Mar A Lago documents

User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Mar A Lago documents

Post by I Shrugged » Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am

So this turned out to be nothing? Who could have guessed?
Good timing of the raid and sensational story versus the actual, though, vis a vis the elections.

And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.
User avatar
Dieter
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:51 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Dieter » Thu Nov 24, 2022 1:11 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am
So this turned out to be nothing? Who could have guessed?
Good timing of the raid and sensational story versus the actual, though, vis a vis the elections.

And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.
?
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1837
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:41 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am
And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.
The Washington Post actually did do a backhanded article admitting that there was nothing there. Just standard outgoing presidential memorabilia. Of course, they still had to chalk it up to the Donald being a big poopy pants.
User avatar
Dieter
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 579
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:51 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Dieter » Thu Nov 24, 2022 7:59 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:41 pm
I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am
And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.
The Washington Post actually did do a backhanded article admitting that there was nothing there. Just standard outgoing presidential memorabilia. Of course, they still had to chalk it up to the Donald being a big poopy pants.
Say what?

Unnamed sources said they can’t find a motive why he took classified info, so are sparing its due to his ego or some such

They didn’t say that he didn’t take classified information
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:07 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am

So this turned out to be nothing? Who could have guessed?
Good timing of the raid and sensational story versus the actual, though, vis a vis the elections.

And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.


Where is that being reports?

This is what I'm seeing:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mar-a- ... rt-appeals

Mar-a-Lago probe: Procedural legal battle for documents continues in 11th Circuit Court of Appeals
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a special counsel to take over the DOJ's criminal probe into Trump
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1837
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:12 pm

Dieter wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 7:59 pm
They didn’t say that he didn’t take classified information

Correct. The FBI and DA only said that there wasn't anything of value there. Allegedly. Per "people familiar with the matter". 8)

It must have been pretty painful for the Wapo to even write that much - and not have even one bit of anything damaging leaked to them that they could put into the article. That must have hurt. And here they thought that they were best buds with the FBI. Sad, really. Can you imagine that poor reporter going back to his sources. "Just give me something incriminating! I've been doing you favors for years, man!". FBI Agent : Sorry dude. It's just a bunch of selfies with Putin and Kim.


Screen Shot 2022-11-24 at 2.38.44 PM.png
Screen Shot 2022-11-24 at 2.38.44 PM.png (104.93 KiB) Viewed 402 times
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:12 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:41 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am

And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.


The Washington Post actually did do a backhanded article admitting that there was nothing there. Just standard outgoing presidential memorabilia. Of course, they still had to chalk it up to the Donald being a big poopy pants.


From the above article you provided:

Court papers say the Justice Department has been investigating Trump and his advisers for three potential crimes: mishandling of national security secrets, obstruction, and destruction of government records.

The Washington Post has previously reported that among the most sensitive classified documents recovered by the FBI from Mar-a-Lago were documents about Iran and China, according to people familiar with the matter.

At least one of the documents seized by the FBI at Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8 describes Iran’s missile program, according to these people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe an ongoing investigation. Other documents described highly sensitive intelligence work aimed at China, they said. The Post has also reported that some of the material focuses on the defense systems of a foreign country, including its nuclear capabilities.

Two advisers to the former president who personally reviewed boxes of material in Trump’s White House said he often threw hundreds of pieces of paper in boxes — mixing in highly sensitive documents with years-old schedules and other mundane material.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
SilentMajority
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2022 9:10 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by SilentMajority » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm

Dieter wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 7:59 pm
Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:41 pm
I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am
And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.
The Washington Post actually did do a backhanded article admitting that there was nothing there. Just standard outgoing presidential memorabilia. Of course, they still had to chalk it up to the Donald being a big poopy pants.
Say what?

Unnamed sources said they can’t find a motive why he took classified info, so are sparing its due to his ego or some such

They didn’t say that he didn’t take classified information
I think as the head of our executive branch, the president can declassify anything at his discretion, therefore the act of taking the docs is a de facto declassification.

I'm open to a counter argument. I think the one above is supported by dershewitz who is a total Dem/socialist.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:15 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:12 pm

Dieter wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 7:59 pm

They didn’t say that he didn’t take classified information



Correct. The FBI and DA only said that there wasn't anything of value there. Allegedly. Per "people familiar with the matter". 8)

It must have been pretty painful for the Wapo to even write that much - and not have even one bit of anything damaging leaked to them that they could put into the article. That must have hurt. And here they thought that they were best buds with the FBI. Sad, really. Can you imagine that poor reporter going back to his sources. "Just give me something incriminating! I've been doing you favors for years, man!". FBI Agent : Sorry dude. It's just a bunch of selfies with Putin and Kim.



