Gyroscopic Investing

Posted: **Thu Aug 11, 2022 2:50 pm**

https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-de ... _permalink

Popcorn check, Diet Coke check.

Posted: **Thu Aug 11, 2022 3:59 pm**

What do you speculate the warrant is for? It would seem is has to be something more than work that was taken home.

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:15 am**

IDK…but you don’t get to take classified materials home from work which is the purported reason for the search.

I’ve read some crazy stuff as to what was taken but accurate reporting who knows. If one thing in particular is true, I’m completely cool with the first ever presidential jail time.

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:33 am**

I probably haven't seen what that something is that you are referring to.

I would think other presidents and officials would have also taken work home so I figure it has to be more than that. I can't even speculate what would cause this need.

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:46 am**

Headline on Drudge said it could be something to do with nukes. Probably that's what kbg was talking about.

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 10:36 am**

Desert wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 10:06 am
Yeah, it's hard for me to imagine what would be worth hanging onto for months and refusing to return it.

A decades long attitude / belief of being "above the law"?

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:25 pm**

What I’d really love to see (lots of assumptions I’m making so let’s get that out of the way)…is for the Hillary case to be restarted, the Trump case to go forward and they both get a nice public day in court and let the jury do what juries do.

I don’t really care guilty or not, but the principle of no one is above with non-partisan optics would be a great thing to happen.

Posted: **Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:06 pm**

Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:25 pm What I’d really love to see (lots of assumptions I’m making so let’s get that out of the way)…is for the Hillary case to be restarted, the Trump case to go forward and they both get a nice public day in court and let the jury do what juries do.

I don’t really care guilty or not, but the principle of no one is above with non-partisan optics would be a great thing to happen.

How about Pres Trump catch up with Secretary Clinton? 11 hours congressional testimony, actually say something other than pleading the fifth

[Edit — ooh, an article about it. Oh, and I’m sorry, Trump answered one question : his name.

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton- ... 39712.html
]

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:35 am**

Dieter wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 3:06 pm

Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 12:25 pm
What I’d really love to see (lots of assumptions I’m making so let’s get that out of the way)…is for the Hillary case to be restarted, the Trump case to go forward and they both get a nice public day in court and let the jury do what juries do.

I don’t really care guilty or not, but the principle of no one is above with non-partisan optics would be a great thing to happen.

How about Pres Trump catch up with Secretary Clinton? 11 hours congressional testimony, actually say something other than pleading the fifth

[Edit — ooh, an article about it. Oh, and I’m sorry, Trump answered one question : his name.

https://news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinton- ... 39712.html
]

That was pointed out that as far as the January 6th hearings have gone .... several young female Republicans have testified but the old white males of the administration attempt to dodge testifying by attempting to use some questionable legal tactics. Just typical chickenhawks in a different setting.

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 11:02 am**

Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:15 am IDK…but you don’t get to take classified materials home from work which is the purported reason for the search.

Even if you did, I can't imagine a reason you'd be entitled to hang on to the materials after you no longer work there. They don't belong to you.

Could you imagine the ex-CEO of Intel or Pfizer bringing home a bunch of proprietary material, and keeping it?
Obviously not, it would all be deemed company property and he/she would be expected to return it, assuming their document handling policies permitted having it off premises in the first place.

Now take that scenario and add an exponential National Security factor, treason laws, espionage laws, probably all manner of other laws.
My understanding is a former President is a civilian with no particular security clearance unless granted by the sitting President.
And even then, there's a difference between access to materials and possession of materials.
You're knowledgeable in this area Kbg, what am I missing?

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:42 pm**

I haven't heard of any reports of classified documents found in the raid of President Trumps private residence.

And then, we have this:

"...For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation..." - Statement by FBI Director Comey 7/5/2016

Could you imagine the CEO of Intel or Pfizer storing company emails on a personal home brew server?

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:33 pm**

BUT HER HIS EMAILS.

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 10:08 pm**

Worst case scenario is the raid doesn't result in preventing Trump from running, and was a stunt to further rile up both sides

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayden_(general)

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 10:51 pm**

MarketIfTouched wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:42 pm
I haven't heard of any reports of classified documents found in the raid of President Trumps private residence.

And then, we have this:

"...For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation..." - Statement by FBI Director Comey 7/5/2016

Could you imagine the CEO of Intel or Pfizer storing company emails on a personal home brew server?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... department

Colin Powell told Clinton he bypassed official servers to email foreign leaders

Former secretary emailed ‘without going through State Department’
Old email exchange shows Republican dismissed some security restrictions

Thu 8 Sep 2016 11.52 EDT

Colin Powell told Hillary Clinton, his successor as secretary of state, that he used a personal computer to email foreign leaders “without going through State Department servers”, a seven-year-old email exchange reveals.

Powell dismissed some of the official security restrictions on him as “nonsense” and questioned why his personal digital assistant (PDA) was any more vulnerable to spies than a TV remote control or “something embedded in my shoe heel”.

The email correspondence was released on Wednesday by Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House oversight committee, intending to show that Clinton’s handling of data was hardly less meticulous than previous secretaries of state. She was the only one to set up a private email server in her home, however, and has admitted this was a mistake.

The emails also offer a rare glimpse of relations between America’s top diplomats across party lines, evolving technology in an era when the BlackBerry was still king and the daily frustrations of a security detail.

Posted: **Sat Aug 13, 2022 11:21 pm**

MarketIfTouched wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 8:42 pm
I haven't heard of any reports of classified documents found in the raid of President Trumps private residence.

