News Trump: Mar-a-Lago just raided by FBI

Page 177 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,402
136

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
17,270
16,493
146
I will always remember Popehat's answer to this. If you're wondering what the laws are where ignorance of the law IS an excuse just envision the type of crimes that rich white dudes in suits are most likely to commit. That pretty much covers it.
I mean, the whole classified documents thing is a great example of it. How many poc's/poor people got away with a mj possession charge because they didn't know it was in their car?

If classified documents possession was chased and charged with equal fervor we'd probably never have a reelected politician.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
25,764
12,081
136
But now we have a recording of Trump not only admitting he had classified documents, but they are also a danger to national security (plans to attack Iran) and he wanted to show them to others. I think I will do that trust poll.
I can't wait for the "this was just boasting, like locker room talk".
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,673
8,212
136
Handing Trump top secret docs is the exact same thing as handing a five year old a loaded and cocked large caliber side arm and telling the kid it would really impress his friends if he took it to school for show-n-tell, especially if he fired off around or two at the time. Selling the left over rounds would be icing on the cake....well, before the cops showed up so to speak.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,745
9,998
136
Handing Trump top secret docs is the exact same thing as handing a five year old a loaded and cocked large caliber side arm and telling the kid it would really impress his friends if he took it to school for show-n-tell, especially if he fired off around or two at the time. Selling the left over rounds would be icing on the cake....well, before the cops showed up so to speak.

Pro Tip: If you happen to steal Mark Milley's classified plans to attack Iran...DO NOT show it off to some random dipshits who happened to be wandering through your vermin-infested golf motel and have some rando staffer record it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

you2

Diamond Member
Apr 2, 2002
6,781
1,819
136
Pro Tip: If you happen to steal Mark Milley's classified plans to attack Iran...DO NOT show it off to some random dipshits who happened to be wandering through your vermin-infested golf motel and have some rando staffer record it all.
Trump view is that why have it if he can't show it off.... it isn't so much what is written in the report as the bragging rights that he has documents considered top secret.
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,443
10,036
136
I'm one of those people who thinks Garland *might* do something boneheaded like announce a "review" of the special counsel's methods and tactics that might delay any indictment further. Ostensibly this would be to verify that Smith is following all department guidelines and policies and ensure a slam-dunk case--but in reality such a move, should it occur, would completely undermine Jack Smith and the case he's built. Any unexpected delays at this point would be fodder for conservative media to cast doubt on the veracity of this entire case. I hope Garland knows to stay out of it and not bow to political pressure from Congress or anyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,737
54,755
136
I'm one of those people who thinks Garland *might* do something boneheaded like announce a "review" of the special counsel's methods and tactics that might delay any indictment further. Ostensibly this would be to verify that Smith is following all department guidelines and policies and ensure a slam-dunk case--but in reality such a move, should it occur, would completely undermine Jack Smith and the case he's built. Any unexpected delays at this point would be fodder for conservative media to cast doubt on the veracity of this entire case. I hope Garland knows to stay out of it and not bow to political pressure from Congress or anyone else.
No way - the reason for appointing Smith was so Garland could keep his hands off it.

I don't know why you guys keep trying to come up with reasons why he won't be indicted (again). The minute he lost the presidency one or more indictments was all but a certainty.
 

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,617
1,395
146
No way - the reason for appointing Smith was so Garland could keep his hands off it.

I don't know why you guys keep trying to come up with reasons why he won't be indicted (again). The minute he lost the presidency one or more indictments was all but a certainty.
I agree, you don't bring in Jack Smith unless you are being serious about bringing charges against the person or people you are bringing him in for.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,745
9,998
136
Such a coincidence...:rolleyes:


An employee at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence drained the resort’s swimming pool last October and ended up flooding a room where computer servers containing surveillance video logs were kept, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

While it’s unclear if the room was intentionally flooded or if it happened by mistake, the incident occurred amid a series of events that federal prosecutors found suspicious.

FWIW, noted former US Attorney Andrew Weissmann, one of Mueller’s lead prosecutors, just tweeted that in his opinion, Trump will be charged in DC. This week.

Jack Smith was apparently present at the Trump lawyer meeting at DOJ today.
 

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,745
9,998
136
Loser Donald is apparently melting down after his lawyers met with Jack Smith today. An all caps post made on his pretend social media platform not long after the meeting implies that he knows something about the hopefully imminent indictments.

Throw in a grain of salt with this because he erroneously predicted his arrest in the Manhattan case.

