Utopia Talk / Politics / FBI V Trump 3

Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Sat Aug 13 22:40:25 Repubs pushing the idea of trying to repeal the espionage act to save Trump http://twitter.com/randpaul/status/1558579480171614209 Rand Paul @RandPaul US Senate candidate, KY The espionage act was abused from the beginning to jail dissenters of WWI. It is long past time to repeal this egregious affront to the 1st Amendment. Repeal the Espionage Act – The Future of Freedom Foundation
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Sat Aug 13 22:48:32 http://www...tel-sources-us-payroll-1733230 Trump Raid Documents Could Reveal Informants on U.S. Payroll the FBI was seeking to retrieve Top Secret and "compartmented" documents dealing with intelligence "sources and methods," two federal government sources tell Newsweek—documents with the potential to reveal U.S. intelligence sources, including human sources on the American government payroll. The former president does not have authority to declassify such documents, intelligence sources say, because they are classified under statute rather than by executive order. documents that are covered by statute, and not classified under presidential executive order, cannot be classified or declassified by the president. That includes nuclear secrets (under the Atomic Energy Act) and documents that might identify CIA case officers or agents
Forwyn Member	Sat Aug 13 23:28:10 Lol Rand has been consistent in repealing overreaching fed laws from day one - even if its seizing on populist idiocy. One of the only halfway honest politicians on the hill.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Sat Aug 13 23:32:39 "Lol Rand has been consistent" http://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/309442958208405505 @RandPaul US Senate candidate, KY We should try people for treason. It's one of the four crimes given to the federal courts in the Constitution. Yeah ok dude, punishment for leaking state secrets is against the 1st amendment
Habebe Member	Sat Aug 13 23:54:29 No one as of yet has been able to answer my questions. Whom or what body has The authority above a POTUS to classify or declassify? And by what authority?
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 00:24:55 The Potus can declassify what he has classified. Otherwise, it depends on what act allowed classification in the first place. For nuclear stuff: "The Commission shall from time to time determine the data, within the definition of Restricted Data, which can be published without undue risk to the common defense and security and shall thereupon cause such data to be declassified and removed from the category of Restricted Data." http://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1536/ML15364A497.pdf#page=23
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 00:25:34 You are sometimes a bit lazy. Why did you not just look for yourself?
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 00:38:06 Jergul, I didn't download the PDF. Where does this commission derive its authority to classify or declassify? If its any where but thenUS constitution its a lesser authority than article 2 and thus can not constrain the POTUS.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 00:46:36 For example, Congress cant pass a law that is unconstitutional because Congress is not the supreme law of the land, they are constrained by the USC. So if there is no constitutional amendment barring a POTUS from releasing nuclear documents, and a POTUS is granted authority to classify or declassify at whime by the USC, they better change the constitution if they want to constrain the office. I beg that such a question be brought to the SCOTUS. #GorsuchIsMyHero
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:08:42 The authority is from the act of Congress I provided. An act of Congress is legal until overturned by the USSC. Here is the current Executive Order regulating how things are classified and declassified by the President. Too bad Trump did not ammend it eh? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12958
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sun Aug 14 01:09:36 interesting how none of the 'he can/did declassify it' people care what he supposedly declassified (but of course he didn't, there has to be record of it how else would anyone know) and if it's all declassified, let's publish it all & evaluate his judgment... would R's agree to that? i seriously doubt it
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:16:59 "Prior to public release, all declassified records shall be appropriately marked to reflect their declassification" So, where the documents appropriately marked to reflect their declassification? Also, how can Trump prove he declassified the documents? That is his defence after all. The documents were declassified. He has to prove that this is true.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:17:54 "The authority is from the act of Congress I provided." Congress can not alone supercede the USC. Even an executive order can not supercede the USC. It is but a recommended guideline AT BEST. Again, I pray this goes before the SCOTUS. Tw, If it's all declassified, yes, t should be published, that authority rests soley with Biden at this point as I understand it.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:18:57 I was incidentally correct. Documents are supposed to be declassified by the authority that classified them. There is a hiarchy, so I accept that you could argue the President can leap over the CoC.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:20:43 What ruling from the USC are you referring to?
