• 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 142 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
MtnMan said:
He's not stupid, just totally corrupt, which is amplified 10x by his mental illness.
Click to expand...

No he's pretty fucking stupid. imagine an ex-president saying in an interview he can declassify documents simply by thinking about it. I honestly don't know how he's survived to his age.

He's also very corrupt, but he's also s-t-u-p-i-d, if he had total power like he wished for he probably would have tried launching a fuckin nuke into a hurricane, terrifying we had a president who didn't just think that was a logical solution for a hurricane but said it out loud.
 
QueBert said:
No he's pretty fucking stupid. imagine an ex-president saying in an interview he can declassify documents simply by thinking about it. I honestly don't know how he's survived to his age.

He's also very corrupt, but he's also s-t-u-p-i-d, if he had total power like he wished for he probably would have tried launching a fuckin nuke into a hurricane, terrifying we had a president who didn't just think that was a logical solution for a hurricane but said it out loud.
Click to expand...

"Hey, has anyone tried it? Seems like it would work when I think about it. All these advisors are stupid, they're probably lying about what would happen."
 
rommelrommel said:
"Hey, has anyone tried it? Seems like it would work when I think about it. All these advisors are stupid, they're probably lying about what would happen."
Click to expand...
Sure it will work; then comes the radiation.... nice whippy radiation.... Then we can get some nice whipped up radiation rain; of course no telling what it does to the ozone so maybe we can also get some additional skin cancer when the weather clear - oh wait we'll do it while the hurrican is over China and explain it was just an accident.... er something like that... oh wait doesn't he hate europe; maybe it would be easier to do it over europe after all they wouldn't consider it an attack....
 
So much for that lie.

Newly released emails debunk Trump and allies’ attempts to blame the GSA for packing boxes that ended up in Mar-a-Lago

221010111325-trump-documents-shipping-july-2021.jpg
 
Oh it gets better... as in better chances of an indictment (AND disbarment?)

www.cnn.com

Trump lawyer Christina Bobb spoke with federal investigators, source says | CNN Politics

Christina Bobb -- the Trump attorney who signed a letter earlier this year inaccurately attesting that all classified material had been returned following a "diligent search" of Mar-a-Lago -- spoke with federal investigators in recent days, according to a person familiar with the matter.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Turns out Bobb was told to certify that all documents had been returned when she had nothing to do with the actual search. She's just another fall gal with a nice face. Even better--they tried to pull the same stunt with her in February, but she figured she was caught in a lie and refused to certify back then. And yet, she eventually fell for it.
 
The problem with Trump making public statements where he basically does a scattershot defense of throwing everything up against the wall to see what sticks, is that everything he's written on social media and said in speeches will come into evidence if there's a trial, regardless of whether he choses to testify. He's going to lose credibility with the jury for not sticking to one logically consistent defense. It's like saying, I didn't do it, but if I did it was self-defense, and see how far that gets you with a jury.

For example, if I'm prosecuting, I would show the jury that he made false statements about how records were handled by other ex-POTUSES. Why lie about all that if he isn't guilty?

His public statements must be driving his lawyers nuts. This is just one of many reasons he has trouble finding attorneys.
 
UNCjigga said:
Oh it gets better... as in better chances of an indictment (AND disbarment?)

www.cnn.com

Trump lawyer Christina Bobb spoke with federal investigators, source says | CNN Politics

Christina Bobb -- the Trump attorney who signed a letter earlier this year inaccurately attesting that all classified material had been returned following a "diligent search" of Mar-a-Lago -- spoke with federal investigators in recent days, according to a person familiar with the matter.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Turns out Bobb was told to certify that all documents had been returned when she had nothing to do with the actual search. She's just another fall gal with a nice face. Even better--they tried to pull the same stunt with her in February, but she figured she was caught in a lie and refused to certify back then. And yet, she eventually fell for it.
Click to expand...

Can't find any rationale behind this that isn't overtly criminal.
 
woolfe9998 said:
The problem with Trump making public statements where he basically does a scattershot defense of throwing everything up against the wall to see what sticks, is that everything he's written on social media and said in speeches will come into evidence if there's a trial, regardless of whether he choses to testify. He's going to lose credibility with the jury for not sticking to one logically consistent defense. It's like saying, I didn't do it, but if I did it was self-defense, and see how far that gets you with a jury.

For example, if I'm prosecuting, I would show the jury that he made false statements about how records were handled by other ex-POTUSES. Why lie about all that if he isn't guilty?

His public statements must be driving his lawyers nuts. This is just one of many reasons he has trouble finding attorneys.
Click to expand...

Not sure how a jury could even be assembled here. People either think of Trump as the greatest president we ever had or think he's one of the biggest asshole/racist/idiot/scumbags in our lifetime. Finding 12 jurors who don't have a strong opinion one way or the other on Don would be very damn difficult. And this is infinitely stronger due to his constant blabbering on Fox News and social media. Maybe 12 Amish jurors would work.
 
