The Mar-a-Lago Raid Starts Another Cycle in a Partisan Feedback Loop
Plus: Americans want more political options, public pensions suffer major losses, and more...

More reporting on the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago club suggests the FBI was after classified documents Trump may have illegally retained.
The backstory: Early this year, Trump returned 15 boxes of material he had taken from the White House, after "several months of back and forth between his lawyers and the National Archives," The New York Times reported then. But authorities believe he still illegally kept some documents, and this is reportedly the root of yesterday's raid.
"People familiar with the investigation said that Justice Department and FBI officials traveled to Mar-a-Lago this spring" and "spoke to Trump's representatives, inspected the storage space where documents were held, and expressed concern that the former president or people close to him still had items that should be in government custody," reports The Washington Post. "By that point, officials at the National Archives had been aggressively contacting people in Trump's orbit to demand the return of documents they believed were covered by the Presidential Records Act."
The raid: On Tuesday, the FBI took about 12 boxes from a basement storage area at Mar-a-Lago, according to Trump lawyer Christina Bobb. She indicated that the FBI's search warrant said they were investigating violations of the Presidential Records Act and laws regarding classified material.
If this is all true, it suggests Trump's team may very well have brought this on themselves by refusing to turn over things they were supposed to turn over. But it also suggests the Justice Department is possibly being a bit petty; unless there was some imminent danger from Trump having whatever documents he's suspected to have kept, raiding Mar-a-Lago to obtain them seems drastic.
"Document disputes are typically settled in negotiation, and that is how Mr. Trump's disagreement with the National Archives had been proceeding," notes the Wall Street Journal. Whatever disputes remained over materials Trump still had, "it's far from clear why this couldn't be settled cooperatively, or at most with a subpoena."
Team Trump reacts: Trump spokesman Taylor Budowich told the Post that the raid has "unified and grown the entire conservative movement."
Perhaps that's an overstatement, but it has certainly invigorated it by lending credence to Trump's ongoing narrative about the extreme lengths to which Democrats will go to stop him.
Trump adviser Jason Miller told the Post that "it furthers [Trump's] inclination to run and galvanizes the Republican base on his behalf."
Republicans have been running wild with the speculation—like suggesting that the FBI may have planted evidence—and concocting fan fic that absolves Trump of all blame and ropes in his fans as part of the persecuted.
"Trump's crime was, and always has been, that he threatened The Regime's power and privilege—in so doing, representing tens of millions of Americans who The Regime considers an impediment to its total control, and who it holds in utter contempt," writes Claremont Institute fellow Ben Weingarten in an especially florid example of the genre.
Another perspective: Not all conservatives are drinking the Kool-Aid about this being a sign the U.S. has become a banana republic.
"The FBI's serving a search warrant on Donald Trump's residence is not — in spite of everything being said about it — unprecedented," writes Kevin D. Williamson at National Review. "The FBI serves search warrants on homes all the time. Donald Trump is a former president, not a mystical sacrosanct being. If we really believe, as we say we believe, that this is a republic, that nobody is above the law, that the presidency is just a temporary executive-branch office rather than a quasi-royal entitlement, then there is nothing all that remarkable about the FBI serving a warrant on a house in Florida."
David French warns against assuming either "corruption or incompetence" or "integrity or competence" from federal law enforcement agencies.
Meanwhile, Democrats are speculating that classified documents aren't the end of this.
After all, Trump's team hasn't shown the search warrant, only characterized it. It's possible that the FBI is investigating something bigger, possibly related to the Justice Department's grand jury probe into Trump's role in the January 6 Capitol riot.
The feedback loop: Democrats have been betting that keeping January 6 front and center could help them in the upcoming midterm elections and that criminally prosecuting Trump may help them in the 2024 presidential race.
But Democrats "may also be wrong in their calculation about how a prosecution would affect Mr. Trump's futures" suggests the editorial board of the Journal:
The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President, if only to vindicate himself. He will run as a martyr, and even Republicans who want to turn the page on the former President may be repelled by what they see as a political prosecution.
All of this risks compounding the baleful pattern of the last six years. Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response. Polarization increases, and public faith in institutions and the peaceful settlement of political difference erodes further.
This is the essential tragedy of the Trump era. The man ran on being an outsider who was hated by establishment types of all stripes and on accusing Democrats of lawlessness. Then he took power and acted in shady and borderline lawless ways himself. The left understandably seized on this—while often stating the case hyperbolically. All of which fueled sometimes justified but often unjustified complaints from Trump and his team that oh, look, the lawless Democrats are at it again, further hardening the stance of avid Trump supporters that anything he is being investigated for is a political farce. And this, in turn, grows Trump's original appeal while giving more cover for him to act in corrupt or lawless ways…which leads to more Democratic action against him. It's a terrible feedback loop in which it feels like we may be forever trapped.
FREE MINDS
Americans want more political options. In new polling data from the Pew Research Center, nearly half of young adults surveyed said they "wish there were more parties to choose from."
Among the public overall, 39% say the following describes their views extremely or very well: "I often wish there were more political parties to choose from in this country." Another 32% say the statement describes their views somewhat well, while 28% say it describes their views not too well or not at all well.
Notably, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to express a desire for more political parties: 38% of those who identify with the Democratic Party say this describes their views extremely or very well, compared with 21% of Republicans. Yet it is among independents and others who do not identify with a party that the sentiment is most pronounced: 48% say it describes their views extremely or very well, including 48% of those who lean Republican and 53% of those who lean Democratic.
Overall, interest in having more political parties is higher among younger Americans than older adults. Nearly half of those ages 18 to 49 say they often wish there were more parties to choose from (47% say it describes their views extremely or very well); that compares with 35% of those ages 50 to 64 and just 23% of those 65 and older.
Neither party is very popular with the public: Roughly four-in-ten Americans (41%) have a very or somewhat favorable view of the Democratic Party, while even fewer (37%) have a favorable impression of the Republican Party.
Over the past several decades, the share of Americans who express unfavorable opinions of both major parties has grown: In 1994, just 6% of the public had an unfavorable view of the Republican and Democratic parties. Today, about a quarter (27%) have negative views of both parties. This view is especially pronounced among partisan leaners: 44% of Republican-leaning independents – and an identical share of Democratic leaners – currently have negative views of both parties.
More here.
FREE MARKETS
State and city pensions are still screwed:
Funds that manage the retirement savings of teachers, firefighters and police officers returned a median minus 8.9% for that three-month period, their worst quarterly performance since the early months of the global pandemic.
@hgillers https://t.co/ciI3FKaxKq
— Alejandra Cancino (@WriterAlejandra) August 10, 2022
QUICK HITS
• The Biden administration is defending a law that stops medical marijuana users from legally owning guns.
• Rep. Scott Perry (R–Pa.) said the FBI has seized his cellphone.
• New Jersey cops are using the routine blood samples collected from newborn babies to investigate crimes, says a new lawsuit.
•The Free Speech Index is "a first-of-its-kind analysis of laws restricting speech about government in all 50 states."
• "Voters in Southern California's San Bernardino County will soon get to say whether they want the county to potentially secede from the state," reports the Associated Press.
• Rick Stewart, a Libertarian Party candidate for governor of Iowa, talks about his arrest for protesting in front of the Drug Enforcement Administration headquarters.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
...it has certainly invigorated it by lending credence to Trump's ongoing narrative about the extreme lengths to which Democrats will go to stop him.
And the DOJ.
It's only a narrative though, not a rock solid fact like the Russia collusion or the piss hookers or the Kavanaugh led gang rapes. Just a narrative, nothing to see here that Reason writers don't fully endorse.
It certainly is not CREDIBLE like the Kavanaugh gang rapes that occurred somewhere, at some time, and could be verified by nobody outside of a woman who does not seem to have problems with lying.
No problems with lying, but she was way too scared to fly. Flying for vacation is way different than flying for gang rape testimony.
Hey, you know how many vulnerable womyn get gang-raped on planes every day?
Not as many as when Epstein was alive. 😉
I am creating eighty North American nation greenbacks per-hr. to finish some web services from home. I actually have not ever thought adore it would even (res-05) realizable but my friend mate got $27k solely in four weeks simply doing this best assignment and conjointly she convinced Maine to avail. Look further details going this web-page.
.
>>>>>>> https://workhere3.blogspot.com/
They've been suppressing the "Gang Rape On The Way To Fantasy Island" episode for decades.
Less than the amount of folks enjoying gang-rape on planes every day.
The math checks out.
its possible Trump put off giving back the items knowing this would happen and anger his base. 44d Chess this man is playing.However maybe he should have just destroyed them or put them on a server.
the problem is anything can be classified even a conversation with one self
It’s my understanding that this back and forth with the National Archives happens with every former administration.
The server in Hilldog's basement isn't being used right now for anything other than Billy's porn world downloads. Maybe he could use that?
It isn’t in her basement. She gave it to the FBI.
She gave an empty server to the FBI. One empty server looks just like another.
And one idiot commenter (Mike) looks just like another.
It’s not in her basement then, as I said.
"Then he took power and acted in shady and borderline lawless ways himself." Refresh my memory, exactly what actions of President Trump could be characterized in that way? Obnoxious and thin skinned perhaps but "shady and borderline lawless"? J6 is the only action that remotely fits that description and that is a very weak argument. But that was at the end of his term, what did he do throughout his term that qualified for that description?
I'd certainly classify his allowance of the CDC to enact an eviction moratorium on private parties as lawless, not even borderline.
The bump stock ban was reactionary and potentially unconstitutional.
The CDC does pretty much what it wants to, can't put that at Trumps feet. The bumpstock thing was a congressional move. Those are pretty weak examples certainly within actions by other presidents. Joe Biden threatened to pull a $Billion from Ukraine to push for a prosecuter to be fired. Trump is no more "lawless" than any other president.
“The CDC does pretty much what it wants to, can't put that at Trumps feet.”
Trump signed the executive order.
There was no executive order for that. That was only from the CDC.
Withholding shipments of Congressionally approved assistance to Ukraine on condition they would issue a statement embarrassing to his Democratic opponent in his 2020 presidential reelection run.
That's not what actually happened, of course, just like Mike's claim that no BLM riots took place.
Are you talking about Joe Biden?
Cite? lol
"Withholding shipments of Congressionally approved assistance to Ukraine"
You mean the thing Biden bragged about doing on tape?
Pfft. What did the Biden family get from Ukraine?
Do you mean besides the 83k/month Hunter was getting from Burisma for over 6 years? Possibly shared with the "Big Guy"?
