Working as intended. Rile up the crazies and point them at your political enemy du jour. If they die, well, there's always more crazies.
If they reveal the specifics of the warrant, they can't come up with all sorts of insane conspiracy theories and claim that they're being targeted by their political enemies.
I think it would be a credible possibility given the events described by Trump and co. I'm not willing to take that at face value, I don't know what the FBI did, Trump could be lying about that altogether. I will only suggest that "if they do everything in secret, how can well tell they aren't planting evidence" is a reasonable question if those are the circumstances.
That is hardly the same as knowing what they did. If the subpoena said they were looking for something horrible, and they come out with precisely that, that doesn't add any credibility.
How often do you think the police give advance notice to a suspect when the suspect in question has a long history of destroying documentation?
I would counter that "Trump is lying and trying to distract' is actually a far more likely case here then a vast DOJ conspiracy to plant evidence. Notably because it's Trumps SOP and pretty much always has been.
You mean the fact they had a damn good reason to believe they were going to find classified material(they subpoenaed him for it prior to this), knew where it was, got a judge to sign off on it and then went there and got it because they actually did their research and justified it properly? I know this may be a hard thing to imagine, but that's how policework is supposed to work. Judges don't sign off on warrants, especially concerning people like Trump, for shits and giggles. I have no doubt the judge wanted that paperwork to be airtight before he signed off on it because any fuckup would undermine any attempt to use it as evidence later and at that point, what's the point?
OK. So what else exactly could they have done? They followed normal procedure here, and Trump and the fringe right have blown a gasket about how it's so unreasonable that he's being treated... as any other suspect would be.
Rarely, but there is a legal requirement to share evidence gathered or crime scene access with the defense. Failure to do so is likely to lead to mistrial if such a thing we're to go to court.
It's not a counter to repeat what I said to me. Yes, Trump might be lying. I said that.
I'm not saying they should have done anything differently. I don't know specifically what they did. I don't know if they followed normal procedure, and neither do you. Trump claims they did not follow normal procedure, and if that is the case, his complaint may be warranted. He could also be lying and they did do everything by the book. There are many possibilities left open given limited information.
That happens at a trial! We're not even at that point yet!
So many words used to say absolutely nothing. A classic Tstorm post.
Ok, but you originally chose to interject with the suggestion that the documents don't exist, so you clearly think the conspiracy angle is worthy of a signal-boost.
It's not a counter to repeat what I said to me. Yes, Trump might be lying. I said that.
By track record, Trump lies like most people breathe. And whilst law enforcement are by no means perfect, you'd have to think they'd make a special effort to do things by the book given they are investigating an ex-president.
I did not do that. I suggested that the specific claim about him having nuclear secrets floating around was likely false. That does not require any suggestions of conspiracy.
Acknowledging what you don't know is not saying nothing.
The FBI has already deceived the courts to get warrants against Trump in the past. I give Trump's claims nearly no credibility at all, but I am inclined to suspect the feds are more likely to skimp on rule-followong against Trump as compared to the general public, based on history.
It requires those sources to either not exist, or to be lying. Or alternatively it requires the FBI to be fabricating it's reasons.
What's the basis for this?
I have a better question
I remember years and years of Benghazi investigations which went fucking nowhere..
A pizza parlor which did not have a basement. Much to the chagrin of the armed psychotic shithead who showed up planning to "free those poor kids".
I find it more likely someone close to the investigation gave nuclear secrets as an example of top secret documents, and the press ran with that as what the FBI was specifically looking for.
Warrants based on Russian misinformation compiled by a foreign spy financed by the DNC.
I also remember the Oklahoma City Bombing when it happened. I know it's not new, but man it felt like we collectively forgot all about that shit. Or abortion clinics being bombed.
Right-- where 2 FBI warrant requests were misleading/lacking, but even the Republican Committee admitted that the FBI's concerns regarding him were substantially true. And they had 2 other warrants for the same surveillance which were fine.
One might note that the official review of this held that despite some improprieties, there was still sufficient information to justify a warrant and that it would very likely have been accepted anyway.
