So for what purpose does an ex president have for TS/SCI

[Trigeek]

Documents? Why would he be holding on to nuclear secrets? Was he going to sit in the basement and walk through memory lane? Was he going to use them in his next career opportunity?
Obviously I can only think of one reason he would have these documents?

Everyonyof the documents to be assumed comprised. Right?

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

I’m sorry but he didn’t know anything about this. It was his people who did this and they didn’t know what they were taking. Donald is 100% innocent here and the victim of an elaborate hoax by the left that has overstepped the law once again and could have solved this with lawyers.

How to pronounce "Nuclear"

You might need some practice:

ucf.forums.rivals.com

 

[Nautiknight]

You have some good questions here. It would be interesting to see and know what past presidents took out of there as well. He should be held account here.

I would add this. In the US military there are millions of enlisted and officers who are exposed to and do highly secret stuff. They then leave the military with all this secret stuff in their heads. Some are highly decorated scientist and such .. some like my brother who was third in command of a ballistic missile submarine in the late 80s to this day knows a lot about the nuclear Navy and it's workings .

I am not saying Trump shouldn't be questioned here ,as he should . However, the notion he alone has somehow exposed us to a risk by having a box of papers locked up in his compound is not all that risky when you look at how many millions of people who walk around knowing as much if not more than what could be in those papers and some how we managed to make it this far.

The FBI needs to chat with the Donald ,get the stuff back and if he broke a law then decide how to punish the guy.

 

[hemightbejeremy]

Another thread to ask Trump nut-swingers why they are swinging? Haven’t you seen basically every other thread in here where the chocolate guy posts a monologue?

 

[UCFBS]

You have some good questions here. It would be interesting to see and know what past presidents took out of there as well. He should be held account here.

And that's what's finally happening. I'm glad to see it happen. It's gone unquestioned far, far too long. Trump and his lawyers are even using the Hillary lawyer excuse that she 'had the right to declassify information' ... and Hillary was appointed, not even elected.

It's about time this happened. I'm just pissed it hasn't been done before, but ... that's all 'water under the bridge.' The Democratic party will reap what they sow here as well, in the future. And I'm fine with that, by holding Republicans and Trump accountable.

The FBI needs to chat with the Donald ,get the stuff back and if he broke a law then decide how to punish the guy.

Trump signed the bill that made it a felony in 2018, precisely because of HIllary. It had always been against the law, but never enforced, with no specifics on how to classify the charge. That changed with the 2018 federal law.

And the FBI executed this exactly how they should have, because of Hillary. It's about time this happened as well.

I'm hopeful when this is all said and done, while letting the investigation run its course, Biden pardons Trump, and says, "It's time to heal and move past this." I fear he won't, giving into the 'radicals,' but maybe he will ...

Especially if he is either re-elected or decides not to run again. Because this is about as hypocritical as things get.

Another thread to ask Trump nut-swingers why they are swinging? Haven’t you seen basically every other thread in here where the chocolate guy posts a monologue?

You literally spend your time here 'pulling out assumptions out of your @$$' based on 100% party affiliation. Your latest, self-destroying credibility move?

I'm still laughing at your, "88 is supposedly better for the environment," which is literally that same, "Oh, the democrats would never implement something that was actually anti-Clean Air Act." It's all you do here ... literally.

Meanwhile, objective people like myself quote experts, even government transcripts, as well as the laws or statues, which are at-odds with your assumptions, and US Media sheep'ism. And I'm doing the same with Republicans on Trump as well.

Seriously ... it's not just Trump nut-swingers, but a lot of Republicans, for finally actually executing what they should have also done with Hillary, and even other Presidents ... but especially Hillary, because she was never elected.

That's why I have to agree with the Republicans too, even if I'm all for holding Trump accountable, under the new law. But you wouldn't know hypocrisy, let alone being repeatedly wrong, no matter how many times I prove and showcase it.

You have zero credibility these days, and are one of the most subjective people here. Try stopping to read the details and facts, instead of just insulting.

