FBI sought nuclear documents in search of Trump's home -Washington Post

[R13...]

I love it when people say "Trump cultists" then in the next breath "but muh Russia".

You are actually calling the findings of a government investigation a hoax. By the way, if the dossier was false didn't investigations find the falsehoods?

The group is focused on a living leader to whom members seem to display excessively zealous, unquestioning commitment.

 

[Kieppie]

And the feds failed to establish that Hillary acted criminally.

The Trump investigation was active at exactly the same time.

Two investigations. One statement from the FBI.

This is just fact and not up for debate.

Voters deserved to know about both just eleven days before going to the polls... but they didn't.

Only one campaign was damaged by the FBI.

128 838 342 votes in total. Hillary got 2 868 688 *more* than Donny, but 77 744 votes in three states decided the winner.

One

Camnpaign

Damaged

Nah. Hillary lost because of Hillary. The world dodged a massive bullet.
Why still salty over something as trivial as this?

 

[PsyWulf]

It's tiresome having to correct folks who have rewritten objective reality and then decided to have a go based on their fiction.

Given their general detachment from reality re: vaccination and covid i'm very surprised that that detachment crosses other subjects too /s

 

[greg0205]

Nah. Hillary lost because of Hillary. The world dodged a massive bullet.
Why still salty over something as trivial as this?

I'm not, and no one really can speak to what the world dodged because it would be purely speculative.

We do, however, have a former potus whose home was searched on a espionage warrant 'tho, and we know for sure he had a box of the nation's most classified documents in that home.

 

[greg0205]

Can't stop laughing...

 

[Kieppie]

I'm not, and no one really can speak to what the world dodged because it would be purely speculative.

We do, however, have a former potus whose home was searched on a espionage warrant 'tho, and we know for sure he had a box of the nation's most classified documents in that home.

Since Hillary was found not guilty of acting criminally with some of the nation's most classified documents, I expect Trump to also be found not guilty.
I mean precedent and all that...
Why his aides decided to pack up his office including, all documents there, and take it home would make an interesting piece.

 

[greg0205]

Since Hillary was found not guilty of acting criminally with some of the nation's most classified documents, I expect Trump to also be found not guilty.
I mean precedent and all that...
Why his aides decided to pack up his office including, all documents there, and take it home would make an interesting piece.

Nope. No precedent.

Hillary wasn't charged. She was investigated but they couldn't establish she acted criminally.

We don't know if Donny will be charged yet.

We know a grand jury was empanelled, we know the warrant was executed, we know feds recovered documents, and if he's charged your last bit will be litigated in court.

 

[Emjay]

And the feds failed to establish that Hillary acted criminally.

The Trump investigation was active at exactly the same time.

Two investigations. One statement from the FBI.

This is just fact and not up for debate.

Voters deserved to know about both just eleven days before going to the polls... but they didn't.

Only one campaign was damaged by the FBI.

128 838 342 votes in total. Hillary got 2 868 688 *more* than Donny, but 77 744 votes in three states decided the winner.

One

Camnpaign

Damaged

She broke the law no matter which way it is sliced. There is such as thing as criminally negligent. She had classified and top secret material on her private server. That is not in question.

The FBI chose not to indict as they could not determine any criminal intent. There is a big difference. Again, you are not being truthful.

 

[Emjay]

We do, however, have a former potus whose home was searched on a espionage warrant 'tho, and we know for sure he had a box of the nation's most classified documents in that home.

And the FBI is going to have to show criminal intent to do anything with that information. Just like with Hillary Clinton, that very high bar needs to be cleared.

 

[Kieppie]

Nope. No precedent.

Hillary wasn't charged. She was investigated but they couldn't establish she acted criminally.

We don't know if Donny will be charged yet.

We know a grand jury was empanelled, we know the warrant was executed, we know feds recovered documents, and if he's charged your last bit will be litigated in court.

Seems others also point to it not really being about secret documents, but a convenient way, given the very broad search parameters (citing section 793, 1519 and 2071), to collect and pour through all potential documents to find information relation to the capitol riot.

Trump Warrant Furthers Justice Department’s January 6 Investigation | National Review

Already, we can see that the investigation is far broader than just the mishandling of classified information.

www.nationalreview.com

 

[greg0205]

She broke the law no matter which way it is sliced. There is such as thing as criminally negligent. She had classified and top secret material on her private server. That is not in question.

The FBI chose not to indict as they could not determine any criminal intent. There is a big difference. Again, you are not being truthful.

If she was, and the feds could prove it was criminal, they would have charged her.

They didn’t.

You just pointed that out yourself.

Wishing something true doesn’t make it true.

 

[Emjay]

If she was, and the feds could prove it was criminal, they would have charged her.

They didn’t.

You just pointed that out yourself.

Wishing something true doesn’t make it true.

Does Trump having classified material in his home criminal or not?

 

[greg0205]

And the FBI is going to have to show criminal intent to do anything with that information. Just like with Hillary Clinton, that very high bar needs to be cleared.

No they don’t. Illegal possession and obstruction are a basis for a criminal case and easy to prove.

Espionage would certainly require the government to prove intent, but we’re not even sure there will be charges yet or what those charges might be.

