FBI raids Mar-A-Lago; Known criminal Donald Trump still at large

Will they find smoking gun evidence?

  • Total voters
    40
Lexicus said:
Of course he can! They have the documents back now, there's no need to charge anyone.
Click to expand...

What about the ones that got flushed?
 
Lexicus said:
I remembered they don't have them all back but when you're a former POTUS and allegedly rich you are above the law in this country
Click to expand...

Ah well best lock the thread, nothing more to discuss! ;)
 
The State of New York is not going to go after Trump for running a criminal organization and pretending it's a company because every major corporation is a criminal organization pretending to be a company. They won't go after him for tax fraud or any other kind of fraud because those crimes are ubiquitous among the ruling class including the people now bankrolling things like the Lincoln Project and the Democratic Party.
The feds won't go after him for treason, trying to overthrow the government, or stealing classified government documents because Garland and his underlings at DOJ are Republicans and/or cowards.

It is really that simple.
 
Lexicus said:
Of course he can! If they could avoid charging the bank CEOs after 2008 they can do anything. You'll see.
Click to expand...
:) Well it is not 2008 and Trump is not the US financial industry. The documents is a very narrow issue with little leeway. The only excuse not to indict is that Trump is a former president. Anyone else would already be indicted. The 2008 bank sandal is a very different animal.
 
Lexicus said:
The State of New York is not going to go after Trump for running a criminal organization and pretending it's a company because every major corporation is a criminal organization pretending to be a company. They won't go after him for tax fraud or any other kind of fraud because those crimes are ubiquitous among the ruling class including the people now bankrolling things like the Lincoln Project and the Democratic Party.
The feds won't go after him for treason, trying to overthrow the government, or stealing classified government documents because Garland and his underlings at DOJ are Republicans and/or cowards.

It is really that simple.
Click to expand...

I state my speculation that some underlings will be found to take the fall for Trump
Its generally how these things have ended in the past
The GOP will do what is always done and protect Trump himself from any kind of criminal justice, really no suprise
 
Over the weekend Trump, in a rally speech, said that he took the documents, kept them at Mar a Lago and that they were his ("They're mine!") so the government must give them all back to him. Possession and intent. The case would be a slam dunk. Now Garland has to follow through on his "nobody is above the law" speech. If he does not, he will make the DOJ look like spineless chumps.
 
FriendlyFire said:
I state my speculation that some underlings will be found to take the fall for Trump
Its generally how these things have ended in the past
The GOP will do what is always done and protect Trump himself from any kind of criminal justice, really no suprise
Click to expand...

But Trump has been breaking molds and redefining normal since he showed up on the political radar. And he can't stand to not get the credit for something. He aches to tell everyone he ordered the code red.

Whether he actually did or not is irrelevant to him. Because unlike Col Jessup, honor and duty are punchlines to him, and he will never ever ever pick up a rifle and stand a post.
 
FriendlyFire said:
I state my speculation that some underlings will be found to take the fall for Trump
Its generally how these things have ended in the past
Click to expand...
Right, but I think Trump himself gets in the way of that. Since he has to be "the bride at every wedding, the corpse at every funeral," he doesn't leave open the possibility of some underling taking the fall. On the phone call to Raffensperger it's him, gloriously him, who is urging the election fraud. And you know going into that phone call, he thought to himself, "if I lean on him, he'll have to capitulate." Ditto him making self-incriminating statements regarding the documents at every damn rally he gives. Those are on tape. In the right circumstances, they'll be played in court to establish him as the agent.

Oops, I see Igloo beat me to the punch here.
 
Lexicus said:
But fundamentally I just do not believe the federal government will ever charge Trump with anything, regardless of the evidence against him.
Click to expand...
The MSNBC programs last night were mentioning an Atlantic article that came out yesterday on this topic and predicting Garland will indict.
Haven't read the article, but apparently Garland keeps saying to people at DoJ "no one is above the law" and gets frustrated when they don't seem to know what he means by that. My grounds for making the same guess are pretty much the same thing. In public statements, he's said "we'll go up as high as this goes" and "no one is above the law." If you know you don't mean to charge him, you don't say that kind of stuff. And in fact, if you do know you're going to charge him, you do say that kind of stuff--to sort of soften the ground in advance. I totally understand your grounds for cynicism. And charged doesn't mean convicted. Literally all you need is one person out of twelve to be a Trump zealot, and the jury is hung. But I do think he'll be charged. As Bird says, he's way more high profile than the bankers who didn't get charged in 2008. And in fact he's vociferously flouting DoJ. If you let that pass, the precedent it will set will be devastating.
 
Gori the Grey said:
The MSNBC programs last night were mentioning an Atlantic article that came out yesterday on this topic and predicting Garland will indict.
Haven't read the article, but apparently Garland keeps saying to people at DoJ "no one is above the law" and gets frustrated when they don't seem to know what he means by that. My grounds for making the same guess are pretty much the same thing. In public statements, he's said "we'll go up as high as this goes" and "no one is above the law." If you know you don't mean to charge him, you don't say that kind of stuff. And in fact, if you do know you're going to charge him, you do say that kind of stuff--to sort of soften the ground in advance. I totally understand your grounds for cynicism. And charged doesn't mean convicted. Literally all you need is one person out of twelve to be a Trump zealot, and the jury is hung. But I do think he'll be charged. As Bird says, he's way more high profile than the bankers who didn't get charged in 2008. And in fact he's vociferously flouting DoJ. If you let that pass, the precedent it will set will be devastating.
Click to expand...

I read a lot of stuff in the Atlantic about the Mueller investigation, so I also think that my cynicism is warranted.
 
I'm thinking Garland will indict in November before Thanksgiving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FriendlyFire
Trump called for acting FBI director’s firing hours after FBI agents raided Paul Manafort’s home
Replies
8
Views
815
VicRatlhead5199
VicRatlhead5199
Top Bottom