 

[UCFBS]

I’m sorry but he didn’t know anything about this. It was his people who did this and they didn’t know what they were taking. Donald is 100% innocent here and the victim of an elaborate hoax by the left that has overstepped the law once again and could have solved this with lawyers.

How to pronounce "Nuclear"

You might need some practice:

ucf.forums.rivals.com

Now that had me cracking up ... and yes, I 'get why.'

Good show!

 

[DaShuckster]

Why would he be holding on to nuclear secrets?

Yeah, it's a real mystery why Donald would be holding on to nuclear secrets after leaving office. What could he possibly have wanted them for??!?

I'm hopeful when this is all said and done, while letting the investigation run its course, Biden pardons Trump, and says, "It's time to heal and move past this." I fear he won't, giving into the 'radicals,' but maybe he will ...

Yeah, let bygones be bygones.

It's not like Trump was planning to give top secret nuclear information to a foreign country the way that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg did with top secret atomic bomb info back in the day. From what I recall, those two didn't end up spending much time in prison when all was said and done. (They were both executed.)

 

[UCFBS]

Nitpick ... (and this is public information, even public training on the matter)

I seriously doubt it's nuclear secrets.

Nuclear secrets are not DoD et al. TS, but DoE RD (or DoE RFD). Some may be also classified DoD et al. SCI, but they originate as DoE RD (or DoE RFD) as their primary tagging. A civilian agency, the DoE, has been the authority over nuclear secrets for a reason, as Truman dictated (and well justified after MacAuthur in Korea).

Trivia: DoE RD actually pre-dates all other, current classifications.

 

[UCFBS]

Yeah, it's a real mystery why Donald would be holding on to nuclear secrets after leaving office. What could he possibly have wanted them for??!?

Yeah, let bygones be bygones.

It's not like Trump was planning to give top secret nuclear information to a foreign country the way that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg did with top secret atomic bomb info back in the day. From what I recall, those two didn't end up spending much time in prison when all was said and done. (They were both executed.)

We don't know what he has. People keep speculating. The FBI still hasn't released any information on what he has. So the speculation isn't helping.

The bigger problem is ... from the Clinton library to the Nixon library ... this has been an issue in general with ex-Presidents. It just wasn't a felony until the 2018 law, so Trump is the first President, or appointee for that matter, where it can apply.

That's why I said it's very likely that Trump will be an example, but pardoned. Because virtually every administration prior to 2018 has done it.

And it might not even be Trump, but one of his agency heads or other appointees they are going after.

 

[Cubs79]

We don't know what he has. People keep speculating. The FBI still hasn't released any information on what he has. So the speculation isn't helping.

The bigger problem is ... from the Clinton library to the Nixon library ... this has been an issue in general with ex-Presidents. It just wasn't a felony until the 2018 law, so Trump is the first President, or appointee for that matter, where it can apply.

That's why I said it's very likely that Trump will be an example, but pardoned. Because virtually every administration prior to 2018 has done it.

And it might not even be Trump, but one of his agency heads or other appointees they are going after.

You are right we dont know what he has, which is it why it is ridiculous at this point to bring up Hillary or Democrats.

 

[DaShuckster]

You are right we dont know what he has, which is it why it is ridiculous at this point to bring up Hillary or Democrats.

It's the reason it's also utterly ridiculous -- and dangerous -- for GOP Congressional leaders to be publicly attacking the FBI and DOJ. We've already seen one looney-tune attack the FBI's Cincinnati field office and Homeland Security reports are that there's been a spike in internet 'civil war' talk.

Civil War??!? WTF???

In all seriousness, I just don't "get" how so many people in this country can act like total idiots.

 

[goodknightfl]

In all seriousness, I just don't "get" how so many people in this country can act like total idiots.

You mean like everyone on this board.

 

[UCFBS]

You are right we dont know what he has, which is it why it is ridiculous at this point to bring up Hillary or Democrats.

It's the reason it's also utterly ridiculous -- and dangerous -- for GOP Congressional leaders to be publicly attacking the FBI and DOJ. We've already seen one looney-tune attack the FBI's Cincinnati field office and Homeland Security reports are that there's been a spike in internet 'civil war' talk.

Civil War??!? WTF???