I honestly can't decide at this point if the Democrats are pulling c**p like this because they are stupid and think it will keep Trump from running or smart because they know it will make him run and likely win the primary.
Trump as the boogie-man is pretty much the only election strategy they have at this point.
We don’t have the information to know if this search warrant was driven by Democrats. It is quite possibly a Democratic ploy.
It is also a quite possible scenario that the National Archives wanted to make sure they got all classified documents back, and Trump was needlessly being a dick about returning them, or even made a big deal of it so he could play the martyr.
Republicans have been running wild with the speculation—like suggesting that the FBI may have planted evidence...
Certainly not our most cherished of institutions. They've always been above reproach.
Yeah, she speaks like there isn't precedent of the feds planting evidence.
Egad! Never! Not such a trustworthy institution like the FBI!
Especially in support of defeating Trump in a Presidential election. That has never happened before.
No, she really doesn’t.
Wow.
Yeah the agency that planted evidence on trump, got cough, went to trial, and got found not guilty because "he went after trump" would never plant evidence again
No, the organization that falsified documents to get a FISA warrant would never plant evidence.
I love Reason's "All search warrants are illegitimate...EXCEPT this one" mentality.
Maybe you should change your motto to "Free-ish Minds"
That still wouldn't be accurate.
Reason Magazine: freedom is slavery, slavery is freedom
"Question authority, unless we approve of the authority"
https://www.newsweek.com/2018/01/19/boston-marathon-bomb-maker-loose-776742.html
It's not like the FBI to cover for a terrorist
Reason writers get in on the Republicans pounce narrative.
Time for Reason to officially come out as a totalitarian group
The FBI serves search warrants on homes all the time.
See? Mundane.
In the future, everyone’s home will be raided for 15 minutes.
Unless your name is Hillary or Hunter. Something fishy with all these H names .... who else had an H name ...
Hamlet?
Damme!
Horation Hornblower double-secret protected.
nice, idiot. Horatio.
Horton hears a WHO?
Hammacher Schlemmer? Am I close?
Enver Hoxha?
See article one down on latest....
Wonder how ENB would believe if it happened to her.
She cannot complain or else she'd be proven to be an utter hypocrite.
Local story
...that this is a republic, that nobody is above the law...
Lol. Trump may be the only Epstein/Maxwell adjacent figure to face any police action of any sort on any subject.
Report: FBI Raided Mar-A-Lago After Tip That Parents Were Protesting A School Board Meeting There
https://babylonbee.com/news/report-fbi-raided-mar-a-lago-on-false-tip-that-parents-were-protesting-a-school-board-meeting-there
How long before the Bee gets canceled?
The Bee is already off Twitter. The real question is how long before the Bee gets raided?
I guess, but it’s a bit of a red herring observation since this search warrant wasn’t related to Epstein at all.
Whoooosh!
(Again)
I still wonder if Mike has to work at sounding autistically clueless, or if it comes naturally.
At this point, with all of the available evidence, most progs are either outright lying or beyond all rational discourse. You're not going to convince any of these weirdos to use common sense.
Focus on the "nobody is above the law" part for this exercise.
OK. That does open it up to whataboutery based on any case where VIPs got away with it, ever.
Also, Trump himself is one of the people who hasn’t been investigated in regards to the Epstein matter.
What an idiot
But not just any idiot, our Reason commenter group idiot.
"In new polling data from the Pew Research Center, nearly half of young adults surveyed said they 'wish there were more parties to choose from.'"
LOL
It's nice to be a Koch / Reason libertarian. The major party that currently controls Washington DC agrees with us on literally all our key issues — open borders and legal elective third trimester abortion. 🙂
#LibertariansForBiden
What about free weed and ass sex?
You forgot Mexicans and food trucks.
So, tacos either way?
They bring the free weed and food trucks (and ass sex if they're game.). 🙂
There's only one party, the D.C. Cocktail Party. If you aren't invited in you don't count.
Fuck Joe Biden
Not even with ENB's dick.
"The Biden administration is defending a law that stops medical marijuana users from legally owning guns."
Good. Longtime libertarian activist Michael Hihn always said libertarians should demand comprehensive gun safety regulations. I'm sure he'd approve.
#LibertariansForGunSense
ENB one upped her dumbass GOP pounces take for yesterday.
#HeDeservedIt
..borderline lawlessness…
Mr. Trump is accused of violating political norms—sometimes fairly, sometimes not—and the left violates norms in response.
Trump, different kind of garbage president we usually get, did manage to get everyone else to expose themselves as garbage, too.
Trump makes democrats do it. His skirt is too short.
Gaah! I asked for a short skirt for Ivanka and you give me short skirted Donald? This is not what I ordered.
At his age, the skirt wouldn't have to be too short for the balls to hang out. He'd look like a walking set of Truck Nutz.
Whatabout Frmocrats skirt? /sarc
With a long jacket? And fingernails that shine like Justice?
CAKE-Short Skirt/Long Jacket (Official HD Video)
https://youtu.be/X5KmB8Laemg
(Not A Pop-Up Video Factoid, But Plausible:. This video was the first in the "Listener Responds" genre.)
His ability to get people to fight in the mud with him really is impressive. Shows just how shallow even the most "respected" people can be.
Or maybe you respect the wrong people
I do wonder if what the D.C. establishment hates about Trump is not that he did all the venal, corrupt things they normally do, but that he did it so crudely that people started paying attention.
Way back during the 2016 run-up, Trump had talked during one of the GOP debates about how he had obviously taken advantage of tax breaks, because that's what rich people do. Dave Chappelle commented that Trump might as well have pulled out his Illuminati card and showed it to everyone when he said that.
"taken advantage of tax breaks, because that's what rich people do."
That's what every should do. If you're eligible for any type of tax break, say, mortgage interest or SALT or charitable donations or disaster losses... TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM. No one should pay more taxes than they legally owe.
That's a strange argument that always comes up in certain places, like "If you're really libertarian you wouldn't take social security."
It conflates different things. I don't think there should be tax breaks, I have a pretty nuanced reasoning behind it, mostly revolving around the fact that the power to give "breaks" is the power to distort markets and pick winners.
I also don't live in a world where tax rate is flat and tax laws are simple. So if there's a tax break available to me, I'm using the mpercy method and taking it! Because there's a real difference between positing an ideal world and living in the one I'm in, right now.
I think it's more that he's not corrupt, at least in the DC establishment sense. They're all in bed together on Epstein's island. Trump isn't part of that covenant and that makes him dangerous to them.
I truly think its mostly pure revenge for his silly Obama birth certificate conspiracy. "Oh you want to make shit up, well we can do that too" type of reasoning.
Also can you really claim outsider status, when you inite the Clintons to your wedding?
Forgot to mention, birth cert was first put forth by Clintons; Trump though ran with longer and harder then most.
Trump is corrupt in the way rich businessmen are corrupt not in the way rich politicians pretending to be serving the people's interests are corrupt.
We hate most what we don't understand...
"he did all the venal, corrupt things they normally do"
Umm... what???
Read somewhere:
If Trump was going to hide something he should have hid it under Hunter's pile of hookers and blow. The FBI would never look there.
For sure.
Americans want more political options.
Right up until Election Day.
+1 Lesser Weevil.
Going Master and Commander on us.
You get to choose between total government control of every aspect of your life and something less intrusive.
Nobody needs more choices than that.
Common sense ballot control.
Like in 2020?
the problem is that the choice is more like "total government control of A B and C," or "total government control of X Y and Z." neither option is offering less control, just different control. (and, when the party in control changes, they never get rid of the control the other party put in place.)
The Biden administration is defending a law that stops medical marijuana users from legally owning guns.
Biden's handlers violating a constitutional right???
TOP. MEN. FBI ‘Scoured’ Melania’s Wardrobe at Mar-A-Lago Looking for… Classified Shoes?
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2022/08/10/fbi-scoured-melanias-wardrobe-at-mar-a-lago-looking-for-classified-shoes-n2611526
Sounds like a fishing expedition launched out of desperation.
I loved using a magistrate judge with some REALLY sketchy history over a federal judge to issue the warrant.
I'm sure he's the best, most honest, pedophile-representing, Clinton+Obama-Connected magistrate out there.
But it allowed millions of idiots to shout "A judge issued the warrant". Whereas using a federal judge who wasn't obviously compromised might not.
Just part of the "we dare you to stop us" more blatant phase.
^
The final redpill is accepting that “the Cathedral” is actually a synagogue
https://mobile.twitter.com/lennydykstra/status/1557097606232301569?s=21&t=qWy1HE1n2qDdhKNQ7v1Z0g
That Baseball Nazi thug can Fuck Off! And so can you if you like him!
Lenny Dykstra--Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenny_Dykstra
Don’t you have a Donbas bunker to defend?
Sounds like a fishing expedition launched out of desperation.
Or an FBI agent with close ties to Rex Ryan.
Or a kinky, freaky fetish! 🙂
Damnit! Here's where I draw the line! Get your own platforms with the live goldfish in the clog, you Fed bitches! Don't make me pull the Derringer in my garter belt! 😉
The judge that signed off on the trump Judge Bruce E. Reinhart use to be a lawyer for epstien. This is revenge
A birthday dinner menu amongst them and a cocktail napkin with a suspicious stain! Proof Trump got TWO scoops! TWO! We got him now boyos!
https://nypost.com/2022/08/09/trump-raid-sparked-by-boxes-of-materials-including-kim-jong-un-letters/
Do you think they found any medium-velocity ketchup splatter on whatever he was wearing January 6th? I bet they were there to verify the lunch on the wall story.
Let's not joke around about this. If he got preferential birthday treatment at a chain restaurant that is an indication of a corruption across our entire nation. That's an indication that there's nothing left to do but burn it all down.
Wait a minute! We all still get to "Have It Our Way" at Burger King! Even Vegans with that horrible concept of The Impossible Burger! The "long trail of abuses" isn't there yet! 😉
He got extra fries with that. Emoluments!
As new details emerge the facts of the raid get worse. Trumps lawyers were not told, the denied entry using the raid. The FBI requested trump security cameras were to be turned off. The lawyers were not give a copy of the warrant.
Likewise trump was already working with the archives to return materials as normally occurs every pot presidency.
And to add insult, yesterday the FBI asked for the phone from a sitting member of congress despite the phone having legislative work and contacts on it.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/republican-congressman-scott-perry-fbi-seized-phone
What this appears to be is a reason to raid and obtain materials for the J6 committee as the FBI swept up all documents, not just pertinent ones. The congressman was someone in contact with trump on j6. So the warrant was a pretense to continue going after trump on the novel theory of seditious conspiracy.
