Mr Trump - All discussion here

[Slinny 278]

11 hours ago, Longcol said:

A mate of Algly and Gingerly?

 

 

 

Oh him ,

[Magilla 510]

13 hours ago, L00b said:

In other news, Paul Manafort finally admitted yesterday, to passing data to FSB agent Kilimnik.

Is it a witch hunt, if you find witches?

 

Quote

Completely fortuitous, I’m sure 😏

Irony of ironies, after all the accusations against Hillary and demanding she be jailed for her handling of classified material...Trump changed the law in 2018 to stiffen the penalty for the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents from one year to five...

 

...turning it into a felony offense

Edited August 10, 2022 by Magilla

[trastrick 866]

The like the uncivil war is heating up.

 

Here's a take from the Wall Street Journal, (no friend of Trump)

 

In case you get hit by a paywall, I've taken the liberty to post the full article:

 

The FBI’s Dangerous Trump Search

Merrick Garland is taking the U.S. down a perilous path.

 

"Monday’s unannounced Federal Bureau of Investigation search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home isn’t a moment for anyone to cheer. The Justice Department is unleashing political furies it can’t control and may not understand, and the risks for the department and the country are as great as they are for Mr. Trump.

"As everyone knows by now, an FBI law-enforcement action of this kind against a former American President is unprecedented. Monday’s search needed a judicial warrant in service of probable cause in a criminal probe. The Justice Department has provided few details beyond what has been leaked to reporters, so it is hard to judge what the FBI was looking for.

 

"The media leaks say the search is related to potential mishandling of classified documents or violations of the Presidential Records Act. If that is true, then the raid looks like prosecutorial overkill and a bad mistake. Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump’s disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding.

 

"Mr. Trump has already returned 15 boxes of documents, but the National Archives wants to know if the former President retained classified material he shouldn’t have. This is what appears to have triggered the FBI search, but it’s far from clear why this couldn’t be settled cooperatively, or at most with a subpoena.

"Didn’t someone at Justice point out that a search in this case would draw comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information before her 2016 presidential campaign? She was never prosecuted, as Mr. Trump was quick to point out. Unless Mr. Trump’s offense involves a serious risk to national security, half of America may see the Trump search as an example of unequal justice.

"This may not be the full FBI story. Multiple media reports suggest that Justice has opened a grand jury probe into the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and Mr. Trump may be a target of that investigation. The House committee investigating Jan. 6 has been cheering for a prosecution, and the political and media pressure is intense on Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict Mr. Trump. The FBI search may be a fishing expedition to find evidence related to Jan. 6.

On the public evidence so far, a Jan. 6 indictment would be a legal stretch. Political responsibility isn’t the same as criminal liability. In our view, the evidence would have to show that Mr. Trump was criminally complicit in that day’s violence at the Capitol.

 

"Given its inherently political nature, the burden of proof is especially high for indicting a former President, all the more so for an Administration of the opposition party. The evidence had better be overwhelming—not merely enough to convince a 12-person jury in the District of Columbia, but enough to convince a majority of the American public.

Then there is the fraught history between Mr. Trump and the FBI and Justice. The Russia collusion probe was a fiasco of FBI abuse of process and public deception. Current FBI director Christopher Wray was Mr. Trump’s choice to succeed the disastrous James Comey, but the bureau still has a serious credibility problem.

 

"That the Mar-a-Lago raid occurred only about 90 days from a national election also increases the political suspicion. Democrats want to keep Mr. Trump front and center in the midterm campaign, which is why the Jan. 6 committee is continuing into the autumn.

 

"Anyone who thinks an indictment and trial of Mr. Trump would go smoothly is in for a rude surprise. Millions of his supporters will see this as vindication of his charges against the “deep state,” and who knows how they will respond. Has Mr. Garland considered all of this?

"Worse in the long term is the precedent being set and the payback it is likely to inspire. Once the Rubicon of prosecuting a former President has been crossed—especially if the alleged offense and evidence are less than compelling—every future President will be a target. William Barr, Mr. Trump’s second AG, wisely resisted pressure to indict political actors without a very strong case. The next Republican AG will not be as scrupulous.