In all seriousness, I just don't "get" how so many people in this country can act like total idiots.

Wait?! Are you saying it's wrong to criticize inconsistent enforcement?! No, it's 100% valid! The GOP has a damn strong argument in that regard! A damn strong one!

Again, I'm all for Trump being investigated and charged. But don't think for a moment that just because I do want politicians held accountable, that I only want Trump held accountable.

There are more than 30 IT Professionals that were prosecuted at State for following Hillary's orders under threat of not just firing, but prosecution. And now they are being prosecuted for following her orders, because State itself was utterly compromised as a result of her orders! That's all public record now.

But we knew from the watchdogs even in 2016, when the left was screaming there was no proof she was every compromised. No, she was not only compromised, and we knew that then, but what came out later was that she ordered Trend Micro security software to be disabled, so then State itself was utterly compromised!

But you guys on the left don't want to visit that. You just want to say, "FBI found nothing." No ... FBI was not allowed to find things. This time, the FBI was not inhibited.

You mean like everyone on this board.

Yep. So few want to be objective and consistent.

 

[Cubs79]

Wait?! Are you saying it's wrong to criticize inconsistent enforcement?! No, it's 100% valid! The GOP has a damn strong argument in that regard! A damn strong one!

Again, I'm all for Trump being investigated and charged. But don't think for a moment that just because I do want politicians held accountable, that I only want Trump held accountable.

There are more than 30 IT Professionals that were prosecuted at State for following Hillary's orders under threat of not just firing, but prosecution. And now they are being prosecuted for following her orders, because State itself was utterly compromised as a result of her orders! That's all public record now.

But we knew from the watchdogs even in 2016, when the left was screaming there was no proof she was every compromised. No, she was not only compromised, and we knew that then, but what came out later was that she ordered Trend Micro security software to be disabled, so then State itself was utterly compromised!

But you guys on the left don't want to visit that. You just want to say, "FBI found nothing." No ... FBI was not allowed to find things. This time, the FBI was not inhibited.


Yep. So few want to be objective and consistent.

My point is until we know what info Trump has or what Trump did there is no way you can say it is inconsistent with how Hillary was treated. Your whole "inconsistency" argument only rings true if they did the exact same thing, but have a difference outcome. We dont know what Trump has done at this point, so you cant say they did the exact same thing. ANd, Trump has not been charged as of now (and we dont know if he will be), so you cant claim anything is inconsistent about that.

 

[DaShuckster]

So few want to be objective and consistent.

 

[Knight_Classes_begin_7pm]

Trump just wants to incite more violence, like he is with the FBI.

 

[UCFBS]

Trump just wants to incite more violence, like he is with the FBI.

Sigh ... at some point accusing half the country of being violent is exactly the wrong move and what happened in the 18th century. This 'cracking down' by arresting anyone who even says anything is going to backfire.

Even many officers in the military are trying to warn about that too. They're not dumb either. But you 'war-hawk' and 'crack down' on Americans lefties keep on doing what you're doing, and see what happens.

Me? I'll be in rural Alabama with my wife ... waiting to see what end game results.

 

[DaShuckster]

This 'cracking down' by arresting anyone who even says anything is going to backfire.

What the hell are you talking about??!? Where is this so-called 'crack' down' taking place where folks are being arresting for saying stuff? Who are these poor folks who being arrested and WTF are they saying that's causing their incarceration?

As we've seen, Congressional Republicans certainly haven't been shy about publicly blasting our institutions to their base.

And when someone does something crazy in response to their dangerous rhetoric like that wacko who attacked the Cincinnati FBI office or we see the next Timothy McVey bomb some government facility, what then? Of course, THEN, we'll see those same public 'leaders' shrug their shoulders can say it wasn't their fault.

 

[Ucfmikes]

Me? I'll be in rural Alabama with my wife ... waiting to see what end game results

The world’s foremost expert in everything with a self-proclaimed IQ of 200, is a failed IT specialist living in a shack in rural Alabama. Would love to know what your SAT score was.

What does that tell you? Perhaps you should invest in a mirror. They don’t cost much.