And then, we have this:

"...For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation..." - Statement by FBI Director Comey 7/5/2016

Could you imagine the CEO of Intel or Pfizer storing company emails on a personal home brew server?

Posted: **Sun Aug 14, 2022 4:57 pm**

glennds wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 11:02 am
Kbg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 9:15 am IDK…but you don’t get to take classified materials home from work which is the purported reason for the search.

Even if you did, I can't imagine a reason you'd be entitled to hang on to the materials after you no longer work there. They don't belong to you.

Could you imagine the ex-CEO of Intel or Pfizer bringing home a bunch of proprietary material, and keeping it?
Obviously not, it would all be deemed company property and he/she would be expected to return it, assuming their document handling policies permitted having it off premises in the first place.

Now take that scenario and add an exponential National Security factor, treason laws, espionage laws, probably all manner of other laws.
My understanding is a former President is a civilian with no particular security clearance unless granted by the sitting President.
And even then, there's a difference between access to materials and possession of materials.
You're knowledgeable in this area Kbg, what am I missing?

I’m not going to comment on topics…because that’s your legal (and ethical) obligation.

This isn’t hard and anyone who had an ethical compass when confronted with potential documents in their “anything” would have arranged to have them returned immediately. This assumes a packing accident and not a deliberate removal of documents. The President does have the power to declassify anything, a President who was serious about their responsibilities would have followed the established process to ensure there was a good reason and purpose for doing so. And there is ZERO reason why he would need any of this stuff out of office.

My personal take is the warrant wouldn’t have been issued if it wasn’t pretty bad and they pretty much knew what was there.

This latter point supposedly has the man and his lawyers freaked out…but I’m reading the same stuff you guys are and have no special insights on what’s truth or not.

Posted: **Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:31 pm**

Kbg wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 4:57 pm

I’m not going to comment on topics…because that’s your legal (and ethical) obligation......

Thanks. I wasn't trying to put you on the spot, but seeing as how it is your thread...
Really, the whole thing is incredibly weird to me. Maybe eventually some of it will make rational sense as more information comes out.

Posted: **Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:00 pm**

glennds wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:31 pm Maybe eventually some of it will make rational sense as more information comes out.

Are you new here? Or been in a coma for the last 6 years?

Posted: **Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:08 pm**

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:00 pm
glennds wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:31 pm Maybe eventually some of it will make rational sense as more information comes out.
Are you new here? Or been in a coma for the last 6 years?

Humor aside, could you explain what you mean?

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:05 am**

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:00 pm
glennds wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:31 pm Maybe eventually some of it will make rational sense as more information comes out.
Are you new here? Or been in a coma for the last 6 years?

Once upon a time, I, Zhuangzi, dreamt I was a butterfly, fluttering hither and thither, to all intents and purposes a butterfly.
I was conscious only of my happiness as a butterfly, unaware that I was Zhuangzi.
Soon I awakened, and there I was, veritably myself again.
Now I do not know whether I was then a man dreaming I was a butterfly, or whether I am now a butterfly, dreaming I am a man.

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:09 am**

glennds wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:08 pm
flyingpylon wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:00 pm
glennds wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:31 pm Maybe eventually some of it will make rational sense as more information comes out.
Are you new here? Or been in a coma for the last 6 years?

Humor aside, could you explain what you mean?

Humans make decisions based on emotion, then rationalize them with "facts". One person's facts are another's mis/disinformation, and round and round we go. More information will not change this, nor will we ever be allowed to see ALL of the pertinent information.

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:13 am**

WSJ reporting this morning has the primary reason for the search was to get the documents back which makes a lot of intuitive sense to me. The boys and girls at the DOJ probably got sick of the lawyer dance for something that the man had no right or legal reason to retain.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-search ... _permalink

Should be able to view this link.

And of course all this material was all "subject to attorney client privilege" (read: our first statement that I could waive my magic declassification wand was pure BS so now I need another excuse for my fan boys and girls.)

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:03 am**

Kbg wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 8:13 am
WSJ reporting this morning has the primary reason for the search was to get the documents back which makes a lot of intuitive sense to me. The boys and girls at the DOJ probably got sick of the lawyer dance for something that the man had no right or legal reason to retain.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fbi-search ... _permalink

Should be able to view this link.

And of course all this material was all "subject to attorney client privilege" (read: our first statement that I could waive my magic declassification wand was pure BS so now I need another excuse for my fan boys and girls.)

This just concluded this morning and the law professor made the same point as above. It may end with just getting back the documents.

AUGUST 15, 2022 | PART OF WASHINGTON JOURNAL 08/15/2022
Washington Journal
Stephen Vladeck on the FBI's Search of Trump's Home
University of Texas constitutional law professor Stephen Vladeck talked about the FBI’s search of former President Trump’s Florida home and the legal and constitutional questions surrounding it.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?522303-5/ ... rumps-home

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:07 am**

From Dershowitz...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/but-her-em ... _permalink

Completely agree...in my world it's about the principles involved not the people.

Posted: **Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:51 am**

flyingpylon wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:09 am

Humans make decisions based on emotion, then rationalize them with "facts". One person's facts are another's mis/disinformation, and round and round we go. More information will not change this, nor will we ever be allowed to see ALL of the pertinent information.

Thank you for explaining. I get your point. Maybe I just wish I was in a coma for the past six years, pre-Babel.

Gyroscopic Investing

Bluff Called???

Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???

Re: Bluff Called???