What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why Would Trump Hold Onto Anything From His Presidency That Would Give ANYONE Grounds to Invade His Private Space With a Search Warrant?

Godboy

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
27,910
Reaction score
12,344
Points
1,090
Trump is easily the stupidest president we've ever had.

That's why he keeps getting caught.
Bro, if you give Biden an IQ test, he doesnt score anything above 70 on it. Without a doubt, Biden is the dumbest, most inneffective president the world has ever known. Im not talking about just in the US either. No president in history anywhere has been as dumb as Biden. Who else tries shaking hands with ghosts non stop?
 

Smokin' OP

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
4,916
Points
938
Location
Florida
Trump then went into great detail about the test, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA).

“It was 30 to 35 questions,” said the president. “The first questions are very easy. The last questions are much more difficult. Like a memory question. It’s, like, you’ll go: Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV. So they say, ‘Could you repeat that?’ So I said, ‘Yeah. It’s: Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.’

“‘OK, that’s very good. If you get it in order you get extra points. If you’ — OK, now he’s asking you other questions, and then 10 minutes, 15-20 minutes later they’d say, ‘Give us that again, can you do that again?’”

“And you go, Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV. If you get it in order you get extra points. They said, ‘Nobody gets it in order.’ It’s actually not that easy. For me it was easy.”

In January 2018, Jackson said Trump had a perfect score on the MoCA, which awards up to 30 points for successfully completing tasks such as drawing a clock with the hands at 11:10.

“Incidentally, I took the test too when I heard that you passed it,” Wallace replied.

“Yeah, how did you do?” inquired Trump.

“It’s not — well, it’s not the hardest test,” said Wallace. “They have a picture and it says, ‘What’s that?’ and it’s an elephant.”

“It’s all misrepresentation,” Trump said. “Because, yes, the first few questions are easy, but I’ll bet you couldn’t even answer the last five questions. I’ll bet you couldn’t, they get very hard, the last five questions.”

"And I proved I was all there ’cause I aced it, I aced the test, and he should take the same exact test, a very standard test at Walter Reed Medical Center. I took it in front of doctors, and they were very surprised. They said, ‘That’s an unbelievable thing, very rarely do people do what you just did.’” Trump said.

Yeah, Trump got extra points, no one ever gets extra points, he's the bestus.
 

Mac1958

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
103,172
Reaction score
46,361
Points
2,320
Location
Opposing Authoritarian Ideological Fundamentalism.
It doesn't.
That's what I just explained to you.
In reply to this: Post 187
"That's what Trump and his cult are doing".
"Attacking the FBI".
"Attacking the DOJ"."
"Attacking the judge."

"Attacking the messenger means you dismiss the message because you can refute it".
"Rather than offer evidence to prove the message is false, you say the source is unreliable".

And you found out, it doesn't mean what you think it means.
My guess is that the rubes are just trained to think and say things as instructed, and the people pulling the strings in the GQP know better.

"Destroy the establishment", the rubes will scream, not really understanding the actual ramifications of doing so. They don't have to think, just act. It's STILL shocking to watch this.
 

SeaMajor7

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2022
Messages
917
Reaction score
1,079
Points
883
Location
Long Island, NY
My guess is that the rubes are just trained to think and say things as instructed, and the people pulling the strings in the GQP know better.

"Destroy the establishment", the rubes will scream, not really understanding the actual ramifications of doing so. They don't have to think, just act. It's STILL shocking to watch this.
What are these ramifications from disbanding the cabal of UNELECTED bureaucats that are out of control?????
The top scum of the FBI and DOJ need to be reigned in and held accountable for their actions!!!
The SIX FUCKING YEARS of trying to frame Trump is illegal and DISGUSTING!!!
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,410
Reaction score
8,968
Points
910
Location
New York
It doesn't.
That's what I just explained to you.
In reply to this: Post 187
"That's what Trump and his cult are doing".
"Attacking the FBI".
"Attacking the DOJ"."
"Attacking the judge."

"Attacking the messenger means you dismiss the message because you can refute it".
"Rather than offer evidence to prove the message is false, you say the source is unreliable".

And you found out, it doesn't mean what you think it means.
/----/ You're the one confused. Let me dumb it down once more.
I cite a Fox News story about Biden doing something wrong.
Instead of refuting the story with evidence, you attack Fox as being unreliable or lying.
It's called attacking the messenger and not refuting the message.
In the OPs case:
"Attacking the FBI". Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking those who committed the act.
"Attacking the DOJ"." Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking those who committed the act.
"Attacking the judge." Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking the person who committed the act.
Geeeze, I can't make it simpler for you.
 

