I don’t trust Garland, the DOJ, the FBI, or the Biden administration (explained). Do you?

This claim does not need to be "examined in depth," to know that it is horseshit. Will you accept a reasonable explanation, of why that is the case, or will you speciously categorize this as "hate?"

A President does not simply wave his hand, and magically make things declassified: there is a very deliberative procedure that must be undergone. IOW, in case this isn't manifestly obvious to you, the declassifying of any documents, cannot be done secretly.

If it could, how could the proper classification be marked on, and applied to, these documents? Those in our government need to know, among the information they see, each portion's varying level of classification; this also determines who has the appropriate security clearance, to see which documents.


On another level, though, would you actually approve of Trump's irresponsible "declassifying," of highly sensitive documents-- that would seriously compromise our national security, as well as put our foreign sources of information at risk-- merely on his capricious whim? The truly laughable, because it is so preposterous, explanation I have heard, is that Trump is claiming he had put in a (presumably non written) "order," that any document he removed from the premises should automatically be considered "declassified." Think about that for a second, or for a minute, or for however long it takes you to realize that this mechanism would make it legal for the president to plunder all of our national secrets.

If it were done in the proper manner, of course, the result would be the making of all this U.S. Intelligence public knowledge, as its declassification would allow civilians to access it. But I used the word "plunder," because we already know that Trump did not do this, in the proper manner. Doing so, would have made it unnecessary for Trump to have loaded up, and found storage room for what I am now hearing was about 25 boxes worth of material (on top of the 12 boxes he had earlier, voluntarily, returned). But if he had let others know, that he had declassified all this top secret info, one would no longer be able to demand high prices, for it. Again, think about it, Joe Knows-- what other, possible reason, could Trump have, for wanting to physically possess all of these sensitive documents?

 

He claims he won the election in 2020, so there's no faith in anything he says

and declassifying documents isn't as simple as the presidents saying abbra cadabra, you are now declassified.

 

Yeah, I posted before I seen your post.

 

It absolutely does. They have had his laptop way longer than Trumps documents and I bet money Trump will see charges before hunter if Hunter sees any at all. Left wing media has even posted how this reflects poorly on Biden. Why is it that his belongings haven’t been search? Or Biden’s documents during his term as VP? It’s because they’re targeting political adversaries not criminals.

 

They wouldn’t even let his lawyers be present during the search. There is no good reason for that and leaves the question of planted material.

Secondly, there is no proof they recovered anything nuclear related and that’s just he said she said at this point. Even if they had why didn’t they let his lawyers witness it?

 

Well, there is one reason for your faulty conclusion: you are basing it on false information. Here is an interview with one of Trump's lawyers, who was on the scene, for the Mar-a-lago search:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/trump-mara-a-lago-fbi-search-lawyer/


Now, I am curious, could you please tell me, or supply a link to, the source you had trusted (or perhaps still trust), that no Trump lawyers were present? As the Attorney General stated very clearly, in his press conference, that Trump attorneys were in attendance, this idea that he would assert something like this, without plenty of witnesses to back it up, seems extremely unlikely, and rather farfetched, to me. What is your own source's evidence, supporting its contention?

 

Everything you say is true and yet it justs goes to show how much Hillary and Biden are dispised. If the Justice department would have done their job and held Hillary accountable for her misdeeds and investigated Bidens ties to Hunters computer most would say to hell with them all. This BS that we can't investigate Presidents while in office or former Presidents and their surrogates because it might cause a Constitutional Crises is a crock. It is a sad state of affairs that the 2024 election could be between Trump and Biden, neither, is deserving of being re-elected. If they are the only choices though I'll take Trump because he is more likely to take on the Justice department and clean house over Biden who uses, IMO, the justice department to persecute his enemies.

 

If they had let his lawyers know what they were looking for (which they knew was locked in a storage room) the lawyers could have let them have them and then they would be on their merry way. Thus there was no need for them to search throughout the entire mansion or Melanie's undies.

 

From your own source

 

Because the FBI ALWAYS just believes whatever suspects tell them when they search a residence.
C'mon dude. No search in the history of the FBI has ever been conducted that way - why should they change protocol this time?
Try again - and think this time.

 

Turns out his lawyer signed a letter that there was no more classified documents at Trumps residence. I highly, highly doubt that his lawyer would put his name in that without knowing there was no classified info. I mean why would he/she risk themselves like that? So I’m sure they were declassified

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/08/13/...sified-documents-mar-a-lago-search/index.html

 

You're accused of hiding cocaine in your basement. The LEO requests a warrant asking to search your basement (remember Garland's words of ". . .it is standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search, and to narrowly scope any search that is undertaken.). You find the cocaine where you were told you'd find them. You "got" him. The warrant doesn't grant you the right to search the rest of the home in search for other evidence since you found what the search warrant was written for, where you were told to look for it.