Wow, so the corporate media and the Brandon Administration are full of shit once again and Reason is accepting all of it uncritically?
I am shocked, sir!
AFT union discusses how to change children's pronouns without parents knowing. Jeff still in denial.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/aft-promotes-method-teachers-help-kids-change-pronouns-without-parents-knowing
Isn't he past the denying stage and now all about justification and acceptance of such practices?
No. He still denies reality and claims they are only teaching kids to love each other and that there is no grooming or practices common to groomers.
Snow White! Checkmate.
But that's not true. Fox News is lying here (shocking). The AFT card doesn't tell kids to hide pronouns from parents. The card asks the student IF the teacher should use those pronouns when talking to parents. It is an act of courtesy.
And here again you are offering nothing but unfiltered outrage and emotion. What do YOU want to do about the issue of pronouns? Pretend like it's not an issue? Just impose "he/she" pronouns on everyone even if they object? The fact of the matter is, the Bostock decision happened, and discrimination on the basis of gender identity is now illegal. You can either rage and complain that schools are trying to comply with the law, or you can try to recommend a different course of action.
“IF the teacher should use those pronouns when talking to parents.”
You’re a lying piece of garbage.
Here's an idea for teachers. Stay the fuck out of it. The pronoun thing is a forced social construct on the kids. It forces them to comply with something they don't completely understand and puts them at risk for ridicule if they make the wrong or unpopular choice. How about. Who gives a shit about pronouns. Let the kids be kids and leave their sexual identity to them as they mature and explore it.
You obviously have no kids. If you want a kid to not focus on something the best way as a parent or teacher is to leave it alone, ignore it and give it no weight. Your model school is doing all of the opposite and this is the result. Identity loss for the kids as they are lumped into multi-gendered categories and aligned accordingly.
What a joke.
But Jeff cries when he thinks about kids separated from their "parents" at the border.
The pronoun thing is a forced social construct on the kids.
The status quo is a forced social construct on the kids.
Not forcing social constructs on children is forcing social constructs on children? Ok groomer.
The status quo is a forced social construct on the kids.
Funny, that's just what the neo-marxists say, too.
Do the neo-marxists say "the status quo is not an amoral state of nature, it is its own moral framework with its own built-in moral assumptions about how the world works that is imposed on us by the decisions of the past just as much as any authoritarian government might impose some sweeping new program on a population"?
They do have this ridiculous notion that they were unfairly born in to a world that wasn't a paradise, yes.
Your rationale is that we need to define one or the other when really not forcing a pronoun construct or the status quo is a more organic process.
Hey. Teacher. Leave them kids alone.
It doesn't tell kids to hide pronouns from parents, it tells teachers to hide pronouns from parents
Yes, that's what he said.
Jeff is a fucking retard.
You're so completely corrupt and bent you're not worth discussing anything with.
Correct.
Just ridicule the fat pedophile totalitarian, that's the most he's worth.
Such a radical individualist.
*barf*
Lying is a strong word for this considering you're slicing the truth awfully, awfully thin here.
I'm not very charitable towards Fox News or Jesse, you are right.
Or the actual truth.
Plenty generous to Democrats though.
It's still facilitating withholding information about their children from parents. That is not something a school should be doing at all. If a child is toying with the idea of a radical change like that, parents should absolutely not be left out. They should be asking the parents that question, not the child.
Pronoun people are fucking morons. It's the stupidest issue of all time. "I made up a new pronoun and now it's a hate crime if you refer to me differently when talking about me in the third person!"
Absolute idiocy. Overloaded Narcissism. Little kids throwing tantrums because you dont recognize their invisible friend.
Pronouns are not even mentioned in Bostock, except in Alito's dissent.
Jesse, do you want schools to ignore the Bostock decision? Yes or no?
How does that decision justify schools hiding important information about their children's social development from parents?
get rid of public schools. problem solved.
Agreed, but in the meantime, keep groomers like Jeffy away from children.
Did you actually read bostock?
Ironically the schools are withholding and treating two classes of students different with this decision. In opposition to bostock. Lol.
New Jersey cops are using the routine blood samples collected from newborn babies to investigate crimes...
"The dedicated New Jerksey detectives who investigate these crimes are known as Baby Crime Unit. These are their stories for story time."
As narrated by drag queens.
The Free Speech Index is "a first-of-its-kind analysis of laws restricting speech about government in all 50 states."
SHUT IT DOWN
California is #1. You will be applauded for calling a black guy a nigger, and then calling him a monkey while throwing a banana at him. (granted the black guy was a (r) so we probably need to test this theory with a wider audience)
The "No True Nigger" fallacy.
If we really believe, as we say we believe, that this is a republic, that nobody is above the law
Fine premise, but I need transparency, not blind faith in the FBI. "I'm sure they'll explain it all to us later," isn't great. If, as they say, this ongoing disagreement over documents has been going on for months, why haven't we heard about it until now? Why weren't there headlines, "DOJ could become involved in dispute with Trump over allegedly missing documents," or "FBI showing interest in Trump's possible violation of Presidential Records Act" prior to now?
I mean it's not like it would be a small story nobody would cover. Apparently this was all simmering in the background, nobody was talking about it, and then the FBI just swoops in and seizes a whole bunch of records. I don't know how it served justice to keep this all confidential-the public can know that there's a records dispute, and obviously Trump and his representatives knew, if they were involved in discussions.
It has been covered. JUst not in right-wing media.
Here is a New York Times article on it from February:
Oops, clicked submit too soon.
It has been covered. Just not in right-wing media.
Here is a New York Times article on it from February:
https://archive.ph/rb8EY
Here is a PBS story on it from February:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-trump-may-have-violated-the-presidential-records-act
Now discuss how these conversations have occurred at the end of every presidency and how trump was already working with the archive over documents. On its website the archive says only 1 to 3% of documents are relevant, so these discussions are normal. This is the first time it was weaponized so you applaud it.
Now discuss how these conversations have occurred at the end of every presidency and how trump was already working with the archive over documents.
If this is the claim that you wish to make, then perhaps you could provide evidence to support your claim, instead of insisting that I do your homework for you.
You've already been given the links dumbass. Sea lion 101? This happened under both trump and Obama as well as the Clinton's.
Coming from you, that's probably a lie. But since you have the links handy, and you are currently restating this claim, why don't you present them again if you really do have them.
Guess who looks like a retard again? You do sea lion.
This is like when you claimed Hillary willingly handed over her server... 2 years later after destroying and deleting records.
You really are a leftist moron.
But she did hand over her server willingly. She didn't hand it over unmolested, no.
This is what you do Jesse and I'm just tired of it. You take a truthful statement and try to twist it into something else in order to try to generate a controversy.
This is like what you did last weekend, when it became clear that we both actually agreed substantively on a topic, you then moved to completely invent out of thin air a false claim to try to invent a new area of disagreement.
It's so that you can earn attaboys and pats-on-the-back from your tribal members for new and creative ways to 'pwn the left'.
Poor jeffy
No. She didn't moron. She went and deleted records then used bleach bit. Only then did she hand over the server.
Do you know how retarded you sound claiming that?
She didn't
then did she hand over the server
lol
So if trump has burned then bleached the records he would be in the clear if he handed over the ashes? You really are a retarded shit. She destroyed her records.
Can you see why not handing it over for 2 years and then destroying all of the evidence on it before handing it over might be a problem worth looking into?
Oh I can absolutely see how it would make people upset. It makes me upset. But the point of this entire discussion, which started with a whataboutist-like question such as "WHY WASN'T HILLARY RAIDED", was because Hillary handed over her server willingly. It was not immediate, it was begrudgingly, and she tampered with it, absolutely. But she did hand it over without needing a raid.
She deleted her records after a subpoena was submitted retard. She destroyed evidence under judicial subpeona.
How dumb are you?
Lying Jeffy is plenty dumb, but he’s a lot more dishonest.
"But she did hand over her server willingly. She didn't hand it over unmolested, no."
THEN SHE DID NOT HAND IT OVER WILLINGLY
Fuck, how stupid can one possibly be?
If one turns over what is demanded and erases everything on it...it was not turned over.
Courts did not give two shits about the physical equipment, rather, they cared about the data the server contained.
And she DELETED it. Her IT guy was busted online asking how to do it.
THEN SHE DID NOT HAND IT OVER WILLINGLY
Did the FBI use force to grab the server from her possession? No? Then she handed it over willingly.
Look, you don't have to like Hillary in order to acknowledge reality.
"Did the FBI use force to grab the server from her possession? No? Then she handed it over willingly."
They did not care about the physical server. They wanted the info on the server, which was subpoenaed. She erased it.
SHE DID NOT TURN OVER WHAT WAS REQUESTED.
So now you are shifting the goalposts. Got it.
"So now you are shifting the goalposts."
No, you are just a moron.
If. A. Court. Asks. For. A. Server. They. Want. All. Of. The. Info. On. The. Server.
It's not even remotely difficult to grasp if your IQ exceeds the average temperature of Anchorage in January.
I don’t call him Lying Jeffy for nothing.
Pathetic thing is he doesn’t know any actual leftists, so he harasses libertarians, after using lies to attempt to cram them into a “leftist” box.
Nobody but you believes Jeffy’s not a leftist, and you’re a fucking moron.
She deleted files from the machine after it was subpoenaed. She demonstrably had classified data on the machine. She was protected by the FBI.
110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
[The law has no intent requirement: "Knowingly, willfully, or negligently disclose to unauthorized persons"]
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
[Seems pretty negligent to me.]
Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.
As a result, although the Department of Justice makes final decisions on matters like this, we are expressing to Justice our view that no charges are appropriate in this case.
[No prosecutor wants to accidentally shoot themselves in the back of the head...twice...]
To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.
[So this decision is special for Sec. Clinton. Anyone else would have been prosecuted.]
"Coming from you, that's probably a lie."
I'm glad Jeffy doubled down early.
Keep a copy of his post guys. Hang it like an albatross around Jeff's neck in the coming weeks. There's already a mountain of examples with Obama and Bush, and they're still coming in hot and hard as we speak.
Speaking of the Clinton’s— they loaded up their trailer with everything but the kitchen sink. That may be a bit of exaggeration, but I remember news stories talking about missing plates, silverware, drapes and of course all the “W’s” on every computer.
Yes, I remember the stories.
Here is one of the examples.
http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2018/06/10/national-archive-administrator-obama-records-missing/
Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and “loss” of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges.