They have to charge him; i mean it is one thing for him to 'accidently' take a few documents; and another to go to extreme to resist returning them - and in the process even threaten the DOJ. How do you not charge this guy ?
 
you2 said:
They have to charge him; i mean it is one thing for him to 'accidently' take a few documents; and another to go to extreme to resist returning them - and in the process even threaten the DOJ. How do you not charge this guy ?
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but how will the court system find an impartial jury?
 
BoomerD said:
I don't disagree, but how will the court system find an impartial jury?
Click to expand...
Well to get a jury that will unanimously acquit is unlikely. But yeah will the fear of a hung jury be enough for DOJ to not pursue? MAGAtards would consider a hung jury as INNOCENT!!! And should they try for a second trial, the outrage from the orange monkey will be insane.
 
eelw said:
Well to get a jury that will unanimously acquit is unlikely. But yeah will the fear of a hung jury be enough for DOJ to not pursue? MAGAtards would consider a hung jury as INNOCENT!!! And should they try for a second trial, the outrage from the orange monkey will be insane.
Click to expand...

If all 12 jurors voted guilty MAGA idiots would scream he's innocent and say he was railroaded by the DEMS. The only way I'd see most MAGA's admitting he was actually guilty if he was found guilty in court would be if Trump admitted to his guilt. And he could never do that, not even for the plea deal of the century. Trump will maintain one of his hairball stories where he's done nothing wrong and it's all the DOJ and FBI out to frame him, and his kult will eat it up as the facts. Remember a lot of his followers believe Trump declassified documents with the power of his mind, because he said he did it, it has to be true.
 
QueBert said:
If all 12 jurors voted guilty MAGA idiots would scream he's innocent and say he was railroaded by the DEMS. The only way I'd see most MAGA's admitting he was actually guilty if he was found guilty in court would be if Trump admitted to his guilt. And he could never do that, not even for the plea deal of the century. Trump will maintain one of his hairball stories where he's done nothing wrong and it's all the DOJ and FBI out to frame him, and his kult will eat it up as the facts. Remember a lot of his followers believe Trump declassified documents with the power of his mind, because he said he did it, it has to be true.
Click to expand...
This case will be held in DC. If DOJ manage to let 12 MAGAtard on the jury, they deserve to lose. But yeah 1 will prevent an unanimous guilty verdict.
 
The jury issues are just one hurdle they have to consider prior to making a determination. There are many, novel, legal questions that would also need to be accounted for assuming they seat a jury. Two of the many reasons this isn't a slam dunk by any stretch.
 
Pens1566 said:
The jury issues are just one hurdle they have to consider prior to making a determination. There are many, novel, legal questions that would also need to be accounted for assuming they seat a jury. Two of the many reasons this isn't a slam dunk by any stretch.
Click to expand...
What novel legal questions need to be answered? The only one I know is how thoroughly he has poisoned the well of potential jurors. This will very likely be the worst case of jury contamination in history.
 
Interesting...

"A Trump employee has told the FBI about being directed by the former President to move boxes out of a basement storage room to his residence at Mar-a-Lago after Donald Trump’s legal team received a subpoena for any classified documents at the Florida estate"

"The FBI also has surveillance footage showing a staffer moving boxes out of the storage room, the source told CNN."

Could add a couple of nails to the obstruction, destruction of government records and mishandling of classified information cases they're building.

www.cnn.com

Trump employee tells FBI that Trump directed boxes to be moved at Mar-a-Lago after subpoena served | CNN Politics

A Trump employee has told the FBI about being directed by the former President to move boxes out of a basement storage room to his residence at Mar-a-Lago after Donald Trump's legal team received a subpoena for any classified documents at the Florida estate, according to a source familiar with...
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com
 
SMOGZINN said:
What novel legal questions need to be answered? The only one I know is how thoroughly he has poisoned the well of potential jurors. This will very likely be the worst case of jury contamination in history.
Click to expand...

“Novel legal questions“ like:

Are past presidents above the law?
Do past presidents retain executive power?
If you psychically think a document declassified did it happen?
Can a past executive make decisions that the current executive can’t undo?
Is it stealing if you really want the documents?
 
SMOGZINN said:
What novel legal questions need to be answered? The only one I know is how thoroughly he has poisoned the well of potential jurors. This will very likely be the worst case of jury contamination in history.
Click to expand...

There will absolutely be EP and classification issues raised that have never been decided. There is largely no precedent on those issues, at least in terms of who the possible defendant is. And that means they'll absolutely be escalated to SCOTUS at some point during the proceedings. You may think they're based on invalid theories on their face (and they likely are) but that means nothing in the current judicial climate. They will have implications on both process/timeline, and potentially decisions/judgements.

Those are just 2 areas. I'm sure there will be more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top