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sun Aug 14 01:21:24 a statement from his people claims he took docs home with him for work (sounds so much like him) and that he had a standing order to declassify all stuff he took home with him... how convenient... and what a completely irresponsible way to decide what’s declassified though obviously just bullshit to cover his ass And just as with his election overthrow attempt, Rs completely focused on claiming he didn’t break the law with zero concern how corrupt, deceitful and irresponsible he behaved
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:21:31 I hope so too btw. The legal process will cost Trump and his supporters 100ds of millions dollars.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:24:25 Jergul, So you agree that as far as we can tell now, accordingnthe USC & the SCOTUS that a POTUS has absolite authority to regulate the classification status of government documents? Again I'm not stating this as a hill I will die on, but that as of now, that's how I interpret the law and no one has provided any other counter argument that makes sense.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:27:53 The espionage act does not things to be classified. It is enough that the information can cause serious harm. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793#e
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:29:20 The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case Department of Navy vs. Egan -- which addressed the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance -- addresses this line of authority. "The President, after all, is the ‘Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States’" according to Article II of the Constitution, the court’s majority wrote. "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant." http://www...bility-declassify-anything-an/
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:31:18 Jergul, But again, that comes from congressional authority which can not supercede the US constitution, it is very much so constrained by the USC. Thank the gods we are not a democracy.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:32:53 You are referring to some secret USSC ruling, so you would need to share it. But sure, if Trump can prove he declassified the documents, then he has declassified the documents. This is not a small point. Otherwise you have a situation where no one knows what documents are classified. Not even ex-presidents as many of them may have secretely declassified things and each would only know what they secretely declassified.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:36:38 You talk about the USC without explaining its relevance. Are you denying that Trump took stuff he should not have, even if declassified? That is illegal and punishable under the Espionage Act.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:39:22 But I get your sentiment. Trump most def should spend the rest of his life (6 years expectancy after factoring obesity) in courts fighting the charge.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:44:18 "Are you denying that Trump took stuff he should not have, even if declassified? That is illegal and punishable under the Espionage Act." I don't know what Trump took or did not, the list was as vague as it gets to be honest. What Im saying is that if a president is granted the authority to deem what is or what is not classified by article 2 of the USC, than an act of Congress means nothing. To constrain that authority would require an altering of the US constitution which takes more than just an act of Congress but the consent of the state's as well.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 01:47:18 Even for nuclear codes. As far as I can tell, Biden could publish the nuclear codes tommorow and that would be 100% legal. Congress alone would have no more authority to stop him as you or I unless they legally alter the USC. Like it or not.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:55:26 Sure he could. After denoting the codes were declassified as per the appropriate procedure given above. But classification actually has no relevance. Does he have things he should not have regardless of classification? If he did, then he is subject to indictment under the Espionage act. The only thing the government has to prove is that the documents relate to national defence.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 01:56:43 This is why people suddenly want the Espionage act revoked. Trump is vulnerable.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 02:03:32 "Sun Aug 14 01:55:26 Sure he could. After denoting the codes were declassified as per the appropriate procedure given above." Where in the USC or the SCOTUS does it denote the process of declassification? If it's an add on by Congress, it is merely a suggestion. "But classification actually has no relevance. Does he have things he should not have regardless of classification?" I don't understand what you mean. Lets say for arguments sake he has what he shouldn't, who decreed he shouldn't have said documents? And by what authority?