Screen Shot 2022-11-24 at 2.38.44 PM.png


Also from the same article (and presumably from the same source);

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:19 pm

SilentMajority wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm

Dieter wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 7:59 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 4:41 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:45 am

And, have any MSM outlets reported on the fizzle like they did the sizzle? I haven’t seen it.


The Washington Post actually did do a backhanded article admitting that there was nothing there. Just standard outgoing presidential memorabilia. Of course, they still had to chalk it up to the Donald being a big poopy pants.


Say what?

Unnamed sources said they can’t find a motive why he took classified info, so are sparing its due to his ego or some such

They didn’t say that he didn’t take classified information

I think as the head of our executive branch, the president can declassify anything at his discretion, therefore the act of taking the docs is a de facto declassification.

I'm open to a counter argument. I think the one above is supported by dershewitz who is a total Dem/socialist.


That theory / belief goes along with:

1) When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal."--Richard Nixon

2) Trump believing that he could tell his vice president that he could override the votes of the people in each state.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1837
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:33 pm

Bullshit aside.

Is there any chance that if there was something incriminating there that it wouldn't have been leaked yet?

Hell, they immediately leaked photos of the empty classified folders that were included in the boxes that the GSA packed up and sent to Trump's warehouse.

Don't you think that if there were anything more dangerous and classified than personal correspondence with world leaders it would have been front page on the NYT by now? Of course it would have.
User avatar
Mark Leavy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1837
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Mark Leavy » Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:45 pm

Heck. It's Thanksgiving and I'm in a generous mood.

I'm taking any and all bets that Trump will not be even indicted for a single thing associated with the Mar A Lago documents.
Up to 1oz of gold per person. Even money. DM me if you want the other side.

The walls are closing in! He has nuclear secrets! Act now! It's a sure thing!

(payment in physical gold only)
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4152
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:26 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:19 pm
SilentMajority wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm
I think as the head of our executive branch, the president can declassify anything at his discretion, therefore the act of taking the docs is a de facto declassification.

I'm open to a counter argument. I think the one above is supported by dershewitz who is a total Dem/socialist.
That theory / belief goes along with:

1) When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal."--Richard Nixon
It's not like that at all. The classification status of any given document is not a matter of law. It's up to the executive branch to determine the classification status of documents.

As the chief executive, the President absolutely can unilaterally declassify documents for any or no reason. The question is, what action must be taken for a document to be declassified? If he does it inside his own head does it count? Can it be done retroactively (or at least, claimed that it was done earlier)? If taking the documents is a de facto declassification, was he still President when he took them?

There's nothing clear cut about any of that and it could easily go to the Supreme Court.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:54 pm

Xan wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:26 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:19 pm

SilentMajority wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:13 pm

I think as the head of our executive branch, the president can declassify anything at his discretion, therefore the act of taking the docs is a de facto declassification.

I'm open to a counter argument. I think the one above is supported by dershewitz who is a total Dem/socialist.


That theory / belief goes along with:

1) When the President does it, that means that it is not illegal."--Richard Nixon


It's not like that at all. The classification status of any given document is not a matter of law. It's up to the executive branch to determine the classification status of documents.

As the chief executive, the President absolutely can unilaterally declassify documents for any or no reason. The question is, what action must be taken for a document to be declassified? If he does it inside his own head does it count? Can it be done retroactively (or at least, claimed that it was done earlier)? If taking the documents is a de facto declassification, was he still President when he took them?

There's nothing clear cut about any of that and it could easily go to the Supreme Court.


The really pertinent response to this is what if it had been Obama who had taken the documents in a similar fashion? What would be the answer to all your questions? Same in both cases?

From your line of questions it'd be impossible for any president to be convicted of illegally possessing any government documents.

What does common sense tell you?

What did common say regarding Pence being able to void the election results from each state and substitute his own judgement?
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4152
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:10 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:54 pm
The really pertinent response to this is what if it had been Obama who had taken the documents in a similar fashion? What would be the answer to all your questions? Same in both cases?

From your line of questions it'd be impossible for any president to be convicted of illegally possessing any government documents.

What does common sense tell you?

What did common say regarding Pence being able to void the election results from each state and substitute his own judgement?
I don't know the details of the VP's role in election certification. I'm not sure that it's clearly laid out, which if true would be a problem that should be addressed.