 

Or Trump told him they were declassified when they actually were not.

Look, we are literally talking about a guy who cheated on all his wives, misrepresented his University to students, misrepresented his
charity to donors ... why does this guy suddenly deserve the trust of the nation?

 

The search warranted granted the FBI the right to search areas that documents are normally stored - I've got documents in my closet, my safe, and my
office. Why you would think these areas would lie outside "normal search areas" is beyond me.

And if you've ever been to Mar a Lago, you know that the area searched was actually a very small part of the property, which include guest area, guest lodging, a giant ballroom, and a restaurant area.

 

We are also talking about a group of people that created lies with the Russian dossier, and lied about his sons business dealings and the existence of the Hunter laptop.

 

You ignored Garland's own words. "Narrow scope" doesn't mean the entire 11000 sq. ft. The FBI clearly knew where the documents they were searching for were located. His office and safe were reasonable to check also, but why Melanie's private room? Do you think the Donald was doing late night reading in her quarters? And you question my thinking while thinking that's reasonable or included as narrow in scope.

 

No - you don't get to point to a bank robber and claim he's innocent because another bank robber wasn't caught ... justice doesn't work that
way, dude. Each case on it's own merits. Now try again.

 

The FBI didn't examine the largest part of Mara a Lago. The residence is a small part. Closets are a natural place to keep documents in storage boxes,
sorry dude. You are asking for the FBI to change protocol cause your Orange God should be special. Doesn't work that way.

 

On its own merits? One is trying to incriminate the other so others integrity definitely, and undoubtedly matters

 

I seriously doubt boxes of classified documents would be hidden in clothing closets when a whole cashe of them were discovered where you would expect them to be stored (which the agents suggested a more secure lock to be installed at). You're imagination is really going for broke here. What did you think the Donald did?

"Hey Melanie! I've got these two boxes of classified documents I want to keep, but I'll keep a bunch of them in the storeroom for the FBI to take. That way I can keep these two boxes of stuff. They'll never think to look here!"

Did common sense get on the bus for you?

 

He wanted to work on them at home.

 

I had thought you were saying that the FBI/DOJ had not informed Trump's lawyers, so they could be on the premises, during the search. As to whatever this lawyer was doing which caused her to miss the carting off of the materials recovered, is nothing for which to blame the government. The fact remains, she was notified, and she was on site, for most of the search (she was the second lawyer to arrive). Is that not the complaint you lodged?

Joe knows said: ↑
They wouldn’t even let his lawyers be present during the search. There is no good reason for that and leaves the question of planted material...

In your reply, here (at top), you are referring to the 2nd half of your post, in which you make the wild accusation, that all of these classified documents may have been "planted," by law enforcement. Since there had been no basis for this speculation of yours-- which is actually contradicted by Donald Trump himself, who claims these documents he possessed, he had supposedly declassified, and just forgot to tell anyone about it-- I had been focused on the one of your claims which could be debated as a point of fact, not conspiracy theory conjecture. But if that's where your head is at, there is no point in my continuing to try to carry on a rational debate with you, over this story.

 

Funny-- you made me chuckle & smile.

 

They were on site but they were not allowed to be in the rooms they were searching.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fb...eys-agents-raided-mar-a-lago-warrant-nara.amp

 

Are you, likewise, sure that lawyers Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, wouldn't dare risk court sanction, by bringing absolutely bogus claims, before numerous courts?

I do not wish to rescind my last statement, about the pointlessness of continuing our discussion, however this message of yours had already been waiting in queue, so I am just going to dash off the reality-based response, that any lawyer only knows what their client tells them. Unless you believe the lawyer had also conducted a thorough search of Mar-a-lago, they'd have no independent source for this information. Since Trump was, no doubt, not telling the DOJ that he possessed these documents, he could not tell any lawyer whom he wished to represent that claim, to authorities, the truth of the matter.

It is like a criminal defendant, in any other case: you can't tell your lawyer that yeah, you really did kill the person out of spite, or to get insurance money, or whatever, and then still expect that lawyer to defend your claim of it being an honest hunting accident, or a case of "self- defense."

I am sure that Trump has enough legal savvy-- from experience, if nothing else-- to say to his lawyers, "Of course I don't have any classified documents at Mar-a-lago." Therefore, your point, about your reliance on the integrity of Trump's lawyer, is a moot one.