• 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 151 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Trump has, at one of his mini-rallies, pre-announced that he has a "very big announcement" coming on Nov 15th from Mar a Larceny-o
 
Rumor has it that Garland has a special counsel lined up in case any indictments are forthcoming after a campaign declaration. As in, they already have a vetted short-list of people least likely to raise conservatives' ire (not that it matters).
 
Guys Trump announcing a candidacy will not change if he is indicted. If anything it increases the odds.

I’m pretty confident he knows this, I think he is resigned to indictment (which is in fact inevitable) so his strategy now is how to stay out of prison.
 
Garland WILL DO NOTHING until all of the RIGGED ELECTION claims are litigated in the courts. You know, the rigged election claims from Walker and Masters and Rubio and Grassley and Ryan and Oz and from that crazy lady in AZ.
 
sportage said:
Garland WILL DO NOTHING until all of the RIGGED ELECTION claims are litigated in the courts. You know, the rigged election claims from Walker and Masters and Rubio and Grassley and Ryan and Oz and from that crazy lady in AZ.
Click to expand...
Nah, Trump will be indicted in the next couple months. If he declares his candidacy it is to keep him out of prison, not to win the presidency.
 
I seriously doubt Trump will announce a candidacy for President for a couple of reasons. He knows he will lose, and his campaign donations will come under the scrutiny of the FEC if he does announce. Collecting money from his gullible supporters means everything to him and he probably thinks he can run out the clock on facing any real consequences from future indictments. But announcing that he may announce such is just enough of a tease to keep his grift going.
 
conehead433 said:
I seriously doubt Trump will announce a candidacy for President for a couple of reasons. He knows he will lose, and his campaign donations will come under the scrutiny of the FEC if he does announce. Collecting money from his gullible supporters means everything to him and he probably thinks he can run out the clock on facing any real consequences from future indictments. But announcing that he may announce such is just enough of a tease to keep his grift going.
Click to expand...
He won’t lose if all the 300 or so election-deniers get elected in the positions he needs.
 
you2 said:
To be honest the best thing DOJ could do would be to indict Trump prior to his declaring he is running for re-election which basically means this or next week....
Click to expand...
I think they need to do it after he declares he is running, to end the incorrect belief that running for office stops anyone from being indicted and charged for a crime, as such false belief is being weaponized and used to not only keep criminals from being tried (Trump), but to put such criminals in powerful position in our government that they should automatically be disqualified for (Trump again). which is another reason we need our constitution amended to prevent such criminals from ever running or holding office, that does not rely on Congress to stop them. Currently, it falls on Congress to stop them from running. Even the watchdog group that claims they will file a suit under the 14th amendment for Trump's involvement in the insurrection won't make it past the SCOTUS because I believe the constitution leaves enforcement of that clause in the 14th amendment on Congress. Meaning the watch dog group doesn't have the standing (wrong term??) to file such lawsuit.. it will be thrown out on those grounds.. We have already seen it in previous lawsuits.
 
NWRMidnight said:
I think they need to do it after he declares he is running, to end the incorrect belief that running for office stops anyone from being indicted and charged for a crime, as such false belief is being weaponized and used to not only keep criminals from being tried (Trump), but to put such criminals in powerful position in our government that they should automatically be disqualified for (Trump again). which is another reason we need our constitution amended to prevent such criminals from ever running or holding office, that does not rely on Congress to stop them. Currently, it falls on Congress to stop them from running. Even the watchdog group that claims they will file a suit under the 14th amendment for Trump's involvement in the insurrection won't make it past the SCOTUS because I believe the constitution leaves enforcement of that clause in the 14th amendment on Congress. Meaning the watch dog group doesn't have the standing (wrong term??) to file such lawsuit.. it will be thrown out on those grounds.. We have already seen it in previous lawsuits.
Click to expand...
that's an interesting take. it would certainly set a precedent.
 
fskimospy said:
Guys Trump announcing a candidacy will not change if he is indicted. If anything it increases the odds.

I’m pretty confident he knows this, I think he is resigned to indictment (which is in fact inevitable) so his strategy now is how to stay out of prison.
Click to expand...
ABC election coverage about 45 minutes ago, analyst noted that it's been a very bad night for Trump. His hand picked candidates are by and large doing pretty badly. His showing up at their rallies has turned out to be the kiss of death. The Republicans who have not declared for MAGA have done relatively well compared to those who have. Is the writing not on the wall now??? How likely are Republican candidates for whatever going to want to associate themselves with TFG?