So fuck off sea lion.
Your evidence here is rather weak. It's some random blog that links to an editorial in Politico that doesn't really mention anything about negotiations or subpoenas between the Obama admin and the National Archive, just blasts him for not handing over all the records that he should have. And it says nothing about whether those records Obama withheld were classified top secret or not.
So I'm not at all surprised that Obama, or Bush, or anyone else, didn't hand over all the records that the National Archives would have liked to have had. But the remaining questions are (1) how effective were negotiations in resolving the controversy? and (2) did any of those disputed records involve top secret material?
It links to RCI.
Are you going to claim ignorance on the use of private servers and alternate email accounts under Obama administration? Lol.
Sorry yes it was to Real Clear Politics, not Politico.
So I have answered your question: why wasn't Obama treated the same way? The answer is that no one alleged that Obama was withholding top secret documents. That is why. Now you want to perpetuate some nonsensical discussion in order to generate controversy and disputes. Sorry, no, I'm not going to play your game.
Trump was not withholding classified anything. It was all declassified by him before leaving office. His top NSA people verify that.
His top NSA people verify that.
They did? Where?
“The White House counsel failed to generate the paperwork to change the classification markings, but that doesn’t mean the information wasn’t declassified,” Kash Patel, a former staffer for Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) and, briefly, a Pentagon employee, told Breitbart in May.
“I was there with President Trump when he said ‘We are declassifying this information,’” Patel added.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/classified-to-whom-questions-swirl-around-classified-docs-at-mar-a-lago/ar-AA10uAC8
I also like how your arguments have now changed because you were ignorant. The filtering form of argumentation to say how this time is different because reasons.
"(2) did any of those disputed records involve top secret material?"
Contra CNN there was nothing classified in the records.
Which is what I asked: How can the person with unilateral power to classify or declassify anything be guilty of taking classified information?
(1) he's not president anymore
(2) there's a process to declassify stuff, he can't just on a whim say "this is declassified" and that's that
he can't just on a whim say "this is declassified" and that's that
Actually he can.
1) Declassified before he left office.
2) No, there really is not. If the President says it is declassified, it is. He alone has the authority.
“(2) there's a process to declassify stuff, he can't just on a whim say "this is declassified" and that's that”
Cite?
This is a fallacy of generalization: that some documents that Trump took were declassified, doesn't mean that all documents that Trump took were declassified.
They were.
Come on Jeff, sealion me.
Since all you want to do is to try to "pwn" me, why don't you find some more substantive proof of your claim than the word of one man who didn't even work in the White House at the time who claims to have heard Trump declassify a bunch of documents, and even in that interview with Breitbart won't specify which documents were the ones he claimed to have seen Trump declassify.
Patel did not want to get into what the specific documents were
If you can find actual documentary proof that those specific documents - not just vague claims of "he declassified stuff", the ones that were in the boxes that the FBI carted out of Trump's house yesterday - were specifically declassified by Trump before he left, following the proper procedure and documentation, then you will have totally "pwned" me.
"If you can find actual documentary proof that those specific documents"
Trump's lawyers couldn't even find out and you want me to. What part of "the supporting documentation of what the probable cause was to obtain the warrant has been sealed" are you pretending not to understand?
Oh, okay. So you cannot prove that "there was nothing classified in the records" but you are going to state it as fact anyway.
Because Kash Patel who witnessed the declassification, went on record about it months ago when the Archives made the request.
You know this. Who do you think you're tricking here?
Yeah, they were. They have to provide proof that they were not (and the President SAYING it is sufficient) and they have not.
No, he has to provide proof that they WERE. It's not possible to prove a negative.
There is a process for declassifying stuff:
https://www.archives.gov/isoo/policy-documents/cnsi-eo.html
That link says that "Trump declassified whole sets of materials in anticipation of leaving government that he thought the American public should have the right to read themselves". Fine. That doesn't prove that the documents that were in his possession at the time were the ones that were declassified.
Further I might point out that this entire claim rests on the word of one man who was the Pentagon chief of staff. He wasn't even in the White House. We only have his word that Trump declassified... something. And even then we don't know if the ones that he did declassify were the ones in the boxes from yesterday's search.
If he actually declassified those documents, then there is paperwork somewhere to justify that. If not, then he can't now decide that they are declassified, he's not the president now.
The ENTIRE order was based on the authority of the President. Meaning LITERALLY nobody can override him on any of it. If he says it is declassified, NOBODY can say "Uh, yeah, it is".
Fuck, do you even read what you cite?
It does, you simpleton. Fuck, you really ought to wear a helmet when you leave mom's basement.
It doesn't the feds want a civil war, because they are war profiteers
The feds are doing their best to provoke an uprising from the right. They believe they can clamp down and everyone will roll over and submit.
Yea, because that's totes better for them than the status quo of... everyone rolling over and submitting already.
It will be an Alamo for rejects and failures of all stripes.
Whose sock are you?
Also, fuck off.
Reads like Tony.
Two blind losers fumbling around the confines of their cell.
Have fun!
Or the old KRen.
Either way, it’s a grey box now.
Well deserved. haha.
They really don't.
Does a bully really want his victim to fight back?
They've gotten everything they wanted and nobody has forcefully opposed them yet.
Why wouldn't they want that to continue?
It has been in the news.
Reason: "You must trust the government on the days we say the government is trust-worthy."
They're looking for the fruit of the poison branch. Trump's attorneys apparently don't have a copy of the warrant but from the reporting I've read, this looks like a fishing expedition.
ENB, quoting Williamson and French, two loud anti trumpers, to bolster your argument just makes you look ignorant.
Quoting Williamson and French is like quoting Tucker Carlson on a raid at AOC's.
Except Tucker is more likely to oppose it.
Not just ignorant, predictably and stereotypically stupid to the point of bad faith absurdity. The only way it could be worse is if she quoted her one black friend, the guy everybody calls Uncle Tom, about how Democrats aren't entirely racist. It's just that stupid.
Bingo
This is the essential tragedy of the Trump era. The man ran on being an outsider who was hated by establishment types of all stripes and on accusing Democrats of lawlessness. Then he took power and acted in shady and borderline lawless ways himself. The left understandably seized on this—while often stating the case hyperbolically. All of which fueled sometimes justified but often unjustified complaints from Trump and his team that oh, look, the lawless Democrats are at it again, further hardening the stance of avid Trump supporters that anything he is being investigated for is a political farce. And this, in turn, grows Trump's original appeal while giving more cover for him to act in corrupt or lawless ways…which leads to more Democratic action against him. It's a terrible feedback loop in which it feels like we may be forever trapped.
Yup this is a great way to put it.
I think we are at the part of the feedback loop where it honestly doesn't matter if Trump actually broke the law or not.
For Team Blue, they will invent whatever is necessary to try to pin a crime on Trump.
For Team Red, they will excuse anything Trump does in the name of 'pwning the left'.
We as a country just need to get beyond this somehow. I don't know how to do this as a nation. I do think it can start individually by learning to really listen and understand each other in a respectful way. Yes there are a lot of Team Blue people who think that Trump voters are a bunch of racist redneck morons. Yes there are a lot of Team Red people who think that Team Blue voters are a bunch of elitist arrogant assholes who hate them. But those are just stereotypes and we need to get beyond the stereotypes. So that we all know that the opinions each of us hold are not for the most part based on some hidden agenda but is based on a sincere desire for doing what we think is best. We're not enemies, we're just people with a disagreement. I hope we can get to that point at some time.
I like when you pretend to not be on team blue. Just makes you look desperate. You already gave the game up dozens and dozens of times.
And then there are some people, such as Jesse, who are beyond hope.
Keep roaring sea lion.
Not only are you firmly on Team Democratic Party, you're paid to dissemble here for them.
I imagine not even sarc is fooled by your protestations of impartiality.
The only people here getting paid are the RNC operatives trying to equate libertarians with leftists.
Are you claiming that chem-"TopMen"-jeff is libertarian and not a prog?
No one is getting paid to post here. Who the fuck is going to pay someone to argue with like 50 internet weirdos all day?
Exactly what I said. Nobody.
"Who the fuck is going to pay someone to argue with like 50 internet weirdos all day?"
ActBlue does, so does Open Foundations, TalkLeft and MoveOn. Hell, Media Matters have been running fifty-centers since its inception in 2004.
Nobody's paying sarcasmic though. Those fresh opinions are all him.
The term “fifty center” was coined for a reason.
I think RNC operatives, assuming they exist, probably have better things to do.
You accuse me of being a racist Nazi pedophile, not because you think it is genuinely true, but because it is an emotional reaction to your complete hatred of me, and because it earns you attaboys from your tribe for ever more clever putdowns of the people that you hate. So not sure why anyone should take you seriously when it comes to describing reality.
ML really has gone downhill. He used to make actual arguments now and then. Now all he does is make shit up to impress JesseAz. Almost like he's got a big crush.
But Jeff is a fifty-centing Nazi pederast, and you're a troll who can't remember your own drunken shitposts.
Also cute that your trying to foist the accusations regularly leveled against you, onto me.
Originality definitely isn't your sin.
But Jeff is a fifty-centing Nazi pederast,
Cha-ching! 10 more social credit points in the tribal hierarchy!
If only it was real money like with you.
That one only earned 2 points. Pretty weak.
How much is that in money?
He won a blowjob with that one.
Yeah but it was a blowjob from Tulpa. Eww.
Probably shouldn’t make that joke to sarc, since he actually asked Tulpa out on a date and got rejected.
Remember when sarcasmic shipped Sevo and Nardz? That was creepy.
https://reason.com/2021/10/03/how-the-cdc-became-americas-landlord/#comment-9138013
Now he's shipping Tulpa and me.
You and chemjeff get the weirdest boners, sarcasmic.
Ironic considering the two of you follow each other around patting each other on the back.
If you'd quit projecting you'd have like 1 post a day and catch a lot less shit for it.
Except that I don't follow anyone around and I'm not projecting. Otherwise spot on comment.
Seek help.
And this, in turn, grows Trump's original appeal while giving more cover for him to act in corrupt or lawless ways…which leads to more Democratic action against him. It's a terrible feedback loop in which it feels like we may be forever trapped.
It's like a retard screaming into the microphone about all the feedback they're getting.
Seriously, dumbasses, your continued stupidity is turning away Democrats and NeverTrumpers, but I'm sure you'll be surprised when, eventually, somebody unplugs the speakers, someone else takes the mic out of your hands, and you're shown the door.
For Team Blue, they will invent whatever is necessary to try to pin a crime on Trump.
