Xpresident rather than release the warrant is refusing and ‘permitting’ the DOJ to release the material. I guess he needs time to work on the spin.
GH – we know there might be. How do you know that there is. And I heard possibly classified, I heard nothing about highly classified. Is this sourced or are you “paraphrasing”?
Syag: The warrant and the “inventory” of documents seized will be released later this afternoon. I’m hoping they don’t redact the descriptive information.
GH – There were highly classified docs removed from Mar a Lago.
Syag – really? Do you have a source for that or are you paraphrasing?
GH – The warrant will be released this afternoon
You not only didn’t answer my question, you didn’t even pretend to. No offense, and I mean that, but this happens over and over. People who hate trump say whatever they want, whether it’s true or not, and if asked for verification that it is actually an honest statement we get ghosted. Or yelled at for being fox news aholics. Both are just diversionary tactics. Yes, it is better than lying but cmon man!
The above is not directed at GH. This is the way it is here with many of the bidenistas and totally with the left media.
them: “Hunters laptop is russian disinformation!”
the public: “Is that founded? legitimate? verified?”
them: “The weather is gonna be really hot this week!!”Backstage whisper – Oh no, the laptop has been verified as Hunters and there is damaging stuff linked to Joe. Let me do a write up for the 5:00 news….
News: Hurricane season is upon us, the virus is still here and…umm…something, whatever, a sale on laptops worth hunting for….
democrats in the CR: oh you trumpers still think that laptop story has teeth? It was verified as Russian disinformation signed by 20 agents! And don’t tell me otherwise.
it wouldn’t even rate as a bad comedy, and yet you are actively writing new pages every day.
The search warrant and inventory of seized items are now avail online at a variety of outlets including YWN.
Oh thank Hashem!!!
My question was on the honesty and integrity of the people complaining about the lack of honesty and integrity. And the lack of ability to admit that you make stuff up put it out there and pretend you didn’t.
I used to play a bit of poker. Our Xpresident has a ‘tell’ I’ve observed over the years. He usually accuses others of behaviors that he is in fact guilty of.
That’s a Rashi.
If trump used the FBI to go against Hillary or against Biden through his son I think the democrats would be ok with it
Oh wait, wasn’t that what the second impeachment was about? That he was going against a political rival?
Coffee – count to 20 and you will have in front of you a reason why you are wrong (and evidence that you heard that on fox news) and what the REAL story is…
I’m always so curious how they know which is the REAL story if they are both from partisan news sites (there aren’t any non partisan ones left)
Litmus test – waiting for the Declaration Experts who have been keeping us so very up to date on everything Trump to give over the latest find even if it may not quite be in their favor.
Syag,
I don’t follow
Wasn’t the reason for the impeachment trial “quid pro quo”
Not sure what you’re talking about
Sorry, it can’t be the second one that was for Jan 6
Comic Material.
All damaging evidence was planted.
No classified material found.
The FBI is corrupt.
The judge has an agenda.
It’s unprecedented.
Our democracy is at risk.
This is third world activity.
Change the archaic laws.
Impeach the head of the DOJ.
If they just asked nicely, they would have received the information.
There was “zero justification” for obtaining a search warrant.Depending on your political view I am either referring to mar-a-lago or hunter but it could not be both. (why not?)
Guilty
Guilty
GuiltyDepending on your political view I am either referring to mar-a-lago or hunter but it could not be both. (why not ?)
Well, litmus test failed.
And see one of the many above posts regarding diversionary responses.Jackk- having lots of trouble deciphering your post but I think I got your point. Here’s the response: most of us have no problem with both being true.
Your turnHmm
Nothing
So odd.
There is so much going on but the resident updaters lost their tongues.Syag, they are waiting for the second shoe to drop before pounding. Whether Trump was imminently planning to send nuclear codes to Putin via alpha bank basement server or not.
Aaq – not sure what you mean. We were getting steady reports on the inquiry and the raid with lots of supporting commentary and suddenly, when they may have done something questionable….dead stop. This is not the first time this happened when they have to report a ‘glitch’
When confronted with the fact that under statute and clear language in the CFR an outgoing President (nor anyone acting on his behalf) cannot simply “remove” government-documents from the WH and take them home regardless of whether or not they were “declassified” (in his own mind), Trump’s lawyer was at first silent for about 15 seconds and then changed the subject to Obama’s 30 million documents at his home in Chicago. When then confronted with the fact that those 30 million documents are under the control of the national archives at a secure government warehouse, the lawyer quickly pivoted “what about Clinton” and then offered the most bizarre argument that somehow “all the documents” taken from Mar a Lago were “privileged” communications w/o explaining what “privilege” would apply to a President’s communications with foreign leaders, top-secret national security intercepts, etc.
Same game over and over again. Deny, obfuscate, change the story, accuse everyone else of having done the same thing, attribute it all to those out to get you, rinse, wash repeat.Oh Baruch Hashem you are well! I was legit davening for you.
The change in presentation is interesting. In your favor it’s facts, otherwise its narrative and repetitious. And jackk still doesn’t know the laptop was verified. Cmon guys, don’t jump off the roller coaster before the end. Whether or not Trump falls, I am plotzing to hear the response when some of trumps accusations are proven true.
Meanwhile can we talk about something more interesting? Like favorite childhood memories.
