|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On August 12 2022 08:13 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. Sounds like he plead the fifth on every question. Reminds me of when Mike Flynn plead the fifth when the Jan 6 Committee asked him if he believed in a peaceful transition of power.
Yep. Apparently pretty much every question except for what his name was:
"Trump pleaded the Fifth more than 440 times during his deposition in New York, answering only a question about what his name is, NBC reports"
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pleaded-the-fifth-more-than-400-times-report-2022-8
440*5th = 2200th... I guess Trump pleaded the 2200th?
|
On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that.
True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen:
The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth.
I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday.
|
This doj search is starting to blow up a bit. Speculations on reddit are running wild,the most crazy theories. It seems to be about more then simply not returning some documents in time.
That would be something,if something so damaging does come out that even his hardcore base would turn against him.
There must be something substantial.
|
On August 12 2022 08:58 pmh wrote:
This doj search is starting to blow up a bit. Speculations on reddit are running wild,the most crazy theories. It seems to be about more then simply not returning some documents in time.
That would be something,if something so damaging does come out that even his hardcore base would turn against him.
There must be something substantial.
Sadly, we know this is literally impossible. Anything damning would be brushed off as fake or planted or a huge conspiracy to make Trump look bad, in the eyes of his hardcore base.
It would be nice to see him pay some sort of consequences though.
|
At one point things become impossible to brush off even for trump. And that point will be reached i am starting to believe.
He will keep some part of his hardcore base but it will be pretty small.
According to Washington Post they where searching for classified nuclear documents.
|
On August 12 2022 09:19 pmh wrote:
At one point things become impossible to brush off even for trump. And that point will be reached i am starting to believe.
He will keep some part of his hardcore base but it will be pretty small.
According to Washington Post they where searching for nuclear documents.
I think between the Trump legal drama and Fox News focusing more attention on DeSantis, the "best" we can reasonably expect is for Trump to lose the next Republican primary, because Trump becoming politically irrelevant/castrated would be a huge blow to his ego. That being said, it necessarily comes at the expense of DeSantis becoming the Republican nominee, which means there's going to be a decent chance that he becomes president. So even if the country wins by Trump losing, the country might simultaneously lose by DeSantis winning.
|
|
|
United States24799 Posts
Technical nuclear weapons documents are generally classified as Secret (or maybe Top Secret) Restricted Data. There is actually a sentencing hearing in a few days for the engineer who attempted to sell submarine propulsion Restricted Data, so the timing is... something.
|
Donald Trump thinks he's Sarah Kerrigan, when in reality he's more of an Arcturus Mengsk.
|
|
|
On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday.
Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out.
I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place.
|
Hey guys just checking in, has anything happened in the politics realm of the US? Did the Ivana funeral go ok, and the Saudi’s golf tourney?
|
|
|
On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place.
Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to.
|
On August 12 2022 13:08 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place. Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to.
I mean do you really want to go on record and saying that you want to defund the police? The DC agencies are just the federal level of the police. I think a lot of people are just getting whiplash from how flip floppy the right is about the police now. it just seems every bit of messaging has been the exact opposite from what you're saying.
What would define it all being "nonsense" to you? Would the FBI saying that they found the documents incriminating trump and showing what was taken (knowing that they can't actually show anything due to security) knowing that they could just as easily fake those documents? If they got judges to sign off on the warrant whats stopping them from using the exact same things they already came with as evidence?
|
On August 12 2022 14:10 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 13:08 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place. Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to. I mean do you really want to go on record and saying that you want to defund the police? The DC agencies are just the federal level of the police. I think a lot of people are just getting whiplash from how flip floppy the right is about the police now. it just seems every bit of messaging has been the exact opposite from what you're saying. What would define it all being "nonsense" to you? Would the FBI saying that they found the documents incriminating trump and showing what was taken (knowing that they can't actually show anything due to security) knowing that they could just as easily fake those documents? If they got judges to sign off on the warrant whats stopping them from using the exact same things they already came with as evidence?
Being confident that something exists and actually obtaining said thing are different. If you are able to physically retrieve the thing you claimed they had, that's much stronger evidence than 'I know it's there but you'll never know for sure'.
|
On August 12 2022 14:10 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 13:08 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place. Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to. I mean do you really want to go on record and saying that you want to defund the police? The DC agencies are just the federal level of the police. I think a lot of people are just getting whiplash from how flip floppy the right is about the police now. it just seems every bit of messaging has been the exact opposite from what you're saying.
This is not a new thing. The US right don't have principles, they don't stand for anything. They have things that are currently convenient for them, which they will defend to the death. If those things are inconvenient next week, then they will fight to the death for the absolute opposite thing.
It is what makes the whole thing so frustrating. There is no substance, no nothing. They claim to be for X, but they are not. They are for the fact that X currently allows them to "win". They may be for the fact that X currently allows them to be dicks to minorities, or to "pwn the libs", or any other thing. But X itself is utterly irrelevant to them. And this is how it has been for at least a decade, probably much longer.
|
Northern Ireland27355 Posts
On August 12 2022 13:08 NrG.Bamboo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place. Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to.
There’s plenty of good, on record reasons not to.