For Team Red, they will excuse anything Trump does in the name of 'pwning the left'.
Ayuh.
We're not enemies, we're just people with a disagreement.
Easy for you to say. You're not on a team. Each team believes they're the good guys, and everyone else is evil. Disagree with someone on Team Blue and they'll say you're a radical conservative. Disagree with someone on Team Red and they'll say you're a communist. Any attempt to understand the other point of view as something other than an evil caricature is "sympathizing with the enemy" and likely to get you kicked out of your tribe.
It's not going to get better.
It’s pathetic to have to resort to being on a political team to feel good about yourself.
Lol at this exchange from the 3 lying leftists.
That's not at all what I said.
My point is that political tribes act like primitive cavemen. Almost like chimps that shit into their hand, throw it, and then laugh (JesseAz). Any why not? Humans have been around for 150,000 years or something and been industrialized for a few centuries, right? We're three steps out of the cave with a bunch of shiny toys.
Weren't you just throwing shir about whatabousim yesterday to defend your party despite you being given links to explain how how cries were wrong?
Lol.
People forget that it was as bad or worse back in the 1970s, but the country healed after Nixon.
Some of the healing came in though cultural back doors not on any politician’s or establishment’s radar: for example, outlaw country music (Waylon and Willie) reconciling long hair and pot with the conservative world of country music.
Or Merle Haggard, who was never really a staunch conservative, but played one on TV, writing songs with lines critical of Nixon.
Heck, at the end of the 19th century, there were 3 presidents assassinated within the span of 35 years.
I agree that things have been worse in the past. Which is why all this talk about "civil war" is hyperbolic myopic nonsense. But it is still not healthy to be so divided.
I disagree. It's normal to be this divided. We put way, way too much emphasis on unity of opinion. Unity of opinion should scare people way more, if the history of the world is indicative of things.
The Civil War talk I think is hyperbolic, because I think most people don't have the will to do what that really means. War is a horrible thing. I often find this argument going on between people who have never experienced it. I have not myself, but I have worked with vets. Evidence suggests the average person is not quite so hard as to kill a man. This is a digression.
The main question is, how do we learn to live in a divided nation. Subsidiarity and Federation were the original means to do so. This has been significantly impeded over the 20th century by various means. So, moving forward, how do we reach a place where people can disagree without having to basically isolate to some degree from society at large.
And here's where I'm hopeful. The SC was a major means of destroying Federation in the 20th century by focusing more power in federal institutions. I think we've seen an indication from the SC recently, a willingness to turn that back.
I still don't know though. I, oddly, don't feel strongly about dissolution. I think dissolution is the more likely result than Civil War because I don't think people are willing to fight and die over any given topic these days. But, who knows? If I knew the future, I'd be so rich that I could be posting on Reason full time from my weird desert compound, somewhere in Southern Arizona.
Nevada might be better. Southern AZ is already water-challenged, and will probably be returned to Mexico for white guilt assuagement. And, for the same reason, all heritage Indian lands will revert to tribal ownership and control, so they can pick up inter-tribal warfare where they left off. The rest of Arizona will become East California.
"The FBI's serving a search warrant on Donald Trump's residence is not — in spite of everything being said about it — unprecedented," writes Kevin D. Williamson at National Review.
Would this be the same Kevin D. Williamson who floated the idea of death penalty by hanging for people who access abortion care? Yikes, I know Reason.com is cozy with #NeverTrumpers — editor-in-chief KMW used to work for Bill Kristol after all — but it's disappointing to read that name here.
Looks like it is that guy - “I would totally go with treating (abortion) like any other crime up to and including hanging — which kind of, as I said, I’m kind of squishy about capital punishment in general, but I’ve got a soft spot for hanging as a form of capital punishment. I tend to think that things like lethal injection are a little too antiseptic.”
But he is saying things in support of Trump getting raided, so it's fine to use him as an example of bipartisan support.
Voters in Southern California's San Bernardino County will soon get to say whether they want the county to potentially secede from the state...
Literal insurrection.
There's going to be a run on assault fire extinguishers in the neighboring states of Nevada and Arizona.
Hmm, economically challenged area of California voted to separate from other areas that generate buckets of cash. And from other areas that have water. Not a smart move.
San Bernardino is on the Colorado River, and has Big Bear Lake, Lake Arrowhead, Silver Lake and Lake Gregory, in addition to the headwaters of the Santa Ana River.
Los Angeles, Riverside and Orange Counties aren't the areas that have water. . . .
wait til their low-regulation free market zone kicks the shit out of their neighbors and they can afford all the water they want to buy.
If they were really serious about this (they aren't), they'd have talked with Inyo, Kern, and Tulare about forming a separate state, with the unspoken understanding that the Los Angeles aqueduct would suddenly run dry and Owens Lake magically fill up again.
I just don't want them to join with Arizona. Is that too much to ask?
"The FBI's serving a search warrant on Donald Trump's residence is not — in spite of everything being said about it — unprecedented," writes Kevin D. Williamson at National Review.
Show me the last time a former president was served with a search warrant over records. Or a presidential hopeful who is planning to run against the sitting president.
His point though is that if we really believed that as far as the law is concerned, the president is no different than any other citizen, then serving a search warrant on Trump is no different than serving a search warrant on anyone else.
I frankly think he is wrong, but in the opposite direction. I think the enforcement of the law should be harsher on politicians because they hold so much power. And yes that ought to be true of both teams. I don't think Hillary should have been treated as lightly as she was.
But "unprecedented" is a word that means something. What you're describing is "this may be unprecedented, but it's justified and actually not a big deal."
Or I guess we could just redefine words again.
I don’t see where chemjeff said, “and not a big deal.” In fact, he seemed to be saying it should be a big deal more often.
Except for Hillary and Hunter & Pa.
Not part of a tribe folks. Just ask them.
And the counter point, which you and ENB ignore, is that Hillary and Hunter have not yet been raided by the FBI over far more serious matters.
And matters supported with far better evidence.
But whomever exists in that gray box needs to eat shit and die, anyway.
Don't make saec scream whataboutism again.
You guys really believe that "It's not fair! Johnny did it first and he didn't get in trouble! Not fair!" is an effective argument.
No point in pointing out how stupid it is. All that will do is make y'all pissier than usual.
No point in pointing out that ENB did say it happens all the time. No need to point out that is a lie. No need to point out you betray your handle yet again.
In the context of the article "it" was "FBI raiding a home."
The article made a point to be clear that the ex-president shouldn't be treated as royalty, so this should be treated as another raid on a home.
She is only telling a lie if you deliberately misinterpret what she clearly said.
Who is asking him to be treated like royalty? The issue is the unequal application of the laws. Which was shown to yesterday and you screamed whatabout!!!
FTA, dumbass
"The FBI serves search warrants on homes all the time. Donald Trump is a former president, not a mystical sacrosanct being. If we really believe, as we say we believe, that this is a republic, that nobody is above the law, that the presidency is just a temporary executive-branch office rather than a quasi-royal entitlement, then there is nothing all that remarkable about the FBI serving a warrant on a house in Florida."
And it's not even ENB saying it. It's a quote from someone else.
And them going thru Melania's closet?
All for documents that Trump declassified earlier?
I'm not defending anything, idjit.
But ex-First Lady ex-SoS and sitting VP's and sitting President's son don't count.
Talk to Kevin D. Williamson who was quoted in the article. I'm just pointing out that you were wrong when you accused ENB of being a liar. I'm not judging the content of what was said.
The whole use of the word, raid, is loaded. From what I’ve heard, the FBI showed up at 9 am, knocked on the door, and were let in by the head of the Mar-a-Lago Secret Service detail.
Hey look, Dee’s repeating the State’s talking point!
Haha, fucking called it.
"You guys really believe that "It's not fair! Johnny did it first and he didn't get in trouble! Not fair!" is an effective argument."
When only one side is victim of a law, then the law is unjust and should be called out as such.
What would you say? Oh yeah.
Poor damikesc. Poor baby. Cry more. Boo hoo. So unfair. Call your mommy.
Not a troll. Only here to discuss ideas.
He has to HAVE ideas to discuss them, R Mac.
You guys really believe that "It's not fair! Johnny did it first and he didn't get in trouble! Not fair!" is an effective argument.
Uh, if one side is empirically treated differently than the other, then yes, it's an effective argument. Pointing out obvious double standards is hardly the kindergarten-level argument that you're trying to minimize it as.
Most politicians are lawyers. Trump is not. He's spent his life flouting the rules as opposed to being part of the system. As a result he's going to be treated differently because he acts differently.
Just a thought.
You're still not making the case for this not being a double standard, because Hillary is all that and more.
Yet he's been the victim of a 6 year organized effort to "get" him and they've got nothing.
He is, quite possibly, the cleanest President we've had in decades.
Wait, what? Trump is being treated differently by law enforcement cuz he brought it on himself by acting differently?
Lol. Ok.
Okay, an unnamed person, who formerly held a high political office, does something the last several persons who held that same office also did without being raided by the FBI, something that is quite normal for someone in his position to do, and he's raided by the FBI. You think the problem is people drawing attention to the clear double standard here, and not the double standard itself. And you think you and the two or three others here who agree with you are the real "libertarians." Okay, got it.
That's different because norms and shit.
I think the better argument is "show me a citizen raided over records." I would actually agree the President is not above the law. I just think that the actions here are out of sort in general, best I can tell.
Perhaps that's an overstatement, but it has certainly invigorated it by lending credence to Trump's ongoing narrative about the extreme lengths to which Democrats will go to stop him.
Agreed. The problem isn't the authoritarian use of the strong arm of the state against political opposition.
No, it's the way the Republicans are pouncing on this. So much pouncing. It's just inexcusable.
Rep. Scott Perry (R–Pa.) said the FBI has seized his cellphone.
Did the FBI seize Perry's phone, or did he merely claim that they did. Good job with the subtle implications of falsehood there, you partisan hack.
Reporting what a politician says is 'partisan hackery'. Got it.
They lost their "without evidence," "allegedly" and "a person familiar with" buttons after Trump left office.
Ugh. It turns out Serena Williams is a TERF. Just look at the disgusting, bigoted way she associates reproductive organs with womanhood.
"If I were a guy, I wouldn't be writing this because I'd be out there playing and winning while my wife was doing the physical labor of expanding our family," Williams said. "Maybe I'd be more of a Tom Brady if I had that opportunity. Don't get me wrong: I love being a woman, and I loved every second of being pregnant with Olympia. ... But I'm turning 41 this month, and something's got to give."