 

[Emjay]

You seem to have trouble reading. I said investigations by the US concluded that Russia interfered in the election. Your %s mean little in that regard, I mean what % impressions do you consider sufficient to make a different to the election. And meddling in an election doesn't necessarily that they would succeed, but in this case they probably succeeded in swaying sentiment against Hillary which helped Trump.

So, they were innocent, yet lied, obstructed investigations,

Russia engaged in extensive attacks on the U.S. election system in 2016

• Russian interference in the 2016 election was “sweeping and systemic.”[1]
• Major attack avenues included a social media “information warfare” campaign that “favored” candidate Trump[2] and the hacking of Clinton campaign-related databases and release of stolen materials through Russian-created entities and Wikileaks.[3]
• Russia also targeted databases in many states related to administering elections gaining access to information for millions of registered voters.[4]

I have been down this road many times, I am not really going to get into again. There is no Trump collusion with "Russians". The FBI have said they cannot find any proof of any contact with Russian intelligence. There is no proof. There was not even any basis for opening a surveillance operation into Trump's campaign in the first place.

The FBI has no idea who hacked Hillary Clinton's emails. There is no proof it was the "Russians".

Here is something for you to consider:

CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims

By Aaron Maté, RealClearInvestigationsJuly 5, 2019 Amazon.com At a May press conference capping his tenure as special counsel, Robert Mueller emphasized what he called

www.realclearinvestigations.com

Social Media Campaign

Mueller's other "central allegation" regards a "Russian 'Active Measures' Social Media Campaign" with the aim of "sowing discord" and helping to elect Trump.

In fact, Mueller does not directly attribute that campaign to the Russian government, and makes only the barest attempt to imply a Kremlin connection. According to Mueller, the social media "form of Russian election influence came principally from the Internet Research Agency, LLC (IRA), a Russian organization funded by Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin and companies he controlled."

After two years and $35 million, Mueller apparently failed to uncover any direct evidence linking the Prigozhin-controlled IRA's activities to the Kremlin. His best evidence is that "[n]umerous media sources have reported on Prigozhin's ties to Putin, and the two have appeared together in public photographs." The footnote for this references a lone article in the New York Times. (Both the Times and the Washington Post are cited frequently throughout the report. The two outlets received and published intelligence community leaks throughout the Russia probe.)

Further, in a newly unsealed July 1 ruling, a federal judge rebuked Mueller and the Justice Department for suggesting that the troll farm's social media activities "were undertaken on behalf of, if not at the direction of, the Russian government." U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich said Mueller's February 2018 indictment "does not link the [IRA] to the Russian government" and alleges "only private conduct by private actors." The judge added the government's statements violate a prohibiting lawyers from making claims that would prejudice a case.

Even putting aside the complete absence of a Kremlin role, the case that the Russian government sought to influence the U.S. election via a social media campaign is hard to grasp given how minuscule it was. Mueller says the IRA spent $100,000 between 2015 and 2017. Of that, just $46,000 was spent on Russian-linked Facebook ads before the 2016 election. That amounts to about 0.05% of the $81 million spent on Facebook ads by the Clinton and Trump campaigns combined -- which is itself a tiny fraction of the estimated $2 billion spent by the candidates and their supporting PACS.

These were the ads that were run:





Not sophisticated by any means. Inconsequential to election outcomes. These ads would have likely not even reached Hillary Clinton voters in the first place.

 

[greg0205]

Does Trump having classified material in his home criminal or not?

It makes no difference if they’re classified or not. It’s not a requirement for 793, 2071 or 1519… They relate to mishandling of documents.

793 is the worry for Donny. It prevents unauthorised possession of documents. Feds recovered boxes of those on Monday, and yes, he can be charged criminally for that.

Can mind you, not will. We just don’t how this is going to play out yet.

 

[Emjay]

It makes no difference if they’re classified or not. It’s not a requirement for 793, 2071 or 1519… They relate to mishandling of documents.

793 is the worry for Donny. It prevents unauthorised possession of documents. Feds recovered boxes of those on Monday, and yes, he can be charged criminally for that.

Can mind you, not will. We just don’t how this is going to play out yet.

*facepalm*

 

[greg0205]

Seems others also point to it not really being about secret documents, but a convenient way, given the very broad search parameters (citing section 793, 1519 and 2071), to collect and pour through all potential documents to find information relation to the capitol riot.

Trump Warrant Furthers Justice Department’s January 6 Investigation | National Review

Already, we can see that the investigation is far broader than just the mishandling of classified information.

www.nationalreview.com

I don’t think this has anything to do with J6th at all, but in an information vacuum folks will try fill the space.

 

[greg0205]

*facepalm*

I posted the warrant earlier in the thread. You should read it.

EDIT: Read Asha’s thread…

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1557920321411350529

 

[Emjay]

I posted the warrant earlier in the thread. You should read it.

I did. Your lack of appreciating the similarities between Clinton and Trump are funny however.

 

[greg0205]

I did. Your lack of appreciating the similarities between Clinton and Trump are funny however.

That would make your railing against Hillary while looking to absolve Donny irreconcilable IMO.