 

"Democrats may also be wrong in their calculation about how a prosecution would affect Mr. Trump’s future. The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President, if only to vindicate himself. He will run as a martyr, and even Republicans who want to turn the page on the former President may be repelled by what they see as a political prosecution.

 

"All of this risks compounding the baleful pattern of the last six years. Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response. Polarization increases, and public faith in institutions and the peaceful settlement of political difference erodes further.

 

The FBI search on Mr. Trump suggests that Mr. Garland may be committed to pursuing and indicting Mr. Trump. If so, he is taking the country on a perilous road. There is much ruin in a nation, but no one should want to test the limits of that ruin in America".

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-dangerous-donald-trump-search-mar-a-lago-merrick-garland-justice-department-11660074118?st=t3fjw73hp1rc3vh&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

 

Here's a U.K. view:

 

If FBI goons can crucify a former president, no-one is safe. It's how democracy ends and – just maybe – how civil war starts, says Richard Littlejohn

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-11096033/If-FBI-goons-crucify-former-president-no-one-safe-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN.html

 

 

[Zinger549 233]

1 hour ago, trastrick said:

The like the uncivil war is heating up.

 

Here's a take from the Wall Street Journal, (no friend of Trump)

 

In case you get hit by a paywall, I've taken the liberty to post the full article:

 

The FBI’s Dangerous Trump Search

Merrick Garland is taking the U.S. down a perilous path.

 

"Monday’s unannounced Federal Bureau of Investigation search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home isn’t a moment for anyone to cheer. The Justice Department is unleashing political furies it can’t control and may not understand, and the risks for the department and the country are as great as they are for Mr. Trump.

"As everyone knows by now, an FBI law-enforcement action of this kind against a former American President is unprecedented. Monday’s search needed a judicial warrant in service of probable cause in a criminal probe. The Justice Department has provided few details beyond what has been leaked to reporters, so it is hard to judge what the FBI was looking for.

 

"The media leaks say the search is related to potential mishandling of classified documents or violations of the Presidential Records Act. If that is true, then the raid looks like prosecutorial overkill and a bad mistake. Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump’s disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding.

 

"Mr. Trump has already returned 15 boxes of documents, but the National Archives wants to know if the former President retained classified material he shouldn’t have. This is what appears to have triggered the FBI search, but it’s far from clear why this couldn’t be settled cooperatively, or at most with a subpoena.

"Didn’t someone at Justice point out that a search in this case would draw comparisons to Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information before her 2016 presidential campaign? She was never prosecuted, as Mr. Trump was quick to point out. Unless Mr. Trump’s offense involves a serious risk to national security, half of America may see the Trump search as an example of unequal justice.

"This may not be the full FBI story. Multiple media reports suggest that Justice has opened a grand jury probe into the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and Mr. Trump may be a target of that investigation. The House committee investigating Jan. 6 has been cheering for a prosecution, and the political and media pressure is intense on Attorney General Merrick Garland to indict Mr. Trump. The FBI search may be a fishing expedition to find evidence related to Jan. 6.

On the public evidence so far, a Jan. 6 indictment would be a legal stretch. Political responsibility isn’t the same as criminal liability. In our view, the evidence would have to show that Mr. Trump was criminally complicit in that day’s violence at the Capitol.

 

"Given its inherently political nature, the burden of proof is especially high for indicting a former President, all the more so for an Administration of the opposition party. The evidence had better be overwhelming—not merely enough to convince a 12-person jury in the District of Columbia, but enough to convince a majority of the American public.

Then there is the fraught history between Mr. Trump and the FBI and Justice. The Russia collusion probe was a fiasco of FBI abuse of process and public deception. Current FBI director Christopher Wray was Mr. Trump’s choice to succeed the disastrous James Comey, but the bureau still has a serious credibility problem.

 

"That the Mar-a-Lago raid occurred only about 90 days from a national election also increases the political suspicion. Democrats want to keep Mr. Trump front and center in the midterm campaign, which is why the Jan. 6 committee is continuing into the autumn.

 

"Anyone who thinks an indictment and trial of Mr. Trump would go smoothly is in for a rude surprise. Millions of his supporters will see this as vindication of his charges against the “deep state,” and who knows how they will respond. Has Mr. Garland considered all of this?