Would not surprise me if a certain stink associated with election deniers is in the offing.
 
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc...ters-kash-patels-immunity-intrigues-rcna55673

~Sometimes you must sacrifice a little fish to land a giant whale.

~That seems to be the Justice Department’s strategy in granting immunity to Kash Patel, an aide to former President Donald Trump, in its investigation into the government documents seized at Mar-a-Lago. In addition, The Wall Street Journal reports, “Other Trump associates involved in the Mar-a-Lago documents matter also have been offered some form of immunity,” including Trump lawyer Christina Bobb, citing “people familiar with the matter.” The report indicated that Bobb declined the immunity offer because she said she didn’t need it. But more generally, immunizing witnesses suggests DOJ is now focusing on hauling in its catch.

oh that's interesting and timely
 
trump makes the bigliest, bestest legal arguments. JFC
edition.cnn.com

Trump tells Mar-a-Lago special master that he got to decide which White House documents were his to keep | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump argued in a newly public court filing that a president gets to decide whether records from his White House are personal documents -- and that he had decided that all the records he took to Mar-a-Lago were in fact his personal property.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com

Former President Donald Trump argued in a newly public court filing that a president gets to decide whether records from his White House are personal documents – and that he had decided at all the records he took to Mar-a-Lago were in fact his personal property.
......
The Justice Department responded by saying that Trump’s legal theory for when he can deem records from his White House as personal is wrong.

“Plaintiff may not designate records qualifying as ‘Presidential Records’ under the Presidential Record Act … as his ‘personal’ records simply by saying so,” the department said, adding that such a theory would “nullify” the purpose of the law.
Click to expand...
 
Fenixgoon said:
trump makes the bigliest, bestest legal arguments. JFC
edition.cnn.com

Trump tells Mar-a-Lago special master that he got to decide which White House documents were his to keep | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump argued in a newly public court filing that a president gets to decide whether records from his White House are personal documents -- and that he had decided that all the records he took to Mar-a-Lago were in fact his personal property.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com
Click to expand...
Yes by this logic the president gets to take personal possession of whatever national secrets he wants at any time. Nuclear secrets? Not so secret if the president wants to turn those documents into a mural at his house.
 
Fenixgoon said:
trump makes the bigliest, bestest legal arguments. JFC
edition.cnn.com

Trump tells Mar-a-Lago special master that he got to decide which White House documents were his to keep | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump argued in a newly public court filing that a president gets to decide whether records from his White House are personal documents -- and that he had decided that all the records he took to Mar-a-Lago were in fact his personal property.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com
Click to expand...
Trump has revealed a new Presidential psychic power! Based on the description this one requires an activation word.
 
Fenixgoon said:
trump makes the bigliest, bestest legal arguments. JFC
edition.cnn.com

Trump tells Mar-a-Lago special master that he got to decide which White House documents were his to keep | CNN Politics

Former President Donald Trump argued in a newly public court filing that a president gets to decide whether records from his White House are personal documents -- and that he had decided that all the records he took to Mar-a-Lago were in fact his personal property.
edition.cnn.com edition.cnn.com
Click to expand...
Sigh. i was about to post that link; the guy is crazy. No they were classified i unclassified them; no they are presidental records; it was my personal record that i was debating who should be pardoned.... what a clown; just go ahead and hang the sucker.

I can just imagine if he shot someone; naw i didn't shoot them - they walked into the path of my bullet - wasn't my fault they didn't watch where they were going...
 
you2 said:
Sigh. i was about to post that link; the guy is crazy. No they were classified i unclassified them; no they are presidental records; it was my personal record that i was debating who should be pardoned.... what a clown; just go ahead and hang the sucker.

I can just imagine if he shot someone; naw i didn't shoot them - they walked into the path of my bullet - wasn't my fault they didn't watch where they were going...
Click to expand...
Let’s not forget he also claimed those same records were planted by the FBI to frame him.

He always floods the zone with bullshit. Best to just keep moving forward with prosecution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top