 

[goodknightfl]

That's why I said it's very likely that Trump will be an example, but pardoned. Because virtually every administration prior to 2018 has done it.

And it might not even be Trump, but one of his agency heads or other appointees they are going after.

LOL

 

[NinjaKnight]

The world’s foremost expert in everything with a self-proclaimed IQ of 200, is a failed IT specialist living in a shack in rural Alabama. Would love to know what your SAT score was.

What does that tell you? Perhaps you should invest in a mirror. They don’t cost much.

BoomRoasted.gif 😂 🤣

 

[UCFBS]

What the hell are you talking about??!? Where is this so-called 'crack' down' taking place where folks are being arresting for saying stuff? Who are these poor folks who being arrested and WTF are they saying that's causing their incarceration?

As we've seen, Congressional Republicans certainly haven't been shy about publicly blasting our institutions to their base.

And when someone does something crazy in response to their dangerous rhetoric like that wacko who attacked the Cincinnati FBI office or we see the next Timothy McVey bomb some government facility, what then? Of course, THEN, we'll see those same public 'leaders' shrug their shoulders can say it wasn't their fault.

Stones from a glass house. That's your problem, you hypocritically point to Republicans for what Democrats do as well. Just like you blasted Democrats when you voted Republican decades ago.

 

[DaShuckster]

Stones from a glass house.

You're full of sh*t.

That's your problem, you hypocritically point to Republicans for what Democrats do as well.

Oh, those evil Democrats do it as well? Show me any time in our nation's history when a Democrat President refused to concede his electoral defeat and called the results 'massive voter fraud.

Show me when Democrat leaders in Congress and Statehouses across the nation supported their failed leader's 'Big Lie.'

Just like you blasted Democrats when you voted Republican decades ago.

Looking at the country through the lens of a single 'political party' is silly. Show me a 'straight party line' guy and I'll show you a weak-minded fool who wants to be told what to think about the world.

Like most sane people, I'm a little of some things and a little of others. I'd describe myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. But -- get this -- I'm so 'old school' that I consider myself an American first.

 

[UCFBS]

So I'm really liking the 'civics' of all this.

The DoJ-FBI can raid a former President's properties and areas where he has access, but at the same time, the DoJ-FBI must disclose all the how's and why's, because it's unprecedented. The burden of proof is on the DoJ-FBI to explain why it needs to be sealed and, likely and more importantly, what needs to be redacted to protect anyone. I love the justices of the courts because they refuse to let agencies pull the, 'because we said so,' without justification and merit ... just to unseal those how's and why's, not to say they couldn't do it.

They're political appointees, not elected officials. It's law, they must, in a supermajority of cases have to be publicly disclosed and undergo public review and even scrutiny.

With so many federal agencies violating the law ... from the ATF to the CDC and even the FDA ... and refusing to disclose why, or even admit to it, when there are plenty of whistleblowers, there's nothing wrong with letting the people see at least a redacted set of information ... especially in the high profile reality of this. I'm really glad to see this, even though I support the DoJ-FBI's right to do so. It must be explained. I'm honestly tired of Americans not wanting agencies to explain, and keep things sealed.

Trump Search Judge Cites ‘Historical Interest’ in Affidavit

The judge who approved the search of former President Donald Trump’s Florida estate said “intense public and historical interest” in the FBI affidavit backing the warrant justified making an effort to unseal portions of it.

www.bloomberg.com

You're full of sh*t.

Oh, those evil Democrats do it as well? Show me any time in our nation's history when a Democrat President refused to concede his electoral defeat and called the results 'massive voter fraud.

Show me when Democrat leaders in Congress and Statehouses across the nation supported their failed leader's 'Big Lie.'

You're kidding me, right?

Looking at the country through the lens of a single 'political party' is silly.

And yet that's what you do ... although you seem to shift every couple of decades to the 'more authoritative' party. So ... what got you loving Democrats, throwing reporters in jail for espionage? Miller? You seem to still love that 15 years later!

Show me a 'straight party line' guy and I'll show you a weak-minded fool who wants to be told what to think about the world.

Like most sane people, I'm a little of some things and a little of others. I'd describe myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. But -- get this -- I'm so 'old school' that I consider myself an American first.