Gadol, you can’t appeal to history of “same gave over” with a straight face, can you? We had about a 100 of claims and impeachments, each of them outrageous to begin with and then disappearing, as Syag is describing. This, unfortunately, desensitizes all of us to any kind of aveiros. Please ask the guys on your side to be more selective and pursue only the most promising leads. Not only this is tiring but also destroys the moral fabric of the country.
(Not) incidentally, Alan Dershowitz is already out with an OpEd in WSJ making a good argument why “what about Hillary” sentiment should not be laughed at: if we have punishing laws applied selectively, the country will be destroyed. And he brings some examples there. He then politely requests Mr. Garland to explain in more detail what exactly makes this search warrant different from all other cases. See there for legalese.
I wonder how many people are aware that the judge who signed off on the warrant had previously refused himself from a Trump/Hilary case and what the legal ramifications are.
AAQ: I read Dershowitz’s op ed and rather convoluted effort to bring back Hillary into the debate. The FBI/Comey intrusion into the 2016 election with his 11th hour news conference on the “server” and the “emails) was a key factor in her loss (along with her being a generally unlikable candidate). The facts of the Clinton cases, whether you agree with the tactical decision to get a warrant or not, were materially different from a legal perspective and the operative regs than Trump simply stuffing boxes with classified or top secret documents and hauling them home and storing them in his bedroom at a public country club and in the basement next to the basement storage room for the bar (albeit with an “extra lock” requested by the government attorneys trying to recover those documents after his lawyers lied about even having them).
And then, once again, there’s the fact that that isn’t what he did or where he put them. This is the danger of gaslighting. Trump could be 100% wrong but the story always has to be changed, embellished, distorted and readers are dumb enough to soak it up. If Trump is a criminal, why not just tell it like it actually is. Why hide it deep in journalistic gaslighting?
Thanks, I appreciate the rewrite. It gives me actual information to look out for and to compare to the legal reports..
Syag: All this is just Act 29, scene 7 of an ongoing screenplay that seems to be written in real time by some former writers for West Wing with a dark sense of humor nibbling on hallucinogenic mushrooms with a questionable hashgacha. The naive Dems keep thinking that somehow THIS will be the straw that broke the camel’s back and finally result in Trump being skewered. The even more gullible MAGAs (formerly known as Republicans) keep gulping the cool aid and making believe Trump’s actions are “normal” and allowing themselves to be shafted (w/o the benefit of preparation X) and accepting this as the “new normal” for their leader. Even if showing early signs of dementia, at least Biden kept his promise to be “boring” since I really believe Garland is running this investigation w/o any WH input.
“Even if showing early signs of dementia, at least Biden kept his promise to be “boring” since I really believe Garland is running this investigation w/o any WH input.“
I have a bridge to sell you GH and I’ll even give it to you for half off
Gadol,
I am referring to Dersh not because his opinions are absolute but because, contrary to yours and mine, his opinions are based on legal knowledge. So, if he is (politely) asking to clarify a need for a raid rather than milder legal approach, there is something there.I personally don’t want to go into eternal whatabouts “but” 🙂 Hillary and haverah clearly stalled investigation, refused access to hardware, deleted evidence, and were treated nicely during polite meetings with authorities. Before the server, you may want to read IG report on Hillary’s state department that mentions that unfortunately participants left government employment and can not be compelled to testify to answer all IG questions. Oh, well.
Please be careful to separate “President” and “White House”. It is entirely possible to have “White Hose input” without the President being aware. This was documented that during dramatic BBBBB negotiations last year, there was some Friday-to-Monday flare-up when Manchin refused to previously agreed something and was met with an inflexible “White House” position. Somewhere Monday afternoon (?), the President became available again and expressed his (different) opinion.
Gadol > simply stuffing boxes with classified
Look, sometimes you need to appreciate where someone comes from a treat him accordingly. According to my private sources, there will be a long article about this in New Yorker tabloid in a week. Think about someone who became non-drinking President, seemingly being nice to his wives. you say it is a low bar, but then think that he comes apparently from 3 generations of drunkards and wife-beaters, his father was working with mafiosi and mamash murderers, stealing money from war effort, similar cousins. Even trying to make his siblings and children keep sober … There is something humane here that we need to appreciate even if there are some quirks in character. Don’t judge a person until you get to his place (I don’t know whether you are running for President or not). Wait for the paper to hit the stands and read it.
” There is something humane here that we need to appreciate even if there are some quirks in character….”
For some of us, we are dealing with actions and attributes that are so far beyond what might reasonably be considered “quirks in character” that its unlikely we will ever find common ground. Both sides view another 4 years of Trump as an existential issue for our country with no compromise possible. My often expressed wish is for BOTH sides to find new candidates without the baggage of the geriatric incumbents. Hope springs eternal
“renders inadmissable as evidence any and all documents seized pursuant to the search warrant”
Not true anymore. The conservative courts have now ruled that if the police believed that the warrant was valid the evidence is admissible. It is known as the “good faith exception”.
“I don’t like Donald Trump, but…”
but what?
that he moved the embassy? whooppee doo.
that he sent arms to Israel? hasn’t every president done that since Truman (by the way, why do Jews love Truman so. Didn’t he put an embargo on arms to Israel, when Israel needed them most?)
that he got along with Netanyahu? do heads of states have to love each other?
that……“I don’t like Donald Trump, but…”
but what?
But moishekapoieh doesn’t read what the thread is about just the title
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.