Trump says Mar-a-Lago home in Florida 'under siege' by FBI agents
- Thread starter Claudia Love
- Start date
Obstruction now a major focus in Trump documents probe
An FBI investigation into the presence of top-secret information at Mar-a-Lago is zeroing in on the question of whether former President Donald Trump’s team obstructed the probe.
apnews.com
Trump won the 2020 elections? Give us a chuckle, so let us have your response!!
See why Trump's lawyer may need a lawyer in wake of DOJ photo
www.cnn.com
Video: Trump lawyer Christina Bobb may need a lawyer in wake of DOJ photo - CNN Video
CNN's Tom Foreman reports on why Christina Bobb, one of the attorneys working for former President Donald Trump, could face legal scrutiny after the Department of Justice released a photo showing a cache of documents seized from Mar-a-Lago.
www.cnn.com
1. Show the memo.
1a. Explain why in none of the communications with NARA or in any of their court filings do they claim that this is material they declassified?
2. False. When they came in June, they were not allowed to go into the storage room and they didn't search the premises. Instead they took his lawyers signed word that the lawyer had searched the storage room and was returning everything they didn't give back in January. (EDIT TO ADD: I was slightly wrong on this. Seems they did allow them into the room, but they weren't allowed to look through the boxes.)
3. He didn't have them strewn all over the floor. That was an evidence photo, like when you see the cops pile up all the guns or drugs they confiscated in a search. You will notice that no text is being revealed in the photo - just the cover letters with various details covered so they don't reveal anything other than they were there.
Last edited:
Dude, just post photos once.
You know what's even funnier is that Trump has already admitted the stuff is his and complained that the FBI embarrassed him by putting it on the floor - because he had it tidily stored in cartons.
If you're going to post nonsense, at least make sure that it's the most current bullshit Trump version of the nonsense. Not the bullshit nonsense that he was saying 3 days ago.
And only post the same photo once. It's all pretty basic.
Check out post #393. You don't even read the thread you're responding to.
Last edited:
The documents were and are subject to the administrative review by the office of the former president (yes, it's the actual a thing for all modern presidents). There was nothing illegal and certainly not criminal for Trump to be in their possession.
LOL!!! More looking less consuming of the MSNBC bs Mr. Ideologue. As per Politico
"What should have Trump worried, former prosecutors say, is the Justice Department increasing focus on obstruction of justice as part of the Mar-a-Lago records probe. In a court filing Tuesday night, prosecutors said the FBI obtained several indications that someone was “likely” trying to hide or relocate documents after the Justice Department obtained a grand jury subpoena in May for all records there that bore any classification markings".
When out of real evidence, go for "obstruction". ROTFLMFAO!
JC, can you give us the statute, section numbers and any caselaw that you're relying on when you say that?
Or at the very least, give us the breitbart or Charlie Kirk Twitter post that gave you this morning's talking point?
Your problem is that the DoJ is pretty competent and the judges appear to be agreeing with the DoJ. I'm happy to read your legal sources and discuss them with you. But we both know that you read rightie Twitter each morning and then simply repeat whatever you read without understanding it. So there are no actual legal sources.
Yesterday, you claimed that the photo of the documents seized was a fake. That bullshit was contradicted by Trump himself a couple hours later. So today it's a brand new spin - that the charges are completely unsubstantiated because. And because isn't explained.
Here's what I want you to do:
1. Go through lawyer twitter and list the offences that the warrant relates to.
2. Go to the statutes concerned and cut and paste the text of each section setting out the offence.
3. Post any analysis of the sections by people on Twitter who actually appear to be lawyers, like Akiva Cohen for instance.
Then we can both read through your material and chat about it.
He actually never rode a bicycle he hired people to exercise for himFelt down o a bicycle means that you can still ride oneWhich is something Grump has not been able to do since 1996
