Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They love the political weaponizing of the DOJ, FBI, IRS, etc.
They seem to keep their heads in the sand about it turning back on them. The Dems opened that door, and they will have absolutely no standing to complain when it used against their own.
I doubt a court would back political weaponization, and certainly not in this case where the stakes are so high.
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."
It can't get any plainer than that.
However, he also used the word "fight" 21 times if I counted right, and he ended the like this:
Quote:
"And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.
Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country.
And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.
So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give."
So, people hear what they want to hear. I heard one "peacefully" and 21 "fights".
I think you can guess what the crowd heard.
"illegally hanging on to"? You have no facts to prove that point at this time or maybe if at all.
At this point it's unknow who was dragging their feet. The feds were there in June and had apparently left some of those classified docs there, for some odd reason.
If he hadn't been illegally hanging onto them, the DOJ would not have had to request a search warrant, and the FBI wouldn't have had to go in and retrieve them. This is all on Trump and his foolishness.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,548 posts, read 12,525,568 times
Reputation: 10468
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom
Sounds like the Trump-appointed federalist judge needs clarification on Trump's wonky motion against the government. She be like, what are you trying to say, bro? LOL. https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/23/polit...ine/index.html
You expect her to automatically side with Trump? Or are you just so used to democrats automatically siding with their own that you expect those on the right to do the same?
Nothing wrong with a judge wanting to do things by the book and request clarification on things.
<the following is shortened for brevity>
Shows that Trump team was working with the feds.
<the following was quite long, so further snipped for brevity>
Is this^ what you're talking about?
It refers to the boxes of documents that was sent back to NARA and was in NARA's hands. The FBI was wanting to see those documents that NARA had but they could not at the time because Trump was claiming executive privilege over them and had been given time to review the material in the boxes "in order to ascertain whether any specific document is subject to privilege".
Proving that Trump team was given time to review the materials but was refused additional time.
There was no "refusing to relinquish them time after time".
Working with? He should have turned them over immediately. He had no right to ever take them. That he ever took them is a crime. That it took months and many conversations to get some of the documents is more of a crime. That he STILL hadn't turned them all over is a crime. None of that is "working with the feds", it's obstructing justice.
You expect her to automatically side with Trump? Or are you just so used to democrats automatically siding with their own that you expect those on the right to do the same?
Nothing wrong with a judge wanting to do things by the book and request clarification on things.
Clarification is one thing, but when she doesn't even know what he's asking for? And it's not even clear that the DOJ has been served? The first thing you learn in law school is that the other side has to be served a copy. The certificate of service is usually contained at the end of the motion.
"District Court Judge Aileen Cannon in the Southern District of Florida ordered Trump's lawyers to elaborate on their arguments for why the court has the ability to step in at this time, explain what exactly Trump is asking for and whether the Justice Department has been served with Trump's special master motion."
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,548 posts, read 12,525,568 times
Reputation: 10468
Quote:
Originally Posted by trobesmom
I doubt a court would back political weaponization, and certainly not in this case where the stakes are so high.
I doubt anything will happen and that the left will not continue with this for very long because the stakes are just that high...as in that the Dems know the monster that they have been creating could very well be used against them in the future. Former POTUS's investigated, raided, stripped of executive privileges, etc.
Nope, once it suits their purposes and they get the [election] results that they're hoping for, or when they come to realize that it isn't possible to get those results [they lose the elections, Trump guaranteeing he won't run, etc.], then they will back off of it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