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 02:13:44 A standing EO gives the procedure. The court would ultimately decide citizen Trump had documents relating to national defence he should not have had.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 02:16:33 A potus can defy am EO literally at will. At best they could claim Biden decreed that Trumps documents were now classified. And then it is just attacking a political opponent.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 02:19:39 It does not matter. The prosecution simply needs to prove the documents citizen Trump had relates to national defence. Then Trump gets to spend the rest of his life personally fighting in the courts.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 02:22:27 A potus can defy am EO literally at will. by changing the executive order. You would really have enjoyed living in an absolute monarchy.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 02:30:16 "It does not matter. The prosecution simply needs to prove the documents citizen Trump had relates to national defence." But again, Congress made the espionage act. A POTUS authority comes from the USC. A beg, and plead that this goes in front of the SCOTUS. "You would really have enjoyed living in an absolute monarchy" I'm not gonna lie, Norway does look like a great place to live.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 02:32:23 Its crazy that people consider an act justified by overwhelming approval to be absolute monarchy. An act so powerful that Congress alone can not change it because Congress and the state's authorized it with over whelming approval.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 02:53:24 Trump has to prove he declassified each and documents is the point. Citizen Trump claiming he has carries 0 merit. Rule by decree at least is sort of rule by law. Rule by retroactive whimsy is that of absolutely monarchies. Trump is bound by the executive orders in force at the time in the same way all other Federal employees are bound by executive orders. "Executive orders are issued from the executive branch of the government, specifically the U.S. President. An executive order is not a law in the sense that it does not go through the legislative process. It is not binding on everyone, only on employees of the executive branch" "All federal employees hired after 1983 pay Social Security taxes, including the President, the Vice President, members of Congress, sitting federal judges, certain legislative branch employees, and most political appointees" I am not saying the US is an absolute monarchy, I am saying you would enjoy living in one. Whatever the king says, goes.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 07:24:08 Rand Paul @RandPaul The espionage act was abused from the beginning to jail dissenters of WWI. It is long past time to repeal this egregious affront to the 1st Amendment. Repeal the Espionage Act – The Future of Freedom Foundation ====================================== Rand Paul working for Russia and to weaken the US? NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! ;o)
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 07:28:11 "If its any where but thenUS constitution its a lesser authority than article 2 and thus can not constrain the POTUS." I'm not even going to get drawn into this stupid discussion. But Article 1 is Article 1 for a reason. We don't have kings in this country. Sorry.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 07:41:30 "Like it or not." Like it or not, none of that is true.
Forwyn Member	Sun Aug 14 09:17:15 Lol @ JMB Rand was speaking against Obama's refusal to rule out the extrajudicial use of drones against Americans when he said this. And as he said, historically it was used to "punish for leaking state secrets".
Forwyn Member	Sun Aug 14 09:19:56 "The president has now answered and says: I don't intend to do so. Well, that's pretty weak. I want him to say, absolutely, he will not kill Americans on American soil because we do strikes overseas that are sometimes not even targeted to an individual. We see a train -- a caravan coming out of a place we think people don't like America and we strike a train of vehicles without even knowing who they are. But with Americans overseas, I also do have some objection in the sense that I would try them for treason. Awlaki was known and it was published that he was on a target list for months and months. He could have been tried in a federal court for treason for treason. He denounced America and, in all likelihood, he would have been swiftly convicted. His son, though, was never tried. We killed his 16-year-old son and I don't think that that was appropriate."
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 10:49:26 Why does Jergul think Id like Norway? Is that an offer? Want to go fishing? To be fair, I'm not sure who the burden of proof is on in such cases. But we have all learned much like pardon power the POTUS has some pretty extraordinary authority.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 12:31:52 The king is ceremonial and has about the same amount of power as the turkeys that get presidential pardons. The State has to prove that the documents in Trump's possession are related to national defence.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 13:34:22 Jergul,Regardless, Its now on my bucket list to fish the fjords of Norway.Where are the Salmon at? Ive only ever fly fished Salmon here.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 13:37:37 Its not that I want uncountable king powers for someone. But it does seem that most left wing people would prefer an unelected bureaucratic board of "experts" to regulate the classification process.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 15:46:10 So do you. The Federal gov must classify and declassify millions of documents each year. The EO procedure was obviously written by experts.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 16:38:30 No I don't. The elected potus is who grants that authority at will. No unelected board can tell an elected potus what can be classified or not.
jergul large member	Sun Aug 14 16:51:30 Grants that authority by way of Executive Order. Congress can also grant that authority. A former potus would have to prove he actually did declassify something.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:00:20 "A former potus would have to prove he actually did declassify something." Considering there is not a mandated process that restrains that authority, it doesn't seem very hard. Time will tell more about what they are going after and the public opinion of it. So far most people see this as a partisan attack according polls Ive seen.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:03:25 "The elected potus is who grants that authority at will." No he doesn't.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:05:59 Murder, What limits his authority?
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:06:41 The law.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:07:41 What law?
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:09:02 "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant."
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:09:48 "What law?" The laws that dictate the procedure for declassifying information.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:13:57 "His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ... flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President, and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant." Cool! So since Biden has complete authority to control information bearing on national security, I guess he has unchecked power to incarcerate and isolate anyone with knowledge of sensitive information like the former President and all of his advisors. Or better yet ... silence them permanently.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:15:03 I like this stupid game. Tell me more about Joe Biden's unchecked powers.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:34:02 "The laws that dictate the procedure for declassifying information." Would the FLA congress be allowed to over ride that? I would think not being of a lower authority. Biden Absolutley can reclassify documents previously declassified though. You just spout nonsense with Zero evidence because it feels right to you. All Im saying is what evidence do you know of that says these laws supercede article 2?
