CoolThis was back in the day. I betcha’ didn’t know!
Get your motor runnin head out on the highway
Fightin racial injustice and whatever comes our way
CoolThis was back in the day. I betcha’ didn’t know!
And as you can SEE HERE ON THIS BOARD cons insist on using words to make it something it is NOT!ZoWie wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 12:41 pm It was a duly authorized search and seizure. They came, they presented a duly executed warrant likely signed by the Atty General himself, and they left with the boxes that legally belonged to them and which the occupant had stolen.
The occupant was not detained, nobody went to jail, no legal cases impend. (Unless drumpf sues to get the stolen documents back, as is his right. He'll lose, of course.)
All the rest of the discussion goes to intent, and is beyond the scope of the case. Did the Justice Department intend to wage a vendetta against a former president? Not proven in a court of law. Did a former president illegally abscond with top secret documents with intent to peddle them to the highest foreign bidders? Not proven in a court of law.
Of course they showed up in force and waved rifles around. There is no other way to deal with drumpf's faction. Asking nicely gets you ignored, then you get doxxed on social media and have to send your children to live with some relative way out in nowhere.
The whole matter is 99% conjecture, and in the Internet era, conjecture gets taken for fact a billion times a day.
Doesn't have much to say at all?ZoWie wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 12:52 pm It's a con con-job.
It started a long time ago. First I was aware of it was when the Republicans gained full control of the media, and suddenly a war was a "protective reaction," classism was "trickle-down economics," lying to the media was "news management," and people risking their lives fighting for the rights supposedly guaranteed them by the nation's founding documents were "outside agitators."
Compared to now, that time was an era of mutual trust and understanding. Now we don't even discuss matters as adults. It goes from silence to confrontation in milliseconds. One side waves rifles around and threatens civil war. The other side really doesn't have much to say at all. It's all a show, and on occasion it uses real bullets.
Did you think you would see the day republicans, rank and file otherwise not necessarily far right citizens of this god damn country, would throw the FBI and DOJ under the bus in an obvious situation where their guy is guilty? JUST to be political!ProfX wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:13 pm I'm sure the FBI agents had weapons with them, they usually carry revolvers, Agent Mulder & Sculley did , but I see no evidence they brandished them or threatened anybody.
Trump wasn't at MAL. There were probably just staff and guests there. They would have shown the warrant to staff, and then cleared the area of all people in the basement & any other areas to be searched.
[bold] {chuckle}ProfX wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:13 pm I'm sure the FBI agents had weapons with them, they usually carry revolvers, Agent Mulder & Sculley did , but I see no evidence they brandished them or threatened anybody.
Trump wasn't at MAL. There were probably just staff and guests there. They would have shown the warrant to staff, and then cleared the area of all people in the basement & any other areas to be searched.
Motor City wrote: ↑Sat Aug 13, 2022 9:02 pm https://twitter.com/BerniceKing/status/ ... 6839518211
Cool
Get your motor runnin head out on the highway
Fightin racial injustice and whatever comes our way
i love you guys. Ya give me hope.ZoWie wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:05 pm He'd have to be convicted of something that carries that penalty, and it would have to hold up on appeal. There are a few possibilities but the odds seem long. We'd best devote most of our energy to getting the truth out to more people, and working to get out our side's vote in close elections.
It’s closed for the summer. Pretty sure that’s why they acted when they did.ProfX wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 1:13 pm I'm sure the FBI agents had weapons with them, they usually carry revolvers, Agent Mulder & Sculley did , but I see no evidence they brandished them or threatened anybody.
Trump wasn't at MAL. There were probably just staff and guests there. They would have shown the warrant to staff, and then cleared the area of all people in the basement & any other areas to be searched.
Hate to burst your bubble but there is nothing that can stop him legally. I know there’s a law that has been mentioned where the penalty is disqualification from federal office but that is blatantly unconstitutional. Neither the congress nor the states have the enumerated power to set qualifications for federal elected office. The qualifications in the constitution are the only ones that apply. Supreme Court says so.
chuckle. What the fuck are you mumbling about.
ooowwww we're getting serious now.Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:38 pm Hate to burst your bubble but there is nothing that can stop him legally. I know there’s a law that has been mentioned where the penalty is disqualification from federal office but that is blatantly unconstitutional. Neither the congress nor the states have the enumerated power to set qualifications for federal elected office. The qualifications in the constitution are the only ones that apply. Supreme Court says so.
Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/486/
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 514 U.S. 779 (1995)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/514/779/
People don’t understand the problems facing AG Garland. He knows that there are huge risks involved here. Especially with the current Supreme Court makeup. As i said earlier, charging under the Presidential Records Act could easily result in the law being found unconstitutional. Other laws may have problems when a president is involved.
i get that.Bludogdem wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 6:51 pm People don’t understand the problems facing AG Garland. He knows that there are huge risks involved here. Especially with the current Supreme Court makeup. As i said earlier, charging under the Presidential Records Act could easily result in the law being found unconstitutional. Other laws may have problems when a president is involved.