HOW CAN DOJ POSSIBLY CHARGE ME, WHO DID NOTHING WRONG, WHEN NO OTHER PRESIDENT’S WERE CHARGED, WHEN JOE BIDEN WON’T BE CHARGED FOR ANYTHING, INCLUDING THE FACT THAT HE HAS 1,850 BOXES, MUCH OF IT CLASSIFIED, AND SOME DATING BACK TO HIS SENATE DAY WHEN EVEN DEMOCRAT SENATORS ARE SHOCKED. ALSO, PRESIDENT CLINTON HAD DOCUMENTS, AND WON IN COURT. CROOKED HILLARY DELETED 33,000 EMAILS, MANY CLASSIFIED, AND WASN’T EVEN CLOSE TO BEING CHARGED! ONLY TRUMP - THE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF ALL TIME!
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
33,151
12,588
136
Such a coincidence...:rolleyes:




FWIW, noted former US Attorney Andrew Weissmann, one of Mueller’s lead prosecutors, just tweeted that in his opinion, Trump will be charged in DC. This week.

Jack Smith was apparently present at the Trump lawyer meeting at DOJ today.
i certainly hope so

Loser Donald is apparently melting down after his lawyers met with Jack Smith today. An all caps post made on his pretend social media platform not long after the meeting implies that he knows something about the hopefully imminent indictments.

Throw in a grain of salt with this because he erroneously predicted his arrest in the Manhattan case.
after that tweet/"truth", i'd say charges are imminent lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,737
54,755
136
Loser Donald is apparently melting down after his lawyers met with Jack Smith today. An all caps post made on his pretend social media platform not long after the meeting implies that he knows something about the hopefully imminent indictments.

Throw in a grain of salt with this because he erroneously predicted his arrest in the Manhattan case.
Well he was right about the arrest, just wrong about the date.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,423
33,007
136
Loser Donald is apparently melting down after his lawyers met with Jack Smith today. An all caps post made on his pretend social media platform not long after the meeting implies that he knows something about the hopefully imminent indictments.

Throw in a grain of salt with this because he erroneously predicted his arrest in the Manhattan case.
If nothing else, charge him with abuse of an apostrophe.
 

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,617
1,395
146
I think most likely this week but absent that probably next week.

Trying not to be too much of a dick here but I remember lots of people here saying he would never be charged with anything. This isn’t even the end, there are more charges to come.
I've been thinking by the 12th or so.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
26,060
24,367
136
Of course Trump would get indicted.

What was stupid is thinking trump would go to jail over the hush money payments. Now that was just hilarious shit.

As far as being in jail for anything else by the 2024 election for the actual serious charges, that is maybe a coin flip at best, but unlikely due to how slowly the wheels of justice turn as far as the timing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: soundforbjt

manly

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
13,189
3,970
136
I think this majorly raises the odds he cuts a deal with another Republican where he drops out and endorses them in exchange for the promise of a pardon because I can't see any way the Justice Department lets this go. (again, assuming the article is accurate)

The only way he stays out of prison here other than dying is if he wins the presidency himself or another Republican pardons him, and 'he wanted to share secret attack plans about Iran' seems like an extremely powerful attack.
Is that type of deal legal? I'm assuming you mean a secret quid pro quo, and not that Trump has ever cared about the law but presumably the guy on the other side of the Faustian bargain does.

Trump will never grasp that he was a government employee - a Civil Servant. And that the “toys” the president of the United States gets to play with are not actually his, and their use is governed by federal law. What he’s gotten away with almost every single time in his life doesn't pale in comparison to being the president. What doesn’t seem to occur to him, and hasn’t since 2015, is that the President of the United States comes under a lot more scrutiny than he’s used to. He just runs his mouth without taking anything into consideration. Such as who might be listening, now or in the future, and if he can be sued or sent to jail for it.
LMAO just because he was POTUS doesn't mean he was ever a civil servant. The lesson he learned from his term is actually the opposite of what you're suggesting. In 2016, his campaign didn't actually think they'd win and I doubt Trump gave a lot of thought to what the job demands. But once in office, he found it a perfect vehicle to enrich his own pockets and also to have virtual immunity from all prosecution for the entirety of his term. Now he doesn't have such immunity, so he's desperate to get it back.

My understanding is that a very tough case to make. Obstruction of Justice is a pretty open and shut case.
Most prosecutors are astute; they don't like losing and will bring charges only for the strongest cases. This is especially so for a special prosecutor/counsel because he's not going to have a bunch of easy wins to offset occasional losses. The last thing Jack Smith wants is to be a partisan tool like John Durham.
 

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
25,443
10,036
136
LOL @ the whole pool draining scenario—how the hell are surveillance servers being stored anywhere NEAR a pool??
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,738
31,099
146
LOL @ the whole pool draining scenario—how the hell are surveillance servers being stored anywhere NEAR a pool??

they were stored "in the pool house," (flooded a room, from draining the pool--I mean, that's a pool house. how do you do that if not intentionally? lmao) which became flooded when an employee drained the pool...which is what the story says.

I mean, I know we aren't all titans of industry around here, but most of us poors know how pools and pool houses work, and how they are built---we all know that actual claim from Trump's people is utter nonsense.