Yes, we get that, and using 'espionage' charges to justify throwing journalists in jail. People like you make me sick, all while you hypocritically justify releaing Manning ... the person that actually leaked the info, not the journalist who published it.

You're all about special interest and giving the government absolute power.

 

[UCFBS]

Actually a pretty balanced article over at Fox News for once, basically saying there is support for the searches, all while they must still why federal agencies must release information so it can be scrutinized by the public. I'm 100% in agreement.

Checks and balances on search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home and resort display limited government at its best

Among the principles of enforcing the law at stake in the Mar-a-Lago search is this: anyone who violates the law, including a former president, is within its reach

www.foxnews.com

QUOTE: 'On the other side, much already-public information supports the belief that the former president committed crimes by unlawfully keeping some of the nation's most sensitive secrets after multiple government requests for their return. Asserted doubts about the legitimacy of his loss to the incumbent president are irrelevant to those alleged crimes.'​

And yes, it doest now looks like it is confirmed to be at least FRD data (nuclear secrets shared with allies) the DoJ-FBI were searcing for. I just wish the US Media wasn't so ignorant and using the wrong information. But they don't do their homework, so ... it takes a bit to cut through the ignorance and bullsh--.

 

[Cubs79]

Actually a pretty balanced article over at Fox News for once, basically saying there is support for the searches, all while they must still why federal agencies must release information so it can be scrutinized by the public. I'm 100% in agreement.

Checks and balances on search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home and resort display limited government at its best

Among the principles of enforcing the law at stake in the Mar-a-Lago search is this: anyone who violates the law, including a former president, is within its reach

www.foxnews.com

QUOTE: 'On the other side, much already-public information supports the belief that the former president committed crimes by unlawfully keeping some of the nation's most sensitive secrets after multiple government requests for their return. Asserted doubts about the legitimacy of his loss to the incumbent president are irrelevant to those alleged crimes.'​

And yes, it doest now looks like it is confirmed to be at least FRD data (nuclear secrets shared with allies) the DoJ-FBI were searcing for. I just wish the US Media wasn't so ignorant and using the wrong information. But they don't do their homework, so ... it takes a bit to cut through the ignorance and bullsh--.

It will be released at some point, likely when/if there is an indictment. It isnt unusual for affidavits to be sealed until the investigation is completed.

 

[DaShuckster]

It will be released at some point, likely when/if there is an indictment. It isnt unusual for affidavits to be sealed until the investigation is completed.

If the FBI had left Trump's estate with nothing, THEN one might wonder what the government presented to get a search approved by a federal judge. In this case, the FBI left with 13 BOXES of confidential files!!! Yeah, it's a real mystery what the hell this could be all about.*

You're kidding me, right?

So THAT's your stellar comeback to my request to point out for me when a Democrat President refused to concede his electoral defeat and called the results massive voter fraud?

You come here and literally spread pages worth of incoherent bullshit but can't answer a simple question.

 

[UCFBS]

If the FBI had left Trump's estate with nothing, THEN one might wonder what the government presented to get a search approved by a federal judge. In this case, the FBI left with 13 BOXES of confidential files!!! Yeah, it's a real mystery what the hell this could be all about.*

Wait?! Are you saying the FBI always has usable evidence in every single box when it takes them from a location it gets a warrant for? Interesting ... I've seen a lot to the contrary.

I did rather love the FBI raiding the kitchen of Mrs. Jewell. All those boxes taken away really worked out well for them there, right? Seriously ... it's these types of statements that make me roll my eyes.

So THAT's your stellar comeback to my request to point out for me when a Democrat President refused to concede his electoral defeat and called the results massive voter fraud?

You come here and literally spread pages worth of incoherent bullshit but can't answer a simple question.

Again, you are partisan to an extreme, and are all for one party doing whatever they want without question. You're just as bad as Republicans who do the same. Heck, you used to be one.

I'm neutral and objective. I call it all out. And your idea of throwing 'espionage' charges at anyone you disagree with, damn the 1st Amendment and the Press, gets old.