Common sense tells me it both is and should be impossible for the president to be convicted of illegally possessing government documents. I would say that a former president could be so convicted. But there needs to be at least one person who at least in theory can know everything, and that person is the president.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:35 am

Xan wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:10 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:54 pm
The really pertinent response to this is what if it had been Obama who had taken the documents in a similar fashion? What would be the answer to all your questions? Same in both cases?

From your line of questions it'd be impossible for any president to be convicted of illegally possessing any government documents.

What does common sense tell you?

What did common say regarding Pence being able to void the election results from each state and substitute his own judgement?


I don't know the details of the VP's role in election certification. I'm not sure that it's clearly laid out, which if true would be a problem that should be addressed.

Common sense tells me it both is and should be impossible for the president to be convicted of illegally possessing government documents. I would say that a former president could be so convicted. But there needs to be at least one person who at least in theory can know everything, and that person is the president.


Common sense says that the Vice President's role is merely ceremonial. To certify that all the states electoral votes should be accepted as presented by the states. Not to have the power to negate any of those electoral votes.

Also Mar A Lago documents issue is strictly an ex-President having possession of government documents. Again, common sense says that the ex-President has no more rights to these documents than you or I.
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
SilentMajority
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2022 9:10 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by SilentMajority » Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:41 am

vnatale wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 8:35 am
Xan wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 11:10 pm
vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 10:54 pm
The really pertinent response to this is what if it had been Obama who had taken the documents in a similar fashion? What would be the answer to all your questions? Same in both cases?

From your line of questions it'd be impossible for any president to be convicted of illegally possessing any government documents.

What does common sense tell you?

What did common say regarding Pence being able to void the election results from each state and substitute his own judgement?
I don't know the details of the VP's role in election certification. I'm not sure that it's clearly laid out, which if true would be a problem that should be addressed.

Common sense tells me it both is and should be impossible for the president to be convicted of illegally possessing government documents. I would say that a former president could be so convicted. But there needs to be at least one person who at least in theory can know everything, and that person is the president.
Common sense says that the Vice President's role is merely ceremonial. To certify that all the states electoral votes should be accepted as presented by the states. Not to have the power to negate any of those electoral votes.

Also Mar A Lago documents issue is strictly an ex-President having possession of government documents. Again, common sense says that the ex-President has no more rights to these documents than you or I.
You have legal access to millions of government documents. Everyone does.

I'm not sure about the VPs role in the election certification process but I remember don lemon I think on CNN saying pence could legally reject the delegates and send it back to the state legislature per the constitution.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Fri Nov 25, 2022 10:44 am

SilentMajority wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:41 am


You have legal access to millions of government documents. Everyone does.

I'm not sure about the VPs role in the election certification process but I remember don lemon I think on CNN saying pence could legally reject the delegates and send it back to the state legislature per the constitution.


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hitchh ... al-college

VOTING Published June 16, 2022 12:29pm EDT
Hitchhiker’s Guide to the role the vice president plays in certifying the Electoral College
Mike Pence maintains he had no real influence on the 2020 election outcome as he presided over the Joint Session
Chad PergramBy Chad Pergram | Fox News


So what happens if a state sends inconsistent slates of electoral votes to Congress? Or, if there are disputed electoral votes?

That’s sorted out in the certification of the Electoral College in the Joint Session of Congress on January 6 – as dictated by the Electoral Count Act.

Also with a role in this: The 12th Amendment to the Constitution.

The 12th Amendment is murky as to what should happen during the certification process. It reads: "The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted."

Note the passive voice in the phrase the "votes shall then be counted."

That does not suggest any flexibility on behalf of the Vice President. Or, is another interpretation is that the Vice President DOES have a role? It is simply the responsibility of the Vice President to report what the count is – even if there is potential for influence or meddling?

The 12th Amendment also says "the person having the greatest number of votes for President shall be President."
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by I Shrugged » Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:32 pm

Mark Leavy wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:33 pm
Bullshit aside.

Is there any chance that if there was something incriminating there that it wouldn't have been leaked yet?

Hell, they immediately leaked photos of the empty classified folders that were included in the boxes that the GSA packed up and sent to Trump's warehouse.

Don't you think that if there were anything more dangerous and classified than personal correspondence with world leaders it would have been front page on the NYT by now? Of course it would have.
Thank you.
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by I Shrugged » Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:42 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:15 pm

Also from the same article (and presumably from the same source);

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.
That translates as, “We couldn’t find anything, but we reiterate that he should have been nicer to us (we who are trying to grind him into dust).”
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:31 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:42 pm

vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:15 pm


Also from the same article (and presumably from the same source);

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.


That translates as, “We couldn’t find anything, but we reiterate that he should have been nicer to us (we who are trying to grind him into dust).”