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:38:18 Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, said that such authority gives the president the authority to "classify and declassify at will." In fact, Robert F. Turner, associate director of the University of Virginia's Center for National Security Law, said that "if Congress were to enact a statute seeking to limit the president’s authority to classify or declassify national security information, or to prohibit him from sharing certain kinds of information with Russia, it would raise serious separation of powers constitutional issues." From the same 2017 politifact article cited above.
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:38:33 Actually the more I think about this unchecked presidential power to classify/declassify any information without need to for any record of either the better I like it. If there is evidence of Trump declassifying the information, then Joe Biden could classify that evidence so Trump couldn't defend himself from charges of espionage and leaking top secret information.
Habebe Member	Sun Aug 14 17:50:26 Yes granting different branches of government different powers is crazy unchecked recklessness.... Can you beleive they grant the SCOTUS almost unlimited authority to try cases regarding the USC!!!! And Congress near limitless authority legislate laws! Crazy!!!
murder Member	Sun Aug 14 17:52:35 Tell me more about Joe Biden's unchecked powers.
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 16 08:14:53 Judicial watch is reporting they now refuse tonrelease thw affidavit. Certainlt because they had such good cause.
murder Member	Tue Aug 16 08:29:05 OMG investigators refuse to compromise their case by revealing all their evidence and their list of witnesses before anyone even gets indicted! OMG! OMG! OMG! I'm sorry but your campaign of harassment and intimidation are just going to have to wait until a grand jury indicts someone.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Aug 16 08:42:00 " until a grand jury indicts someone " a ham sandwhich!
murder Member	Tue Aug 16 09:04:04 I wouldn't worry about Trump getting indicted on any federal charges ... ever. I wouldn't worry about him getting indicted in New York either. Georgia is another matter. But even if they do, I'm sure the feds will call them off.
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 16 14:15:42 Nah, they are just going to run an open investigation that's super cereal secret guys to play up for elections.
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 16 14:16:21 #ManBearPig
murder Member	Mon Aug 22 18:22:32 Tristan Snell @TristanSnell BREAKING: Trump is representing HIMSELF, with no lawyer at all, in his case against the United States regarding the search of Mar-a-Lago and recovery of government records. The legal term is “pro se” - for himself. He could not find anyone to represent him. http://twitter.com/TristanSnell/status/1561824638396661760
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Aug 22 18:59:07 probably not true, he's got 3 different attractive-ish women who appear on Fox claiming to be his lawyers although if it -was- true his motions would be filed by 'tweet' ('truth') like this one: "By copy of this TRUTH, I respectfully request that these documents be immediately returned to the location from which they were taken. Thank you!"
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 22 19:13:44 Yeah, all of those 3 I noticed were all very bangable.Very Trumpian. I could see Trump representing himself, likely with shadow Council. If only to make himself center of attention. Lets face it, we would all watch and ratings would be at an all time high.
murder Member	Mon Aug 22 19:19:02 Sean Marotta @smmarotta A remarkable 33K likes and 5k retweets based on a misunderstanding of how new cases are set up in PACER. Trust reputable courts reporters, folks. (Trump is not pro se.) http://twitter.com/smmarotta/status/1561856782741512193
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 22 19:27:49 You offered it, now I demand it. I don't even care what the charges are, I demand DJT be charged wirh something so they can film it, stream it live as he defends himself. It would be more entertaining than anything currently on TV.