Smokin' OP

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
4,916
Points
938
Location
Florida
/----/ You're the one confused. Let me dumb it down once more.
NO, retard, let me dumb it down for you.
I cite a Fox News story about Biden doing something wrong.
Instead of refuting the story with evidence, you attack Fox as being unreliable or lying.
It's called attacking the messenger and not refuting the message.
In the OPs case:
"Attacking the FBI". Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking those who committed the act.
"Attacking the DOJ"." Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking those who committed the act.
"Attacking the judge." Is not attacking the News Source. It's attacking the person who committed the act.
Geeeze, I can't make it simpler for you.
No, you couldn't.
You're a liar.

It's only 18 post ago.

"Attacking the messenger means you dismiss the message because you can refute it".
"Rather than offer evidence to prove the message is false, you say the source is unreliable".

IF he would have just stated that, that's his opinion, dumbass.

STILL, his opinion, he didn't state any facts.

I didn't state FOX was lying, nor did I "attack" FOX, they published his opinion, I didn't "attack" him either.
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,410
Reaction score
8,968
Points
910
Location
New York
NO, retard, let me dumb it down for you.

No, you couldn't.
You're a liar.

It's only 18 post ago.

"Attacking the messenger means you dismiss the message because you can refute it".
"Rather than offer evidence to prove the message is false, you say the source is unreliable".

IF he would have just stated that, that's his opinion, dumbass.

STILL, his opinion, he didn't state any facts.

I didn't state FOX was lying, nor did I "attack" FOX, they published his opinion, I didn't "attack" him either.
/----/ Geeeeze - it was an example to explain my point. It could be any news source that exposed democRATs for when thet really are.
 

Smokin' OP

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
4,916
Points
938
Location
Florida
/----/ Geeeeze - it was an example to explain my point. It could be any news source that exposed democRATs for when thet really are.
A news source that deals in opinion, isn't a "news" source, it's just opinion.
Immigrants flooding across border, was the only news, HIS opinion: Biden's policy at fault.
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,410
Reaction score
8,968
Points
910
Location
New York
A news source that deals in opinion, isn't a "news" source, it's just opinion.
Immigrants flooding across border, was the only news, HIS opinion: Biden's policy at fault.
/-----/ "A news source that deals in opinion, isn't a "news" source, it's just opinion."
And thanks for proving my point. If you can't refute the message, attack the messenger. - Saul Alinsky would be proud of you.
 

Smokin' OP

Platinum Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
4,916
Points
938
Location
Florida
/-----/ "A news source that deals in opinion, isn't a "news" source, it's just opinion."
And thanks for proving my point. If you can't refute the message, attack the messenger. - Saul Alinsky would be proud of you.
You're a lying, fucking retard, I did neither.
Except for your dumb ass.
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,410
Reaction score
8,968
Points
910
Location
New York
You're a lying, fucking retard, I did neither.
Except for your dumb ass.
/-----/ And you did it again. You attacked me, the messenger, not my message.
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,410
Reaction score
8,968
Points
910
Location
New York
NO, retard, let me dumb it down for you.

No, you couldn't.
You're a liar.

It's only 18 post ago.

"Attacking the messenger means you dismiss the message because you can refute it".
"Rather than offer evidence to prove the message is false, you say the source is unreliable".

IF he would have just stated that, that's his opinion, dumbass.

STILL, his opinion, he didn't state any facts.

I didn't state FOX was lying, nor did I "attack" FOX, they published his opinion, I didn't "attack" him either.
/——-/ And your fellow Libtard replied to a post quoting Mark Levin: “Levin is partisan. That's how he learns a living.” He never addressed what Levin said.
“The federal government tracks its classified documents or is supposed to. This entire matter is utterly preposterous. And more so as time goes on." - Mark Levin
 

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
51,834
Reaction score
22,655
Points
2,488
/----/ "Trump loves spectacle with him in the spot light.."
OK, there is no denyong that. Can you name any public figures that don't love being in the spotlight? Isn't it part of the Type A personality? Isn't it said the most dangerous place to stand is between (Insert politician's name) and a camera? Don't Hollyweird actors become Cause Celebs just to get free publicity even if they don't really believe in the cause?

 

Rigby5

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
25,695
Reaction score
8,246
Points
465
Location
New Mexico
Maybe I'm just being naive but why give people LEGAL grounds to come after you?

That's like leaving a job, especially if involuntarily and deciding to keep one of the cell phones that you've been using for both work and personal calls and then refusing or not wanting to turn it over when asked for it. I understand that having your own personal items mixed in with your work items presents a dilemma but you don't deal with it by lying about what you're holding and then not turning over everything that is asked for.