 

[Cubs79]

Wait?! Are you saying the FBI always has usable evidence in every single box when it takes them from a location it gets a warrant for? Interesting ... I've seen a lot to the contrary.

I did rather love the FBI raiding the kitchen of Mrs. Jewell. All those boxes taken away really worked out well for them there, right? Seriously ... it's these types of statements that make me roll my eyes.


Again, you are partisan to an extreme, and are all for one party doing whatever they want without question. You're just as bad as Republicans who do the same. Heck, you used to be one.

I'm neutral and objective. I call it all out. And your idea of throwing 'espionage' charges at anyone you disagree with, damn the 1st Amendment and the Press, gets old.

You don't even know what they have, so for you to act like it's all bs, when you don't have all the info, most certainly isn't neutral or objective.

 

[KnighttimeJoe]

You don't even know what they have, so for you to act like it's all bs, when you don't have all the info, most certainly isn't neutral or objective.

110%. Yet again, BS is totally exposed as a shill.

 

[UCFBS]

You don't even know what they have, so for you to act like it's all bs, when you don't have all the info, most certainly isn't neutral or objective.

Who said I said it was BS? When did I ever say I was against the FBI here? You need to re-read my posts!

I'm not the 'I defend Trump / Republicans at all costs, even hypocrisy,' that you are with the Democratic party. I never voted for Trump, and rarely do I vote for Republicans in general!

I have been 100% supportive of the DoJ-FBI raid on Trump properties and associates! 100%! But I've also been critical of the 'sealed' BS too ... and so have Justices, as the DoJ 'dodges' why.

And the Biden adminsitration was just proven to be guilty of lying about 'not being aware.' They were arguing for it ... Biden administration lawyers! This is why this is a serious probelm with both parties! Stop 'defending your team!'

 

[Cubs79]

Who said I said it was BS? When did I ever say I was against the FBI here? You need to re-read my posts!

I'm not the 'I defend Trump / Republicans at all costs, even hypocrisy,' that you are with the Democratic party. I never voted for Trump, and rarely do I vote for Republicans in general!

I have been 100% supportive of the DoJ-FBI raid on Trump properties and associates! 100%! But I've also been critical of the 'sealed' BS too ... and so have Justices, as the DoJ 'dodges' why.

And the Biden adminsitration was just proven to be guilty of lying about 'not being aware.' They were arguing for it ... Biden administration lawyers! This is why this is a serious probelm with both parties! Stop 'defending your team!'

Give me a break, you have spent the entire conversation on this bringing up Clinton and the Democrats, calling people partisan hacks, etc etc for absolutely no reason what so ever other than to deflect from the topic. Is it part of the libertarian platform to not know how to stay on topic or something? This is a major news story that people would like to discuss, yet you are harping on stuff from 6 years ago, that we dont even know at this point how or if they are similar. You might not be defending Trump, but you sure are trying to take the conversation off him.

 

[DaShuckster]

Actually a pretty balanced article over at Fox News for once, basically saying there is support for the searches, all while they must still why federal agencies must release information so it can be scrutinized by the public. I'm 100% in agreement.

But in the next breath you turn around and question why the evidence presented to the judge to obtain a warrant to search Trump's estate remains sealed and opine it was "BS".

As the Fox News article you linked made crystal clear: When all is said and done, the public will learn what led to the search. The only issue here is the timing. As Cubs79 already pointed out to you, it isnt unusual at all for affidavits to be sealed until the investigation is completed.

For someone who calls himself "neutral and objective," you've been the one here who has attempted to discredit the FBI and bash the DOJ for "dodging.' Apparently, law and order 'procedures' depend on who it is accused of breaking the law.

 

[UCFBS]

Not a single claim about nuclear secrets or anything else in the redacted release.

Welcome to 'fishing,' population? Trump

So tired of this.

I never voted for Trump, but between the administration lying their lawyers weren't involved, to the lack of information ... even the judge who approved the warrant hasn't been kind in his words for the DoJ.

Just like the FISA justices were not when we literally made the entire Russian narrative up via a purposely fraudulent filing in the FISA courts. That was back when Trump was a private citizen.