murder Member	Tue Aug 23 06:16:00 It would be the most boring trial ever. Trump couldn't go 2 minutes without getting reprimanded a half dozen times by the judge for lying and violating the judge's orders.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Aug 23 14:13:09 a Trump ally released a letter that Nat'l Archives sent to Trump (about Trump's efforts to prevent FBI from seeing the initial batch of documents (the 15 boxes) retrieved well before the raid) one snippet that DOJ wrote: "There are important national security interests in the FBI and others in the Intelligence Community getting access to these materials. According to NARA, among the materials in the boxes are over 100 documents with classification markings, comprising more than 700 pages. Some include the highest levels of classification, including Special Access Program (SAP) materials. Access to the materials is not only necessary for purposes of our ongoing criminal investigation, but the Executive Branch must also conduct an assessment of the potential damage resulting from the apparent manner in which these materials were stored and transported and take any necessary remedial steps." so that's just the first 15 boxes... (that GOP/Fox couldn't care less about)... then turned out he still was holding plenty more (that GOP/Fox couldn't care less about) the full letter is posted on a untrustworthy biased news site, but biased toward Trump so doubt anything fake to hurt Trump... not sure what good parts they see in it for Trump: http://jus...ter-trump-classified-documents
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Aug 23 18:13:24 as it's now public, Nat'l Archives released the letter too, so a more trustworthy site's version: http://www...-re-trump-boxes-05.10.2022.pdf
habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 15:51:37 So far the FBI has taken passports by "accident", although officially they were misleading about that. They said they do not have them, which was true, only because they had just returned them. Now they admit they potentially* have taken documents that would be attorney client privileged material. Twice Trumps claims have been accurate, we don't know how accurate the FBI has been because they released a bunch of black bars. At this point its a he said she said, the FBI is being withholding, Trump has been honest, easy choice on whos word to grant the benefit of the doubt to.
murder Member	Mon Aug 29 16:03:08 "At this point its a he said she said, the FBI is being withholding, Trump has been honest, easy choice on whos word to grant the benefit of the doubt to." At this point Donald Trump stole a ton of government documents ... many of which were classified. At this point Donald Trump isn't in a cage because he knows where too many bodies are buried.
habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 16:26:05 "At this point Donald Trump stole a ton of government documents ... many of which were classified." If that were true they likely would have charged him. If the FBI wasn't hiding EVERYTHING maybe I could give the evidence the benefit of the doubt. They literally redacted the reasons they redacted the affidavit. So we Dont even know their official reasoning for redactions.
habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 16:26:06 "At this point Donald Trump stole a ton of government documents ... many of which were classified." If that were true they likely would have charged him. If the FBI wasn't hiding EVERYTHING maybe I could give the evidence the benefit of the doubt. They literally redacted the reasons they redacted the affidavit. So we Dont even know their official reasoning for redactions.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Aug 29 17:03:15 Dude nobody gets to see an affidavit before charging because it would allow them to contact witnesses and destroy evidence. Trump already got special treatment by seeing a redacted version something no other american ever gets
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Aug 29 17:04:33 Habebe tretending his trumpanzees wouldnt be threatening to kill witnesses and their families if the affidavit revealed them
habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 17:12:27 "Habebe tretending his trumpanzees wouldnt be threatening to kill witnesses and their families if the affidavit revealed them" Conspiracy theorist. Affidavits are usually case by case basis, its not that no one can see them. But if we are going by what's standard doesnt the FBI have a history of you, making shit up to entrap people? This is the same organization that recently plotted to kidnap a governor and pinned it on a pattsy. Who literally had charges dismissed because the FBI plotted to kidnap a governor.
murder Member	Mon Aug 29 17:21:45 "If that were true they likely would have charged him." Donald Trump stole money from a charity for children with cancer and he didn't get charged. Donald Trump will never ever get charged for ANYTHING by the federal government or the state of NY.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Aug 29 19:25:08 "Conspiracy theorist." ok dude http://www...who-approved-mar-a-lago-search "Donald Trump supporters send death threats to judge who approved Mar-a-Lago search" Affidavits are usually case by case basis, its not that no one can see them. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-12/experts-explain-why-mar-a-lago-affidavit-remains-under-wraps "It would be highly unusual to see that affidavit now, let alone at any point before someone is formally charged, said Sarah Krissoff, a former federal prosecutor in New York now in private practice. " "But if we are going by what's standard doesnt the FBI have a history of you, making shit up to entrap people?" Ok dude, so if your criminal is found of any wrongdoing it's all a conspiracy against Trump
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 19:53:15 "Donald Trump supporters send death threats to judge who approved Mar-a-Lago search" Trump gets death threats all the time, Kavanaugh literally had an armed assassin at his house because someone leaked a document, the left didn't care who leaked it. If that's really the issue, black out names and titles, that would be expected. Wow, you found a NYC fed working for Bloomberg that says it's unusual to see the afvidavit.... How many afbidavit request are entirely denied yearly?