Doesn't she know men can get pregnant too? Doesn't she realize the fact that she's given birth is completely unrelated to the fact that she's a woman? Is she really unaware of female athletes like Lia Thomas who have the same reproductive organs as Tom Brady?
#CancelSerena
#SerenaAlwaysAWhiner
On the other hand, if Serena was a man, she would not be ranked in the top 1000, and would spend his/her career giving tennis lessons at a local club.
Eh, who knows. I'd say that retiring from professional sports at 41 simply isn't that big of a deal. That's normal. It's a good thing.
There's something important in that quote about our current mindset about never having tradeoffs ever instead of understanding that life is nothing but tradeoffs.
Yeah....it's hard to think of ANY sport where you can keep going after 40.
In new polling data from the Pew Research Center, nearly half of young adults surveyed said they "wish there were more parties to choose from."
63% of them expressed an interest in the Khmer Rouge Party.
Yeah, but that's a party that just wanted to pass sweeping agricultural reforms. That's so far removed from what people are doing today, there's NOBODY trying to centrally dictate agricultural practices.
"ThE uS dOeSn'T eVeN hAvE a LeFt wInG pArTy!"
47% reversed interest when they realized this wasn't some kind of sex party at a cabaret.
This generation? A sex party is the last thing they'd be interested in.
Top part choice: Spring Break in Florida
ENB writes that disputes like document returns are normally addressed by negotiation and that is correct. Negotiations are usually used for any number of disagreements between branch of government and between agencies. What is missed is that Trump typically does not negotiate. Whatever negotiation happen are usually just stalling. We have seen numerous times and the choices Trump leaves are to give up or go big. Lately those dealing with Trump have chosen to go big.
I would also suggest the search was a direct result of recent findings that records relating to January 6th have been lost or deleted. I don't think the DOJ could chance losing more records.
"What is missed is that Trump typically does not negotiate."
Explains all of those real estate agreements he signed. His lack of negotiation.
Or the peace treaties signed under him (none under Biden). Lack of negotiation.
The peace treaties were just stalling so we could nuke all of Europe, the entire Middle East, and Asia, which was his plan all along.
.. Trump typically does not negotiate.
He wrote a book about negotiating.
No some else wrote it and he signed on as author.
Because book on negotiation by a guy who "does not negotiate" would be taken seriously for a second by anybody...
ALL Trump does is negotiate.
Quick reason poll
Who has the most misleading handle?
1. Moderation (my moderate he means leftist shill)
2. Chem Jeff (he claims to be a radical individual but can't fathom the idea that the state overruled parents in the raising of children)
3. Sarc who has never been sarcastic
3
3: His style varies so much, both from comment to comment, and within each comment itself, that you can't tell what he means. Whereas the other two are just outright consistently wrong.
I think things have gone from scary to depressing, so I want to be on that list too.
Yes.
White mike. He is really clear like HO2
But Dee’s real name is Mike Liarson, which is accurate.
Just curious could you point me to your definition of "moderation"?
2. His real name is Lying Jeffy, which is accurate.
3. Sarc is just a broken man.
So I go with 1, except M4E is a parody.
I'm going to be open here. I am not actually a used car salesman.
Lol.
Wait, I thought we had to use truthful titles?
Gotta be 2. Every other comment is about what “we” should do about this or that. Collective obligations and such nonsense.
If Jeff is an individualist he indeed is radical.
Especially after the humiliation of Hillary wiping so many records right under their very noses, so very publicly.
And Hunter, giving his laptop away just to embarrass the FBI, that was terrible.
Never Again!
Don't forget Ashley's diary. So many Democrats to protect, so many Republicans to prosecute for thought crime. How is one agency supposed to carry out such a noble, non-partisan calling?
Trump was already negotiating dummy.
As opposed to Obama, and his various minions
That’s why Eric Holder was locked up
While more and more people want additional political parties, I don't think they know what they want in those parties. The desire is often reactive, "I don't like any of the candidates", rather than proactive "I want this".
Nice way to insult everyone.
Take Andrew Yang and his Forward Party. Have no idea what their positions are on political issues.
Personally, I am at the point where I think political parties should be banned from existence.
Even my former Libertarian Party is gone all to shit, and is contributing to the downfall of our country.
At least you are consistent. No Freedom of Association.
It’s a proscription TheKim family and Stalin would love
Haha, you bitches lost your party to real libertarians!
there's no way y ou were ever a member of the libertarian party.
"Trump's team hasn't shown the search warrant"
I'm not the most well-read on this week's events but even I know that "Trump's team" says they were not allowed to keep a copy of the search warrant. Therefore they do not have a copy to show.
I don't practice criminal law, but I'm pretty sure they can't just go around showing the warrant, especially if national security and classified documents are at issue.
You have to accept the warrant to see what's in it.
Dammit, not good enough! We need to see the long form search warrant!
Even if they had the search warrant some times warrants say noting in this warrant can be disclossed to anyone else.
Can you provide a cite? I cannot find any news article saying that Trump’s lawyers were not allowed to have a copy of the search warrant.
I agree here. In what case instance are you not allowed to have a copy of a search warrant used to search your property? As for containing classified information, why would that be in the warrant when those serving the warrant know it will at some time have to be made public.
This is a case where Trump has the advantage. DOJ rules prohibit the agency from releasing the warrant, "no comment on on-going investigations". Trump is free to say what he wants and not show the warrant.
Trump’s Lawyer Claims FBI Warrant to Raid Mar-a-Lago Was Partly Sealed: ‘We Don’t Know What the Probable Cause Is’
"“When I arrived and kind of announced myself as the legal representation for President Trump. I asked to see a copy of the warrant,” Bobb said, recounting the events prior to the search.
“Initially they refused and said, ‘You know, we don’t have to show it to you.’ And there was a little bit of an exchange about whether it was appropriate to withhold the warrant when you’re searching the residence of the former president, who’s likely to be the Republican nominee in the next election, though they conceded and let me see it, they did not give me a copy of it right away, but they did let me see it,”
"“It was very, I would say, thin. And as you can tell from public records, the affidavit, the supporting documentation of what the probable cause was to obtain the warrant has been sealed,” she added.
Could not find it again but did find this. Perhaps the earlier report captured Bobb's statements incorrectly. In any event, seeing the "very thin warrant," which is essentially just the headline, is not as important as seeing the "supporting documentation," which is the full article.
"A search warrant for the raid of former President Donald Trump's lavish Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida was "very" thin, his lawyer claims.
Christina Bobb was one of the three attorneys for Trump who reportedly arrived on the scene Monday after FBI agents began to search the property. Bobb said after a brief back-and-forth with the agents that she managed to see the search warrant but was not allowed to see the affidavit that contains more details on why the search was permitted. Since the raid, which Trump himself revealed in a statement claiming he was the target of a political operation, there have been calls for him to release the warrant.
"It was very, I would say, thin, and as you can tell, it went from public records. The affidavit, the supporting documentation of what the probable cause was to obtain the warrant, has been sealed, so we're not allowed to see that. We have to go to court to request the judge to release that, which may or may not happen," she said in an interview Tuesday on Real America's Voice. "So, we don't know what the probable cause is."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/search-warrant-very-thin-trump-lawyer-claims
There are no rules, only weapons.
Thank you for the clarification.
Mike I will re-clarify back to my original statement. I knew I saw it somewhere:
"Eric Trump revealed FBI agents refused to hand over the search warrant for their raid on Mar-a-Lago and kicked an attorney off the property in a new, incisive account of the Monday operation at the Florida estate.....
'They told our lawyer… you have to leave the property right now. Turn off all security cameras.' 'They would not give her the search warrant,' he claimed. 'So they showed it to her from about 10 feet away. They would not give her a copy of the search warrant.'"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11099205/Eric-Trump-reveals-REALLY-happened-FBI-raid.html
Thanks. I’m reserving judgement a bit since it’s a second-hand source, and it’s Eric Trump.
Also, refusing to immediately give a copy at the scene does not mean Trump lawyers do not now have a copy.
"I'll make a copy for you later today." Very plausible.
How is that even their job? The FBI raids someone's house and says "We've got a warrant, bro, trust me", and the reason we don't know what the warrant says is because Trump's team isn't publicizing it?
Yeesh.
I agree that in general Federal representatives, including former Presidents and their lackies, ought to be held to the same (or higher) standards as any other US Citizen. And it drives me nuts that ENB, Williamson, and other people think anyone troubled by the treatment of Trump disagrees with that notion.
The problem is that raiding the property of a former president is *NOT* evidence that the current administration is currently in the practice of treating Trump like any other citizen. If the FBI is performing a nighttime raid of a building of one current or former federal representative, while simultaneously treating other federal representatives with kid gloves, then in fact you are not seeing equal treatment under the law.
Let's say you are watching two football teams play, and one quarterback is getting constantly penalized for throwing away the ball. Do we immediately jump for joy that quarterbacks are finally being held to the same rules standards as other players? Even if the opposing quarterback is constantly dumping the ball and not being flagged?
WHATABOUT SARC
"Whatabout, whatabout, wha-wha-wha-wha-whatabout"
It was his mating call to Jeffy, yesterday.
Partisans (i.e. normal humans) are never in favor of equal treatment.
They are treating Trump like any other citizen in that they've declared millions of Americans terrorists and started investigating some of them for such for having an opinion outside the progressive narrative. I'm sure it's just a coincidence they all happen to not mindlessly go along with the regime.
Well, look at that. 63% of Americans support ditching the Electoral College for choosing presidents.
https://www.npr.org/2022/08/10/1116688726/most-americans-support-using-the-popular-vote-to-decide-u-s-presidents-data-show
Even 42% of Republicans support getting rid of the EC.
We really do have an archaic and increasingly out-of-step process for choosing a president. I don't know if I'd be in favor of abolishing it 100% but I do think it could use some structural reforms.
I would go the other way and repeal the 17A. Give the states more power, not less.
Good job sarc. Seriously.
I unmuted you to see what insult you could have made in response to my comment. Interesting. You can still fuck off.
Then you follow it up with a blatant lie. Sure, you just happened to unmute me for that one comment, lol.
You really need to get out of Lying Jeffy’s tribe.
We really do have an archaic and increasingly out-of-step process for choosing a president.
This is such a terrible backwards country , yet the border is overrun with people trying to get in.
Well, a Constitutional amendment requires 75% approval, so that falls short.