Ruby Ridge hitting 30 years this month is not a shocker either. All based on the ATF lying in court too.

The US Government needs to stop pulling this crap, because no citizen should trust such a government, or at least its leadership. Why is the administration purposely fraudulent in their own statements?

Get Trump on his own faults, don't lie to get there. The whole Russian narrative has become the biggest joke in the cleared community at this point.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Get Trump on his own faults, don't lie to get there. The whole Russian narrative has become the biggest joke in the cleared community at this point.

I just reported you to my SSO for claiming to share classified information on an unclass network.

I have your PII from you spamming your LinkedIn and Twitter accounts. And now posting what insinuate is classified information (whether it is classified or not is irrelevant, and I am purposefully stating that I am not confirming or denying what you posted is classified) is a violation of US code 798.


Expect to have a visit from the FBI, National Securities Division shortly.

 

[DaShuckster]

Not a single claim about nuclear secrets or anything else in the redacted release.

Yeah THAT kind of thing is not going to be redacted.

So tired of this.

Me too.

I never voted for Trump

We got it the first hundred-times you've mentioned it.

 

[goodknightfl]

Jeeze who gives a damn. You have a corrupt DOJ going after a corrupt x president by lying to corrupt judge who gave tons of money to Obama. The Swamp is the swamp, and dwellers there in are slimy swamp creatures.

The only good thing is, there soon will be 87,000 new armed swamp creatures with their guns pointed a the non swamp creatures of America.

 

[DaShuckster]

Jeeze who gives a damn. You have a corrupt DOJ going after a corrupt x president by lying to corrupt judge who gave tons of money to Obama. The Swamp is the swamp, and dwellers there in are slimy swamp creatures.

Wow. So the latest Republican/Trumpster spin is "Everybody's corrupt so who gives a damn?"

 

[UCFBS]

Wow. So the latest Republican/Trumpster spin is "Everybody's corrupt so who gives a damn?"

The DoJ wanting to make claims, but then hide any mention behind redaction, suggests this was a 'fishing expedition.' It's just adding to the GOP's claims of 'double standards,' and at this point ... I have to agree with them.

It also doesn't help the Biden adminsitration's lawyers were involved, and the President himself lied about that. They had no business being involved, and it's a major 'conflict of interest.' But that's part for the course now.

Just like with the prior fraud in the FISA courts when Trump was still a private citizen. None of you so focused on Trump and screaming 'Russia!' want to address that at all. None. That's why you don't **** a flying **** about the law and rights. And it's why we're all ****ed.

I never voted for Trump. I think he's a confidence man. I have since the USFL, and I thought his reality show was a joke. But still ... the realities are realities. But you're the type that justifies throwing people in jail who didn't break any laws or leak any information, while letting out the people who did ...

All because of narratives about Russia, despite the fact that Podesta's account was hacked because he was -- tada -- a registered foreign agent of Russia himself! But that ... would make too much sense to believe, despite the FOIA documentation that proves it.

 

[Cubs79]

The DoJ wanting to make claims, but then hide any mention behind redaction, suggests this was a 'fishing expedition.' It's just adding to the GOP's claims of 'double standards,' and at this point ... I have to agree with them.

It also doesn't help the Biden adminsitration's lawyers were involved, and the President himself lied about that. They had no business being involved, and it's a major 'conflict of interest.' But that's part for the course now.

Just like with the prior fraud in the FISA courts when Trump was still a private citizen. None of you so focused on Trump and screaming 'Russia!' want to address that at all. None. That's why you don't **** a flying **** about the law and rights. And it's why we're all ****ed.

I never voted for Trump. I think he's a confidence man. I have since the USFL, and I thought his reality show was a joke. But still ... the realities are realities. But you're the type that justifies throwing people in jail who didn't break any laws or leak any information, while letting out the people who did ...

All because of narratives about Russia, despite the fact that Podesta's account was hacked because he was -- tada -- a registered foreign agent of Russia himself! But that ... would make too much sense to believe, despite the FOIA documentation that proves it.

This is an ongoing investigation. When have you ever known people involved with an ongoing investigation to tell the public everything about that investigation before it was complete?