Or maybe because they (like many others) believe the same way as Trump's former Secretary of State (July 23, 2019 – November 9, 2020). Review Esper's life achievements. He is / was qualified to be president while Trump had no qualifications to be president (and proved it during his campaign, during his four years as president, and all these months since he stopped being president).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Esper

"The memoir, A Sacred Oath, was published in May 2022. Esper characterized the Trump administration's decision-making process as overtaken by concerns about the president's 2020 reelection. He said he considered resigning several times but remained on concerns he would be replaced by a Trump loyalist who was providing dangerous ideas to the president. Esper wrote that Trump asked him at least twice if the Pentagon could "shoot missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs" and "no one would know it was us." During the 2020 George Floyd protests, Trump sought to deploy 10,000 active duty troops in Washington, asking Esper about protestors, "Can't you just shoot them?" He wrote Trump's top domestic policy advisor Stephen Miller sought to send 250,000 troops to the southern border on the premise that a large caravan of migrants was en route; Esper wrote he responded the Pentagon did not "have 250,000 troops to send to the border for such nonsense." As White House officials watched a live video feed of the raid that killed Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Esper said Miller proposed beheading al-Baghdadi, dipping his head in pig's blood and parading it around to warn other terrorists. He said he told Miller that would be a war crime; Miller flatly denied the episode occurred. Esper characterized Trump as "an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service."[91][92]"
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by flyingpylon » Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:34 am

It’s unlikely that we’ll know what’s in the Mar-a-Lago documents anytime soon. The cloak of mystery is too useful as a narrative-building tool. The new special counsel investigation will ensure that these docs and many other potentially embarrassing details about the government during the Trump era will never see the light of day. “Sorry, can’t answer that… ongoing investigation, don’tcha know…”
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by I Shrugged » Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:45 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 9:31 pm
I Shrugged wrote:
Fri Nov 25, 2022 7:42 pm
vnatale wrote:
Thu Nov 24, 2022 9:15 pm

Also from the same article (and presumably from the same source);

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.
That translates as, “We couldn’t find anything, but we reiterate that he should have been nicer to us (we who are trying to grind him into dust).”
Or maybe because they (like many others) believe the same way as Trump's former Secretary of State (July 23, 2019 – November 9, 2020). Review Esper's life achievements. He is / was qualified to be president while Trump had no qualifications to be president (and proved it during his campaign, during his four years as president, and all these months since he stopped being president).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Esper

"The memoir, A Sacred Oath, was published in May 2022. Esper characterized the Trump administration's decision-making process as overtaken by concerns about the president's 2020 reelection. He said he considered resigning several times but remained on concerns he would be replaced by a Trump loyalist who was providing dangerous ideas to the president. Esper wrote that Trump asked him at least twice if the Pentagon could "shoot missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs" and "no one would know it was us." During the 2020 George Floyd protests, Trump sought to deploy 10,000 active duty troops in Washington, asking Esper about protestors, "Can't you just shoot them?" He wrote Trump's top domestic policy advisor Stephen Miller sought to send 250,000 troops to the southern border on the premise that a large caravan of migrants was en route; Esper wrote he responded the Pentagon did not "have 250,000 troops to send to the border for such nonsense." As White House officials watched a live video feed of the raid that killed Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Esper said Miller proposed beheading al-Baghdadi, dipping his head in pig's blood and parading it around to warn other terrorists. He said he told Miller that would be a war crime; Miller flatly denied the episode occurred. Esper characterized Trump as "an unprincipled person who, given his self-interest, should not be in the position of public service."[91][92]"
So he got beat in the election. Isn’t that good enough? No, the power of the state has to be used to destroy him, his family, and everyone in his orbit. Not just destroy him, but salt the earth from which he sprang. For the greater good. Right?
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7950
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by vnatale » Sat Nov 26, 2022 5:39 pm

I Shrugged wrote:
Sat Nov 26, 2022 4:45 pm


So he got beat in the election. Isn’t that good enough? No, the power of the state has to be used to destroy him, his family, and everyone in his orbit. Not just destroy him, but salt the earth from which he sprang. For the greater good. Right?


Was it good enough for him to get beat in the election? To accept it like every other losing candidate had?

He's a criminal who needs to punished for his misdeeds. He is not getting anything he does not deserve.

Many believe he's got off extremely lightly for all his misdeeds.

Why is not any other Republican politician being similarly persecuted? Is it because none of them deserve it to the extent that he does?
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Mar A Lago documents

Post by flyingpylon » Sat Nov 26, 2022 8:31 pm

Obama advisor David Plouffe…
Image
Post Reply