The Electoral College remains pretty effective. The current system of awarding all of a state's votes to the popular vote winner has undermined it somewhat, but it still serves its purpose of electing a president with broad, if not necessarily deep, support. I think the 2016 is a good example. Hillary was deeply popular on the East and West Coasts and in major cities, but despised in large swathes of the country.
The current system of awarding all of a state's votes to the popular vote winner...
There is an exception to that.
Is it Maine? I think one other state has that system too.
Scroll down. Nebraska.
the EC in each state should be distributed per the the votes not winer take all. we would see some big differences then. California would no longer be guaranteed
Unfortunately, Californians themselves would have to make that change.
I would disagree. I prefer a system where the populist whims of the people are filtered out. The electoral college, while not perfect, is intended to do this. It's why we have representatives instead of direct referendums on everything.
The three issues is that most people don't understand that we have an Electoral College, and assume they are directly voting for the president. But the other is just as bad, the all-or-nothing states. I think there are only two states that actually do split electors. Nebraska is one, forget the other. If more states split their electors up, then the results would end up closer to the popular vote. And finally, the prohibition against "faithless" electors. I know they are the most hated people in the universe, but their job isn't to be a rubber stamp. The hatred against them is just another fallout from thinking everything should be direct democracy and how dare the elector not vote for the person I voted for.
We don't live in a democracy, we live in a Democratic Republic. Please don't make this country a democracy.
Maine
I would disagree. I prefer a system where the populist whims of the people are filtered out.
If more states split their electors up, then the results would end up closer to the popular vote.
You are deeply confused person. Rather than contort yourself into all of this self contradictory logic, why don't you just admit what you want. Just say "let the Democrats win" and be done with it. It would not only be consistent and truthful, it would have the virtue of brevity. As it is, you are just making yourself look like a fool and not convincing anyone of anything anyway.
"...As it is, you are just making yourself look like a fool..."
Not just appearance.
I agree with restraining the power of the mob. That already happens with all of the other checks and balances that we have. The EC is just such a ridiculous system.
Why? It's weighted by population. The more people the more electors.
How would you feel if each state had an equal amount of Electors? Or how about Electors based on land area of the state? You could make a case for either and make a case why either is unfair as well.
Why is population the be all and end all? Mob rule sucks. A mob of ill informed populace versus a smaller group of informed voters would suck even more. Throw in a biased media and what would be the point of voting anymore?
You know what's even more weighted by population? An individual vote itself.
And hence why we don't use the popular vote. Each has its merits and drawbacks of course.
Popular vote - everyone weighs in individually. No state matters. National Centralized vote winner takes all. Population rules.
Electors - Each state has a weighted Electoral amount. States are treated more individually to get the Electoral votes to win.
Every state has the same Electoral amount. More divisive but each state needs to be woed effectively to win it all.
Electors by land mass. Big states get a bigger say in what the smaller, more densely populated states do. What could go wrong.
I like the Electors as the balanced compromise. At least the states have some individual power which is a closer model to the original intent of the Constitution.
I'd be sort of curious in the every state has the same Electoral amount model. Though, I don't know. I really don't. I think everything we do overemphasizes the president enough as it is.
The problem I see with splitting your electors is that it basically renders your state moot when it comes to the election. In a state with 10 electors, the result is almost always going to be 4-6, 5-5, or 6-4. At that point, why would you bother going to the state to campaign?
If ALL states split their electors that would solve that problem.
“…. most people don’t understand that we have an electoral college.”
Lol. Goddamn, dude. It’s a lucky thing we have smart guys like you to talk down to us. People are so stupid, amirite?
Most Americans are ignorant of the reasons certain structures were put in place. Or even the basics of the founding. Yourself included.
"Archaic" is progressive speak for "this rule prevents me from getting what I want". It makes no susbstantive argument and avoids discussing why that method was originally put in place.
"Archaic" means "archaic".
If you want to defend the Electoral College on its merits, then be my guest.
Limits corruption overall. NYC fabricating votes will only impact NY under the EC, not the entire country.
As opposed to the current system, where far fewer fabricated votes in comparatively less populated swing states, such as Pennsylvania and Georgia and Arizona, can throw the election. Is that really a better system?
Requiring scams in multiple states instead of just one? Yeah.
Requiring scams in states easier to scam than densely populated New York
Yeah, big cities like New York and Chicago, are impervious to corruption.
Have you been on Earth long?
Few places are more corrupt than large, Democrat run cities.
Democracy itself is fucking "archaic," fat boy. It's even older than the Electoral College.
Don't throw out ten-dollar words as if they actually have any applicability here.
Is the First Amendment archaic?
Because we no longer can tolerate archaic federalism and the rebellious behavior of "states", we need direct popular voting for president and for the People's Congress (which will replace both the House and the un-democratic Senate), right Jeff?
right Jeff?
No.
"I'm going to pimp a poll that downtalks the Electoral College, and call it 'archaic' as if being old = bad and that it should be replaced, but don't you dare accuse me of pushing left-wing talking points!"
All the morons like Jeff whine about the guidelines of the constitution and call it archaic. None of them ever mention actually amending the constitution. You hear dumbasses spouting about it being bad because it was written by a bunch of white men, but nobody is calling for a constitutional convention. The beauty of it is that it can be changed, but not by every whim that is popular at the moment.
So then, how does a national popular vote for President help maintain federalism and discourage further expansion of executive power (and also dissuade people that they are voting for a Strong Ruler)?
It doesn't matter if they vote for the right ruler. Just ask any other lefty statist.
fact check: false.
It's the best process. The founding fathers had literally twice your IQ
Such a radical individualist.
*barf*
We are now enemies. Increasingly, polls (e.g. Pew) show that people consider those across the political aisle as not mere opponents but evil threats. And yes, both sides.
Blame it on tech, or social-economic trends, or global conspiracies, but we are getting closer to outright war. I am sure those who know history better than I do can explain that we have endured worse disagreements in the past, but perhaps also how societies have splintered over lesser strife.
A better question might be how to avoid both sides, for those of us who think that both ideologies are fatally flawed, and just reject righteous authoritarians in general.
Leftists could try not being psychotic totalitarians who insist everyone must be made to participate in their delusions, and contribute resources at gunpoint.
Both sides may see the same way now, but it 100% the left's doing.
Perhaps, but I can remember when the dominant authoritarian voices came from the right. I think many of those voices and desires are still there, but have been drowned out by the insane screaming coming from progressives. And I have little confidence in a post-breakup US, where both sides would indulge their preferred visions for proper society.
A certain brand of libertarian has always fantasized about blowing away their fellow Americans in the name of XYZ, it doesn't really matter you're just sick fucks.
^Sarcasmic or shrike?
Your world is so small.
Oh? How so?
Definitely a new sock. Or just some 14 year old who stumbled onto Reason and wants to be a dick.
Or, we can say "how can we start to view each other not as enemies?"
You could start by not lying all the time.
Some people wanna be left alone. Others can’t abide by that.
You could start there, mr radical individualist.
But then who would teach the children about anal sex?
> The FBI search alone makes it more likely that Mr. Trump will run again for President
He can't. The US Constitution says that no one may be president more than two times. This is quite explicit. So to run for president again, Trump and his supporters would have to concede that he did indeed lose the 2020 election.
Catch. 22.
Loser.
Nothing says "free and fair election" like the winners saying "if you ask any questions about this election, it is sedition." I mean who could possibly think there is anything fishy or to hide about the 2020 election.
The government says it is legit and anyone who even asks for an audit is a traitor. That is good enough for you and Jeff.
Ha! Good point!
No it isnt.
It is pretty funny.
It isn't a good point because it's 'serve' two terms, not 'win' two elections like Brandybuck's pretending.
Humorless twat.
"I was merely pretending to be retarded. Don't you recognize a JOKE!?"
So you're saying the VP doesn't have to tally the EC votes in order to know who won the election?
We can all wish TDS was fatal to TDS-addled shitpiles.
It might be, on November 6, 2024.
All that tough talk must impress the inflatable girlfriends.
Can you even strap a rifle over your moobs?
Aren't you supposed to mow the lawn today?
Nothing would please brandybuck more than a quick, immediate death.
Here's hoping you get what you want within the week.
My fetish is libertarians humiliating themselves with tough guy talk they can't follow through on.
You're just about to make me cum.
Keep going!
Careful. ENB might do a podcast on your unique fetish for her next column on sex work.
So Hillary only can serve one more term?
Apparently Brandybuck doesn't understand the difference between win and serve.
This is stupid even by your standards, which is impressive.
Your argument is that Trump is POTUS right now, are you some kind of traitor?
Your argument is that Trump is POTUS right now,
Trump is certainly getting a lot of the blame for being POTUS right now.
Menken said something like the aim of party politics is to convince voters that the other party is evil, and they're both right.
*Mencken*
Another Mencken quote:
“The Jews could be put down very plausibly as the most unpleasant race ever heard of. As commonly encountered they lack any of the qualities that mark civilized man: courage, dignity, incorruptibility, ease, confidence. They have vanity without pride, voluptuousness without taste, and learning without wisdom. Their fortitude, such as it is, is wasted on puerile objects, and their charity is mainly a form of display.”
Great point. If someone is terribly wrong about one thing then they're wrong about everything. Everything Menchen ever said is wrong. Thanks for pointing that out.
derp
I agree with Mencken
Who invited the fucking racists to this board
+10 virtue points, redeemable for 1 handy from Tony
lol
"Democrats have been betting that keeping January 6 front and center could help them in the upcoming midterm elections and that criminally prosecuting Trump may help them in the 2024 presidential race."
Ya think? How many editorial pieces, reporting actual (D) party leader instructions, have encouraged their followers to vote in (R) primaries, and even to donate to (R) candidates, as long as they are more obvious lunatic fringe MAGA types that will be (they hope) easier to beat in general elections.
Voting against Trump worked for them in 2020. They want to vote against Trump just as long as the man breathes and Tweets.
Inflation went "down" to 8.5% in July and the economy has contracted for the last two quarters. I am sure the public is going to forget all of that and the Afghanistan disaster, and the fact that the Democrats just raised everyone's taxes during a recession because they are so concerned that 18 months ago bunch of people walked around inside the Capitol and some guy dressed like an Indian stole Nancy Pelosi's lectern. Yeah, you be sure to talk to the public about what is important.
The Democrats really believe Twitter is reality. Twitter has driven them insane.
Even if I over-estimate the cognitive abilities of American voters, the (D) strategy of getting people to vote against Trump will probably work.
So insane, but effective.
Maybe. But Trump isn't running this November. So, it won't help them now.