"Worse in the long term is the precedent being set and the payback it is likely to inspire. Once the Rubicon of prosecuting a former President has been crossed—especially if the alleged offense and evidence are less than compelling—every future President will be a target. William Barr, Mr. Trump’s second AG, wisely resisted pressure to indict political actors without a very strong case. The next Republican AG will not be as scrupulous.

 

"Democrats may also be wrong in their calculation about how a prosecution would affect Mr. Trump’s future. The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President, if only to vindicate himself. He will run as a martyr, and even Republicans who want to turn the page on the former President may be repelled by what they see as a political prosecution.

 

"All of this risks compounding the baleful pattern of the last six years. Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response. Polarization increases, and public faith in institutions and the peaceful settlement of political difference erodes further.

 

The FBI search on Mr. Trump suggests that Mr. Garland may be committed to pursuing and indicting Mr. Trump. If so, he is taking the country on a perilous road. There is much ruin in a nation, but no one should want to test the limits of that ruin in America".

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-dangerous-donald-trump-search-mar-a-lago-merrick-garland-justice-department-11660074118?st=t3fjw73hp1rc3vh&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

 

Here's a U.K. view:

 

If FBI goons can crucify a former president, no-one is safe. It's how democracy ends and – just maybe – how civil war starts, says Richard Littlejohn

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-11096033/If-FBI-goons-crucify-former-president-no-one-safe-RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN.html

 

 

Richard Littlejohn: No thanks, have you read some of his other stuff. He clams working from home is bad and people should get back to the office. At the bottom of the article he says he has been WFH for several years as he live in a gated community in Florida.

[Guest]

Who had this to say about taking the fifth amendment?

 

"Only the mob take the fifth." 

 

"If you're innocent, why are you taking the fifth amendment?"

 

"Taking the fifth.  I think it's disgraceful."

 

Hmmm.  I wonder which orange-coloured dried up husk of rotten turnip took the fifth today?  Rhymes with rump.  It's on the tip of my tongue....

 

Ah, there it is:

 

 

[HumbleNarrator 286]

Trump is an absolute legend. I hope he runs for President again, or failing that, endorses Ron DeSantis. 

[Guest]

The idea that Trump would step back to endorse anyone else for President .  He would sacrifice Melanie and all of his kids (well, perhaps not Ivanka) to Beelzebub before allowing anyone to stand in the way of a chance of scuttling back to White House.

[Mister Gee 823]

2 hours ago, HumbleNarrator said:

Trump is an absolute legend. I hope he runs for President again, or failing that, endorses Ron DeSantis. 

A real plus for humanity would be for him and Steve Bannon to be tied together, tethered to a concrete bollard and then for the whole assemblage to get chucked into a very deep open sewer.

[Box11 28]

On 09/08/2022 at 13:00, Anna B said:

He's talking of standing for president again, so they'll be digging for dirt on him.

So much for democracy...

But then no one would be daft enough to vote for him would they?

But then we voted for Boris didn't we...

 

 

Don’t speak to soon Anna B....

 

And like you said we voted for Boris...

[altus 540]

5 hours ago, Hecate said:

Hmmm.  I wonder which orange-coloured dried up husk of rotten turnip took the fifth today?  Rhymes with rump.  It's on the tip of my tongue....

It's worth noting that whilst the prosecution isn't allowed to infer guilt from a defendant taking the fifth in criminal cases, that's not the situation in civil ones. Guess which sort of case the one you referred to is? Admittedly, that's still better for Trump than him opening his mouth, removing all doubt about whether he's guilty and probably revealing lots of other things they can prosecute him for they didn't know about.

[Slinny 278]

16 hours ago, HumbleNarrator said:

Trump is an absolute legend. I hope he runs for President again, or failing that, endorses Ron DeSantis. 

Trump is a danger to word peace . He is the most  ,  I love.myself person,  I have ever seen , and will do anything to save his own skin ,  Johnson is just a carbon copy off him,  but millions off people fall for them , 

[PRESLEY 1,228]

22 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Russia didn't invade the Ukraine when Trump was in the White House.  Trump is more deserving for the Noble Peace Prize than Obama.

You like supporting idiots with bad hair doos. Trump would agree with your comment because he is a racist.