- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,117
- Reaction score
- 6,013
- Points
- 113
Garland’s job isn’t to refute Trump.Garland gave a statement last night and did NOT - repeat, he DID NOT - refute that point in any fashion.
Or had you missed that?
Garland’s job isn’t to refute Trump.Garland gave a statement last night and did NOT - repeat, he DID NOT - refute that point in any fashion.
Or had you missed that?
How so?also - if you're now going to discount the allegations of someone "close to Trump" then you're also suggesting that the Search Warrant and subsequent raid were invalid and wrong.
you suggest that the "source" is not to be creditedHow so?
Garland’s job isn’t to refute Trump.
Garland’s job isn’t to refute Trump.
Some sources formerly connected to Trump have come to their senses. This is looking increasingly bad.you suggest that the "source" is not to be credited
yet it was a "source" who called the FBI with information that led to the search warrant, and that is legit.
source is legit only when it confirms your bias.
pick a lane
*right nowSo right now the unrefuted evidence is that Trump was at all times cooperating with the DOJ and complying with the June, 2022 subpoena. It thereby stands to reason the raid on Trump's residence was for theater.
You were saying?
Keep browsing. You'll see they found exactly what you thought they would.Has there been any disclosure regarding what was found? I'm assuming not?
Irrelevant.. again ex presidents have been targeted before for having these types of documents… they never get in trouble and none were ever raided… because the precedent is that ex presidents can’t actually be in violation of the rule by proxy*right now
Garland hasn’t bothered to refute any evidence.
Question: Should top secret information with national security implications be store at ******* MAR-A-LAGO? Yes or no?
*right now
Garland hasn’t bothered to refute any evidence.
Question: Should top secret information with national security implications be store at ******* MAR-A-LAGO? Yes or no?
At this point we know the FBI will plant evidence and just plain make stuff up if they don't like your politics and destroy evidence themselves if you're on the "right" side.when they go to a place, looking for a specific document, in a specific place, where they were just a month ago and put a padlock on the room to prevent any further entry/exit, then spend NINE hours ransacking a home because they decided they can and they've prevented attorneys and lawyers from witnessing their violation of the 4th Amendment, while many of these FBI agents entered with backpacks, well... I'm not saying something is fishy, but we're gonna need a bigger boat.
![]()
Trump confirms DOJ visited Mar-a-Lago in June to ask about records
Federal officials conducted an unannounced search of the former commander-in-chief's private residence in Palm Beach, Florida over documents sought by the National Archives, his son Eric Trump said this week.www.dailymail.co.uk
They certainly have a well documented proven history of it. Which makes them just as bad as any criminal they put in jail.At this point we know the FBI will plant evidence and just plain make stuff up if they don't like your politics and destroy evidence themselves if you're on the "right" side.
Their credibility is totally shot except the Swamp and media don't realize it.
Despite the 20 second sound bites run by her opponents, Lake was never a liberal.
The choice between her a Hobbs is night and day.
Which ex presidents? What precedent?Irrelevant.. again ex presidents have been targeted before for having these types of documents… they never get in trouble and none were ever raided… because the precedent is that ex presidents can’t actually be in violation of the rule by proxy
Because now the FBI is full of Libs.Lol the world comes full circle… for the first decade and a half of my late teens to adult life all i ever heard from libs was how the fbi was corrupt and devious and needed fixed… while the conservatives defended them… total flip flop these days![]()
Defund the FBI !The FBI needs scrubbed clean.
Well lets see… Clinton, Bush, and Obama… all three have been sued over classified documents tgey refused to give up by various organizations. In each case they basically said go pound salt and the legal system agreed. Its back to that argument that Presidential privilege exempts them in the document matter because they have absolute power to declassify stuff and thus by action they cant be in violation… It goes back way further than that, but i can only remember back through the 90’s… I know Obama left with a ton of documents that judicial watch wanted and they were refused, same with Clinton because he took all the classified documents pertaining to certain scandals like the lab break in … those never had to be returned.Which ex presidents? What precedent?
I still can’t believe tgat shitshow wasn’t more of a talking point here.. I always thought that the Delorean setup would be the clearest entrapment case ever, lol… nope the FBI basically formed a kidnapping plot, convinced others to join in, then busted anyone who even remotely talked about it… then got exposed.. what a ******* joke…Because now the FBI is full of Libs.
Defund the FBI !