The issue is plenty of that perception nowadays is purely through a partisan lens, where the FBI’s, or other institutions’ legitimacy or lack thereof is based on outcomes rather than procedural propriety, remit etc.
Which leaves two bad options. Do your job as an institution come what may, and widen that already large political schism.
Or restrict going after figures where it’s politically contentious, basically abandon even the smallest pretence of equality under the law.
Institutions treading carefully so as not to upset what is patently people in thrall to a cult of personality is for me the worse of the two options there.
As Simberto outlined, these aren’t principled ideological stances about citizen’s rights and criminal justice procedures. If the FBI turned up Hunter Biden’s LaptopTM tomorrow the same folks demanding them reformed and defunded today would laud them as heroes.
There’s no compromise possible with folks who don’t have a consistent ideology, there’s nothing stable to work with. It’s either appease their capricious sensibilities, or ignore them.
Not to say there’s not plenty on the blue side who behave in much the same way.
|
On August 12 2022 14:45 gobbledydook wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2022 14:10 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 13:08 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 10:42 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 08:53 NrG.Bamboo wrote:On August 12 2022 07:48 NewSunshine wrote:On August 12 2022 07:39 Sermokala wrote:On August 12 2022 05:51 NewSunshine wrote:
People often plead the 5th 400 times when they're innocent. They do but this was also the same guy who insisted that "only the guilty plead the 5th". Absolutely, he set the landmine himself and then stepped on it. I do want to make it clear though that I'm not also saying that people only plead the 5th if they're guilty. Are odds good that they're guilty if they're invoking the 5th? Yeah, probably. But also there's enough horseshit in our justice system at large that there's legitimate reasons why people who have done nothing wrong need to plead the 5th. So I'm not echoing Trump here. Something I am saying, is that you have to do an awful lot of very interesting things to have to plead the 5th 440 times. The American peasantry is way too boring for that. True, he did say that. He tweeted a whole lot of dumb shit during his presidency (one of the most entertaining things about him, from my perspective.) I'm very curious to see how this actually shakes out, because let's remove his personal touch from all of this and refer to him as a regular citizen: The FBI raids your home when you are not present, you are now in court requested to respond to its details. If you are the kind of person that thinks that the agencies might be against you (politically or otherwise) it makes sense to make zero statements and let time unravel the truth. I'm not even a Trump fan, to be honest, but it does irk me when people point to exercising constitutional rights as an assumption of their honesty (this includes Trump himself tweeting.) It exists for a reason, and if a citizen were in a position to believe that they are being tried in a biased manner then there is no doubt that they should flex the fifth. Either way, I'm very interested to see what was on that warrant to cause this, and also how this investigation plays out. Not playing favorites on either side, I personally don't give a shit either way, but it could be a rather large event for American history, depending on how this goes. It's neat to realize that you are sitting in a moment in time which may be directly relevant to something that may become a chapter in a history book, someday. Neat, but also, if we never make it to the point where the history books get to actually account what's happening right now, also moot. If all this turns out to be nothing, I would be both very surprised and relieved to find that out. I would also point out that for the FBI to enter and search your property, there would need to be significant impetus from either a legal and/or homeland security perspective, especially considering it's an ex-President. They basically need to be all but certain of what they're going to find, and certain of why that's important enough for the FBI to get involved in that moment at all. So while I appreciate the thought experiment, it's also hard to imagine the FBI comes after a normal citizen under normal circumstances like this. You'd have to get on their radar in the first place. Maybe relieved, depends on how you look at it. I can empathize with people who don’t trust the FBI (or any federal alphabet agencies,) so I’d be more disappointed if something interesting here doesn’t happen. I’m more interested in what happens between the population and the government if this ends up being nonsense. It just cements the idea in many peoples minds that these agencies are as politicized as anything else run from D.C. I understand that it takes quite a bit for a judge to sign off on a warrant to raid the house of an ex-president, so if it is actually just some bullshit that turns out to be nothing, that makes it more obvious for the paranoid public to not trust the alphabets, which I can relate to. I mean do you really want to go on record and saying that you want to defund the police? The DC agencies are just the federal level of the police. I think a lot of people are just getting whiplash from how flip floppy the right is about the police now. it just seems every bit of messaging has been the exact opposite from what you're saying. What would define it all being "nonsense" to you? Would the FBI saying that they found the documents incriminating trump and showing what was taken (knowing that they can't actually show anything due to security) knowing that they could just as easily fake those documents? If they got judges to sign off on the warrant whats stopping them from using the exact same things they already came with as evidence? Being confident that something exists and actually obtaining said thing are different. If you are able to physically retrieve the thing you claimed they had, that's much stronger evidence than 'I know it's there but you'll never know for sure'.
If you already have doubts about the institution then it just seems very weird to expect them to act incompetetly.
To get a raid warrant for something like this and not just a former President they needed enough evidence to say that they all but knew that the documents were there now. Not was there at some point but there at the moment.
The warrant was motioned to be unsealed by the doj and will either be revealed or trump must ask them not to do it. Big day in history folks strap in.
|
Northern Ireland27355 Posts
The greatest plot twist would be if the warrant was for Hunter Biden’s laptopTM
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