Unless I'm missing something, does Trump or anyone else believe he's entitled to keep classified, top secret documents at his home? Why would he not turn these items over? Just general principle?

Former President Trump is asking a federal court to appoint a special master to review the documents the FBI seized from Mar-a-Lago this month during a court-authorized search.​
In a motion filed in federal court in Florida, Trump also is seeking to prevent the government from further reviewing the documents that were taken until a special master is appointed, and he wants the government to provide more details on items that were taken during the search.​
The legal action is the first from Trump's attorneys since FBI agents executed a search warrant at Mar-a-Lago two weeks ago.​
"Law enforcement is a shield that protects Americans. It cannot be used as a weapon for political purposes," the filing says. "Therefore, we seek judicial assistance in the aftermath of an unprecedented and unnecessary raid on President Trump's home at Mar-a-Lago."​
Trump's attorneys argue that the search raises Fourth Amendment concerns and that the warrant used was overly broad. They also say the department took the unprecedented step of searching the former president's home despite what Trump's attorneys say was his voluntary assistance with investigators over several months.​
In a statement, Justice Department spokesman Anthony Coley reiterated that the search warrant at Mar-a-Lago was "authorized by a federal court upon the required finding of probable cause."​
The department is aware of Trump's motion, he said, and will file its response in court.​
Last Friday, the judge in the case, U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart, gave the Justice Department one week to provide a redacted copy of the affidavit used to justify the unprecedented search of Trump's residence. Multiple media organizations had asked the judge to unseal all documents related to the search, notably the affidavit laying out the reasoning and research. At a hearing last Thursday, the organizations said they do not want to release any information that would have a chilling effect on current or future witnesses, endanger people involved in the probe or compromise the investigation.​
Read the full warrant documents from FBI search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home's Mar-a-Lago home

The Justice Department argued at the hearing that redacting the affidavit would leave no information of substance to release and also noted that the search itself and release of the warrant last week had created a volatile situation where FBI agents have already received death threats.​
The Justice Department must give Reinhart their proposed redacted version by Thursday at noon. The judge has not said what, if anything, he will ultimately order made public.​


While the Justice Department asked the court to unseal the warrant, citing intense public interest, it has argued strongly against releasing the affidavit, saying doing so could compromise its investigation, other probes, the possibility of future witness cooperation and the safety of agents and individuals named in the affidavit.​
The warrant shows that FBI agents retrieved documents labeled classified, secret, top secret and confidential as well potential presidential records. It also reveals that the Justice Department is investigating the potential violation of three federal statutes, including the Espionage Act and obstruction of justice.​
The genesis of the investigation comes from an unlikely source: the National Archives. This winter the agency, in charge of cataloguing and storing important government documents, retrieved 15 boxes of key presidential records that it said Trump was improperly and possibly illegally keeping at home.​

Yes, presidents and vice presidents are explicitly exempt from any and all classified document legislation.

{...
The President has no security clearance, in the sense that other employees of the federal government do. Simply put, there is no document held by the United States government that the President is restricted from viewing for reasons of national security. It’s also impossible for the President to violate a security classification; the President has the absolute authority to decide who is and is not entitled to know what is in a classified document, and may reveal any classified fact he or she deems appropriate to any person at any time for any reason (except possibly for a few narrow cases where specific statutes make such releases illegal).
...}

In this case, what the FBI did by breaking into Mar-a-lago was completely illegal.
 

Rigby5

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
25,695
Reaction score
8,246
Points
465
Location
New Mexico
1) Because he believes the law doesn't apply to him
2) Because it gives publicity
3) Because it allows him to pump lies about how bad the FBI and DOJ are.

And there is no classified doc law that does apply to a president.
 

frigidweirdo

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
39,458
Reaction score
6,194
Points
1,130

surada

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
51,834
Reaction score
22,655
Points
2,488
If you're a criminal, the first thing you do is try to discredit the police that will be coming after you.

Whether it's the mainstream media, the FBI, the DOJ, the IRS. As well as the courts, and the judges, and elections, and the universities.


 

CowboyTed

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
13,288
Reaction score
5,223
Points
360
Location
Ireland
The Trump Tower meeting was a FISHING EXPEDITION!!!! A FAILED one at that. You keep pushing the same old RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA debunked BULLSHIT over and over and over and over.
That may seem to make sense in your subverted demoralized excuse for a mind, but NOBODY in the realm of REALITY is buying that CRAP!
:eusa_hand:
We keep posting this:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf

The Trumpers keep ignoring it... There is plenty of foreign operatives know that Trump is highly suggestible..
 

SeaMajor7

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2022
Messages
917
Reaction score
1,079
Points
883
Location
Long Island, NY

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

New Topics

Forum List

Top