• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 56 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Roger Wilco said:
Trump repeatedly told advisors he did not want to give documents back.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1559607470212915203
Click to expand...
A strong reader comment to the NY Times story by Ms. Halberman linked in the quoted post:

Didier
Earth8h ago
I have been a lawyer for nearly forty years and been involved in several government corruption cases. President Trump and several of his attorneys will be indicted in multiple jurisdictions for multiple crimes. The most powerful evidence will be those closest to them who do nothing more than tell the truth about what happened. Multiple prosecutors do not invest this much time and resources into criminal investigations that do not result in multiple indictments. It is only a matter of time and President Trump's lawyers, to the extent that there are any left who can find the courthouse, have told him the same thing. Multiple indictments in multiple jurisdictions will reinforce one another and render less effective the deny, distract, and delay tactics President Trump has been using.
623 Recommended
- - - -
Some good replies to that comment:
gretab
ohio7h ago
@Didier Once one prosecutor breaks the ice and files charges, the others will fall in line like dominoes to file their charges. No one wants to be the first prosecutor that has ever filed charges against a former president. All of the rest will want to be second, and no one will want to be last.
58 Recommend
- - - -
Jon rogers
Charleston, West Virginia7h ago
@Didier I've never prayed for anything in my life but I may just start doing so in the hope that it will make this come true.
24 Recommend
- - - -
Expat New Yorker in Norway6h ago
@Didier One can only hope, but viewing the disaster movie from abroad, I have less and less faith in the justice system actually triumphing with this slippery moray eel.
10 Recommend
- - - -
Ellen Haiken commented 6 hours ago
Near Fenway6h ago
Didier: I certainly hope you are right in calling this for the side of truth, justice, and the (hopefully) American way.
8 Recommend
- - - -
Suredave
Detroit. Michigan4h ago
@Didier You're leaving out a very important consideration- his political cronies that will obfuscate and obstruct all efforts to prosecute.
- - - -
DR
Somerville, MA24m ago
I hope and pray that your words will come true. He should be if this country still wants to call itself the land of the law.
 
Last edited:
I said it, now those who have known Trump are also saying it, Trump wanted the documents so he could SELL THEM. Trade them. Barter with them. And a new suggestion I never thought of, use the documents as blackmail. Hold the documents hostage. Trump's personal GET OUT OF JAIL card.
"You come after me Merrick Garland, and the documents go straight to Russia"
As with everything involving Donald Trump, the truth of the matter goes far beyond imagination. Far beyond...

Trump could have taken only the documents promised to Putin, or promised to Kim Jong, or promised to the MyPillowGuy. It's hard to tell. But one thing we do know for sure is.... none of the documents were ever meant for a presidential library.
 
zinfamous said:
guys, he said "lawrs," not "laws." He's only going to be protecting the lawrs regarding classified information.

Until we have lawrs like that on the books, then Trump was absolutely 100% correct and you are all filthy lying liberals that can't listen!

YOU BEEN TRUMPED!
Click to expand...
Noobs everyone knows lawrs is a nickname for Hillary. How could you all not know this it’s so obvious.
Fucking cucks.
 
I hate to break it to both of you guys, but Lawrs is the reason the Stanley Cup was brought back to DC during Trump's presidency. He was just giving him a shoutout in that clip.

lars-eller-game-winning-puck.jpg
 
While the speculation is interesting to read for the first day or two, it's now evolved into the normal love/hate ranting, and internet "proof" (serious ranting). I want to see charges filled and a trial with the actual who what when where and why.
 
JD50 said:
I don't think you even understand the point I was making. You (by way of Comey's statement) were trying to overexaggerate the amount of classified emails Hillary may have had on her server, saying that just because it wasn't marked TS or whatever that it could still contain classified information. Well no fucking duh, but unless she read over every single one of her 30k emails and was a SME on the contents of each email she likely wouldn't know it was classified unless it was marked. It's not as easy to figure that out as you think.

Now with Trump you're trying with all your might to minimize how many classified documents he stole. You could take Comey's exact statement and it would apply EXACTLY the same to the 20 boxes of documents. You didn't do that for some mysterious reason. Oh I'm sorry Trump didn't directly steal them, it was an aide or something who physically put the documents in the box. Do you think Hillary physically set up her server and manually backed up her emails? Again, I don't remember you making that same distinction, so weird.

No I don't think Comey was lying, what he was saying is so blindingly obvious it doesn't need to be said unless he was trying to make it look even worse than it was. That's why the same point doesn't need to be made here, and people should stop exaggerating with regards to Trump. You might FINALLY be right about something, unfortunately you contradicted yourself like one page back.
Click to expand...


No, I just quoted Comey's official findings. You don't need to make it sound like I'm doing something sneaky...
 
pcgeek11 said:
No, I just quoted Comey's official findings. You don't need to make it sound like I'm doing something sneaky...
Click to expand...

As others have already said, his "findings" were highly misleading.

For example, one of the retroactively classified emails simply linked a NYT story about drone strikes. The CIA marked it after the fact. Story is still up on NYT IIRC.
 
Pens1566 said:
As others have already said, his "findings" were highly misleading.

For example, one of the retroactively classified emails simply linked a NYT story about drone strikes. The CIA marked it after the fact. Story is still up on NYT IIRC.
Click to expand...


Information can be classified even when it isn't on paper. In my 20 years working with submarine launched nuclear weapons I learned many things that I cannot discuss or write about as they are secret and top secret etc...

If I were to write this information or share it in an email they are both classified even if it isn't marked as such. Anyone possessing / knowing such information would know that it is classified and cannot be legally shared / stored on unauthorized equipment in electronic or hard copy form.
 
Greenman said:
While the speculation is interesting to read for the first day or two, it's now evolved into the normal love/hate ranting, and internet "proof" (serious ranting). I want to see charges filled and a trial with the actual who what when where and why.
Click to expand...
So, you paid attention for a day or two and then your eyes/ears glazed over and subsequent info was just noise to you. 🙄 Ahem!
 
pcgeek11 said:
Information can be classified even when it isn't on paper. In my 20 years working with submarine launched nuclear weapons I learned many things that I cannot discuss or write about as they are secret and top secret etc...

If I were to write this information or share it in an email they are both classified even if it isn't marked as such. Anyone possessing / knowing such information would know that it is classified and cannot be legally shared / stored on unauthorized equipment in electronic or hard copy form.
Click to expand...

That has nothing to do with a NYT article link. There were no cases of her doing what you're describing. At least none that were ever pointed out.

And I'm well aware of classified info/procedures. TS for 20+ yrs including both manual and automated downgrade.
 
Greenman said:
While the speculation is interesting to read for the first day or two, it's now evolved into the normal love/hate ranting, and internet "proof" (serious ranting). I want to see charges filled and a trial with the actual who what when where and why.
Click to expand...

Trumps own lawyer said on live TV that she couldn't look through the boxes that the FBI took because she isn't cleared. How is this confusing to you?
 
pcgeek11 said:
Information can be classified even when it isn't on paper. In my 20 years working with submarine launched nuclear weapons I learned many things that I cannot discuss or write about as they are secret and top secret etc...

If I were to write this information or share it in an email they are both classified even if it isn't marked as such. Anyone possessing / knowing such information would know that it is classified and cannot be legally shared / stored on unauthorized equipment in electronic or hard copy form.
Click to expand...
Not sensitive compartmentalized information and that was found at Trump's place. That shit is not only top secret but is need to know which means Trump when in office may not have been authorized to see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top