Fogbow

To steal y'all's favorite joke:

They even broke into my safe = despite being served with a valid search warrant, I refused to open my safe.

I'm going disagree with Elias, as I maintain section 2071 cannot be applied to any federal office listed in the U.S. Constitution.

But don't take my word for it:

Popehat has a long tweet on this FBI action.

I find this plausible.

Lara Trump: Look, my father-in-law, as anybody knows, who's been around him a lot, loves to save things like newspaper clippings, magazine clippings, photographs, documents that he had every authority, will, to take from the white house.

I don't need to suck up bandwidth posting everything so far on this Twitter feed, but he seems to be on the Fox reporting on today's events and worth a look.

I also believe there is someone at Mar-a-Lago that is cooperating. You can’t swing and miss on something this consequential.

Mr Traitor Pants Jordon wrote:This is what happens in third world countries.

Not the United States.

Doesn’t the FBI have better things to do than harass the former PRESIDENT?

It only happened in the US because we stupidly elected a tin-pot wannabe dictator who thinks rules don't apply to him.

I see Gym is calling him FORMER president. Disloyal.

So my "Out on the fence line with the wieners" opinion...

Trump took the 15 boxes on purpose and somewhere in them is something that is really really pee tape bad. When he got caught, he let them come take the 15 boxes back but before they did he had gotten the really really bad part out and being a dumbass thought that he had got away with it.

Here at the motorcar company pretty much every piece of paper that goes from A to B has an "MDL#" which is "master document list. E mails don't have them but are automatically archived and I couldn't override that if I tried. Ditto for text messages that are in our system or on company phones (Imagine that!) but if I make a spreadsheet, and attach it to an e-mail or in fact if I save it not on my desktop, the system automatically generates an MDL#.

What I'm getting at is anything I do that I decide later was maybe something I want to hide, that's gonna be damn hard to do without at the very least making someone ask where it's at. I'll go further and say if I did something to try to hide a document just me trying would set off so many alarms that I probably ought to start packing my personal effects.

I would like to think that the document control process in the White House is at least as good.

In conclusion, whatever it was, the FBI had reason to believe that not only was it at Mar A Lago, but that it was in fact in his safe. Cause a search warrant probably would not allow them to force open a safe unless it said plainly "this means the safe, behind the picture of hyaenas goring a troop of Girl Scouts and next to the erotic photos of Stephen Miller".

They might get to go "Oh look, a safe" if they're busting a black drug dealer in East LA, but for the former POTUS the warrant probably had to have the first number of the combination and the serial number of the safe.

I dont care if they were looking for what brand of toilet.paper he wipes his ass with. IM HAPPY!

Gregg wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 8:52 pm Trump took the 15 boxes on purpose and somewhere in them is something that is really really pee tape bad. When he got caught, he let them come take the 15 boxes back but before they did he had gotten the really really bad part out and being a dumbass thought that he had got away with it.

Expanding on that... I wonder if the situation arose now because Trump, with his need to brag, showed one of those incriminating documents to someone he wanted to impress, and that someone - being a loyal American citizen - reported to the FBI or the DOJ that Trump still had certain documents in his possession.

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 8:09 pm Barbra McQuade was ob MSNBC talking about this being related to the documents trump took from the WH, and that just his having such documents may not be enough to indict him. She seemed to want to stress that this may end up not being a big deal depending on what documents he has, and what can be proved about whether he knew they were there and why he had them.

Ken Delanian is reporting the Secret Service was notified of the warrant shortly before the raid and that they helped gain access to the property.

If they are in the safe he ain't gonna be able to say they were just the coffee order receipts.

“I barely know those documents. They may have brought me coffee a few times.”

Roodles, of course, was too sick to fly.

bob wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 8:26 pm I'm going disagree with Elias, as I maintain section 2071 cannot be applied to any federal office listed in the U.S. Constitution.

But don't take my word for it:

Ok, I get it might not apply, but why wouldn't it apply? What was the rationale behind the holding Mike Dunford references? I'm just trying to understand.

Also, just a few minutes ago, Harry Littman, an attorney, was on MSNBC saying he thinks it's possible the DOJ may almost be looking at that provision of 2071 as a way of resolving what to do about Trump. He suggests that they might opt to go after him on this documents issue and get him banned from ever holding office again and let it end there, rather than trying for more difficult charges.

No no no no!

If they try and convict him for stealing a memo about how to serve his diet coke, it would be worse than just letting him go. The Army of the Stupid will go Knucking Phutz.

Either try him for Seditious Conspiracy or not, but he ain't Al Capone. Tax Evasion ain't gonna cut it.

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:04 pmOk, I get it might not apply, but why wouldn't it apply? What was the rationale behind the holding Mike Dunford references? I'm just trying to understand.

Thornton struck down a law imposing term limits on federal legistlators. The rationale being, because the U.S. Constitution sets the eligibility requirements for federal legislators, a law is insufficient; a constitutional amendment is required.

So (Mike D. and I conclude) a law can't ban the president from serving; only an amendment can do that. (Cf. U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, sec. 3.)

bob wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:10 pm

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:04 pmOk, I get it might not apply, but why wouldn't it apply? What was the rationale behind the holding Mike Dunford references? I'm just trying to understand.

Thorton struck down a law imposing term limits on federal legistlators. The rationale being, because the U.S. Constitution sets the eligibility requirements for federal legislators, a law is insufficient; a constitutional amendment is required.

So (Mike D. and I conclude) a law can't ban the president from serving; only an amendment can do that. (Cf. U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, sec. 3.)

Thank you!

Hannity has Eric Trump on. He’s pushing the same line as Lara Trump, namely ask the docs were his personal news clippings and whatnot. They are attacking tfg “because he is Biden’s greatest threat.” Political persecution. They say.

This is really, really astonishing. What could the classified documents be that are so bad that a federal judge would authorize a search warrant, which shows urgency to the situation?

raison de arizona wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:20 pm Hannity has Eric Trump on. He’s pushing the same line as Lara Trump, namely ask the docs were his personal news clippings and whatnot. They are attacking tfg “because he is Biden’s greatest threat.” Political persecution. They say.

Yeah, he even dragged out Benghazi and Uranium One, the BUT HER EMAILS!!!! wasn't enough. I think I heard Newt Gingrich is weighing in shortly

Maybe. . .just maybe. . .this has to do with the fact that the FBI finally has a lead on Jimmy Hoffa, and not all this other stuff.

(In case you think that I am serious, think again.)

Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 8:09 pm Ken Delanian is reporting the Secret Service was notified of the warrant shortly before the raid and that they helped gain access to the property.

You mean the secret Service were....... DISLOYAL???

Don the Con will probably try to get rid of them now that they have shown disloyalty to his Rotund Immenseness.

SuzieC wrote: ↑Mon Aug 08, 2022 9:27 pm This is really, really astonishing. What could the classified documents be that are so bad that a federal judge would authorize a search warrant, which shows urgency to the situation?

This is the $64 question:

Gingrich was boring. McEnany was more animated. Note on to Huckabee. Hannity’s position appears to be that tfg didn’t pack the boxes himself, therefore the search warrant was invalid.