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 19:54:23 As for the FBI, isnt it true they plotted the kidnap of a still sitting governor? That's a pretty important thing to know.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Mon Aug 29 20:27:04 "On October 8, 2020, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced the arrests of 13 men suspected of orchestrating a domestic terror plot to kidnap American politician Gretchen Whitmer, the Governor of Michigan, and otherwise using violence to overthrow the state government.[1][2][3][4] Half of the suspects were tied to a paramilitary militia group that called themselves the Wolverine Watchmen" Sounds like MAGAs "Whitmer, the main target of the plot, had seen her political profile elevated over the preceding months due to her early response to the outbreak of COVID-19 in Michigan, in which she enacted strict mitigation measures such as a lockdown of the state. She became a target of criticism from far-right groups, and her measures triggered protests in April and May.[1][10][19][20][21] President Donald Trump offered his support for the protests, derisively calling Whitmer "that woman from Michigan" and tweeting on April 17: "LIBERATE MICHIGAN!"[17][22][a] Two weeks later, on April 30, armed protesters entered the Michigan State Capitol." yeah definitely magas Dude you need to stop watching fox news its rotting your brain
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Aug 29 21:42:45 "Trump gets death threats all the time" i doubt it... one of the few targets that actually gets you in trouble plus don't recall him ever whining about it
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 21:55:51 Jesse, It was clearly entrapment. That's why some were acquitted when they argued as defense they were entrapped. A very high bar to meet. Also, Trump was on a hit list of targets. This was an FBI plot. They funded, supplied it, came up with the idea and provided transportation. So yes, the FBI plotted to kidnap the governor. http://youtu.be/oXqqvUV4hh8
Habebe Member	Mon Aug 29 22:31:57 TW, Everyone does. FFS Star Wars directors receive regular threats now. Meh,the internet. Serious threats? Debatable.
Jesse Malcolm Barack Member	Tue Aug 30 00:05:41 Dude you're just crying that a repub terrorist group was infiltrated not much different to what law enforcement do to muslims who wanna blow shizz up unless you want those dudes all freed too
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 30 00:41:20 Its all on record, and yes I've argued that they have entrapped young Muslim men for 20 yrs wrongfully. Do you think I dislike Muslims?! In the whitmer case we actually have a legal court ruling not guilty BECAUSE OF FBI ENTRAPMENT. But yes, they definitely should go over the cases or pardon plenry of you Muslim men on a case by case basis.
murder Member	Tue Aug 30 09:05:20 "Dude you're just crying that a repub terrorist group was infiltrated not much different to what law enforcement do to muslims who wanna blow shizz up unless you want those dudes all freed too" Welcome to the US ... where you can walk into court and claim that the devil or the FBI made you do it.
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 30 11:13:41 Well, when the FBI admits to -funding the operation -supplying weapons -supplying transportation -coming up with the idea Yeah, that sounds reasonable to place the legal blame on them. If you or I did those things and tackled the pattsy we talked into coming along , we would still be in jail. ------ That said Jesse blames Trump for breona Taylor too, or more likley he had no idea what he was talking about as usual.
murder Member	Tue Aug 30 11:46:48 "Well, when the FBI admits to ..." Did the FBI admit to forcing them? "If you or I did those things and tackled the pattsy we talked into coming along , we would still be in jail." If you or I did lots of things that law enforcement does we'd be in jail. Try pulling someone over some time and administering a field sobriety test. Arrest them if they don't comply. I'm sure you'll be fine.
Habebe Member	Tue Aug 30 11:52:27 The jury determined that apparently. Now murder is pro cop, who knew, BLM must truly be a terrorist orginization.
murder Member	Tue Aug 30 12:00:39 Murder isn't pro cop. Murder isn't pro FBI. I grew up under surveillance from both. But "entrapment" is, always has been, and always will be bullshit.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Wed Aug 31 02:30:20 here are the attachments to the latest DOJ filing (about the request for a special master, Trumps latest delay tactic) http://sto...scourts.flsd.618763.48.1_1.pdf “E” is the letter from a Trump attorney (presumed to be lady who Trump recruited from OAN) where she claims a thorough search done and all documents were returned... however, the raid later turning up twice as many more docs than they had returned maybe lying GOPers will stop saying “why didn’t they subpoena instead of a raid??” now... not that the subpoenaes weren’t known about already... “F” the damning photo of docs, and I believe those were docs found in his office, not the storage room... presumably the place he entertains the slimy sleazy individuals who come to meet him
murder Member	Wed Aug 31 05:11:31 ...
	show deleted posts