I disagree. Trump is running in MAGA proxy all over the country. Team (D) has deliberately helped to elect Trump-endorsed and endorsing candidates in (R) primaries, just so they can run against MAGA in the generals. Let's review again in November.
They just made Trump into a victim and got a whole lot of people to realize he may have a point. They also ensured that the GOP base is going to be more than motivated. The GOP sell out on gun control was making that a bit dicey. Now it isn't.
I don't entirely believe that bullshit narrative.
MAGAs are winning because MAGAs are what the people want.
This narrative is yet mote propaganda from leftists/media trying to both look mote influential than they are, tricking the rubes into voting for rubes in the primary, and to discredit their opponents.
By the way, this is the exact kind of narrative they use to prepare the field for illegitimately manipulated election returns.
You mean the strategy of mining heavily Democratic areas for votes from those who typically never vote within states where the population is evenly weighted between both parties proved an effective strategy.
This is not a strategy which can be effectively be repeated outside of state-wide elections.
Heard one solution for the issue of cross-over primary voting.
If the candidate you vote for wins...you've already voted in the general.
After all, if you support Candidate A in the primary and Candidate A wins, you'd ALSO vote for them in the general. So, the vote goes forward automatically.
Could be more fun: you get to choose to vote in the primary or the general, but not both.
All of which fueled sometimes justified but often unjustified complaints from Trump and his team that oh, look, the lawless Democrats are at it again, further hardening the stance of avid Trump supporters that anything he is being investigated for is a political farce. And this, in turn, grows Trump's original appeal while giving more cover for him to act in corrupt or lawless ways…which leads to more Democratic action against him.
Does this actually make sense, though? Democrats are launching repeated investigations that are still aimed at post-election shenanigans and January 6. Plenty of people, even this author, think the search warrant may also have something to do with that. So Trump actually isn't continuing to act in lawless ways to provoke these investigations, it's just continuing to escalate while his supporters continue to claim politicization of the process. And it doesn't HAVE to continue like this.
You know what would end this? Biden could Pardon Trump. Pardon powers are basically unlimited. And if he's concerned that there's something REALLY nasty hiding somewhere, he can limit the conditions. "Trump is Pardoned for all acts he took while serving as the elected President, excepting any possible acts of Treason." This might encourage Trump to turn over records that he's otherwise concerned would be misused, and help establish that this isn't about political prosecutions.
Of course, that's not what many on the left want. They know Trump is guilty, they're just waiting to figure out what the crime is.
If the Democrats were not insane, pardoning Trump would be what they would do. The beauty of a pardon is that it assumes the person is guilty of the crimes. Otherwise, what is the point of a pardon. Generally, a person who hasn't been convicted of anything doesn't want a pardon because, being innocent, they don't want the implication of guilt that comes with it.
Pardoning Trump would be a brilliant move. It would taint him with guilt without making the justice system look partisan.
The Democrats, however, are nuts and have no idea how bad this looks to the rest of the world. So, they are going to just tard harder because that is what they do.
Where in the Constitution does it say the paron assumes the guilt of the receipient?
It doesn't. But the implication is there, and in today's psy ops that's all that's needed.
The necessary implication of a pardon is that there is an underlying crime being pardoned. You can't pardon an innocent person who hasn't been convicted of anything. Without a conviction or factual guilt, there is nothing to pardon.
So if an innocent person who was mistakenly convicted exhausts all appeals and judicial review, then there is no remedy left.
No. I said "without a conviction or factual guilt". In your example there is a conviction.
Volokh: “It’s complicated.”:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/26/is-accepting-a-pardon-an-admission-of-guilt/
It isn't that complicated. Also, you don't accept a pardon. You just get one.
Does not matter legally. The PUBLIC will assume that he did something wrong. And he'd have no way to clear his name if he accepted one.
Why would the PUBLIC assume that?
Because the public are mindless sheep and will think whatever their chosen partisan sources tell them?
If the Democrats were not insane, pardoning Trump would be what they would do.
Shit, they don't even need to do that. Ignoring Trump nerfs his powerlevel a lot more than giving him attention does. If these idiots hadn't boosted his signal in the 2016 primaries for the VERY SPECIFIC REASON that they thought he'd get run over in the general, they'd have had Rubio or Jeb acting the gracious loser to Hillary and Trump never would have even stepped foot in the White House except as a tourist.
Yes. Attacking Trump plays into his hands. It just allows him to be at his best and attack. The way to beat Trump is kill him with kindness. Then his bellicosity becomes unnecessary and off putting. The Democrats and establishment Republicans were both too stupid and emotional to understand that. And still are. They have learned nothing.
Yeah, that's why Kemp ended up smoking Perdue in the GA primary while Walker got the Senate candidate nod. Kemp played it brilliantly by pointing out "I know Trump's mad at me, but I'm not mad at him. I'm more focused on what is important to Georgians than anything else." Youngkin did the same sort of deflection and basically defanged any narratives that might have tied him to Trump or pissed off Trump voters.
You know what would end this? Biden could Pardon Trump.
Disagree. Biden perpetrated a quid pro quo and Trump got impeached for it. I'd tell Biden to either save his pardons for Assange and Snowden or cram them up his ass sideways. I don't need a pardon for not having done anything wrong.
Or the J6 political prisoners currently held in solitary confinement for 18+ months without trial for nonviolent trespassing charges.
Or the 2020 lockdowns, the organized political terrorism of the George Floyd race baiting riots, or the stolen election...
No pardons.
Just vengeance.
How much of your life have you pissed away on this sad website?
Unplug the internet and just roll around in your own shit.
Maybe a friend of SQRLSY?
Looks like Monkeypox killed Tony’s handle.
Looks like I've picked up a flea from the garbage heap of Reason leftism.
Flea lives don't matter.
I'm gonna go put some flowers on Ashli Babbit's grave while whistling the Star Spangled Banner.
Poor babies.
Out of curiosity, does anyone have a link to the classic "No serious criticism..." tweet from Shikha Dalmia? I seem to have lost mine.
The Mar-a-Lago Raid PROVES Partisan ENFORCEMENT PROCESS.
Fixed.
I blame Trump for not doing a better job draining the swamp when he had the chance. He believed the swamp monster that they were his friends.
“Better” job?
He didn’t do anything to drain any swamp. He just vaguely whiner about “the swamp” and used it to grift.
How did he use it to grift, Mike.
FFS, you should know by now that we're going to call you on your bullshit.
He is the one President to be worth less money when leaving office.
For any faults he has, grifting ain't one of 'em.
Do you mean sleazy, obvious but inconsequential New York real estate hustler style grift, or global, governments-entangled Biden family style grift?
Can't argue against that.
Might have done so w/o an election to consider. It's unfortunate he didn't realize we're already a totalitarian hell where the people's voice doesn't matter unless...
So this forces Trump to run for president in order to to vindicate himself. The Democrats have been hate promoting Trump aligned candidates in the midterm primaries because they think they are easier to beat. This does suggest the possibility that this was a dirty trick by the Biden Administration to interfere in the '24 GOP presidential primary race to make Trump run.
I don't think so. The polls all have Trump killing Biden in a general election. These people are so delusional. Who knows what they think. But my impression is they are terrified and obsessed with Trump and trying everything possible to keep him from running and winning. That this probably makes his running and winning more likely just shows how incompetent they are rather than some deep plan.
"...But my impression is they are terrified and obsessed with Trump..."
Just like TDS-addled shitpiles here, their obsession blinds them to anything else.
What poll has Trump beating Biden? Polls I have seen suggest Trump is the one Republican that can lose to Biden.
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/public_surveys/biden_vs_trump_guess_who_wins_rematch
Trump +6. Everyone hates Biden.
Rasmussen leans right everyone knows that fact. Biden problem is he is too old, Trump problem is that he is lazy and incompetent.
Rasmussun doesn't lean right. Even if it did, it doesn't lean right six points. And Trump's competence speaks for itself as we see Biden's incompetence.
>>These people are so delusional. Who knows what they think.
in so deep they can't stop now. tha Raid was natural progression and nobody's at the switch.
"Trump problem is that he is lazy and incompetent"
He renegotiated North American free trade, attempted rapproachment with the DPRK, and got peace deals done between Kosovo and the Serbs and Israel and the Arabs... All while fighting off the Democrats crazy witchhunts, riots, a pandemic and impeachment attempts.
He was pretty much the opposite of lazy and incompetent.
And also too old.
Suddenly being old matters. You didn't seem to mind that when Biden, a guy who was clearly senile, was running in 2020. Funny that.
Probably because his opponent was just as bad. Remember Trump showed more signs of senility than did Biden.
Remember Trump showed more signs of senility than did Biden.
No he didn't. Trump campaigned all over America. Biden couldn't function past noon and rarely left his basement. He was a drooling moron. Stop lying.
Probably because his opponent was just as bad
It is different with Democrats because reasons.
Thanks for playing dipshit.
The fact is that Trump behavior is similar to senility. He talks in word salads. Yes, he can talk well about things he cares about like how badly everyone is treating him. But listen to him on a policy topic and it is simply painful. He has limited understanding of things and his aides have to dumb things down, or at least that what they write in their memoirs. Finally, his anger and outbursts are classic for individuals losing their sense of reality.
You cannot judge Biden if you are unwilling to looks at Trump through similar eyes.
Joe Biden forgot he shook hands with Schumer five seconds after it happened.
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/joe-biden-is-unfit-to-be-president
Trump can put his jacket on by himself and walk up stairs.
It is down ramps that he has problems walking.
Maybe, but Democrats, like most people, prepare to fight the last war. And in 2020 they succeed by getting people to vote against Trump. We will see how this plan works in 2022.
It did not work in Virginia, and I would not recommend it in 2022. Democrats putting their thumb on the scale in Republican primaries may turn out to be a big mistake.
"The Biden administration is defending a law that stops medical marijuana users from legally owning guns."
I predict a free medical marijuana federal distribution program.
It says nothing about people who use it for fun. I'm assuming that they can already ban the sale to fun time users?
“Fun time users” are paying in cash, even in states where it’s legal. So they’re a little harder to track.
But that’s how they’ve set the system up, so…. Haha.
'"Voters in Southern California's San Bernardino County will soon get to say whether they want the county to potentially secede from the state," reports the Associated Press.'
When California socialism is not socialism enough.
Congress now gets to look over Trumps taxes. what the heck do they know about taxes, they don't even do their own and they don't even read or write the tax laws they pass. this is just a method to get his taxes into public record to make him look bad and so they can try to find something that the IRS and New York haven't been able to find in years of work.
We'll just wait for the inevitable "leak" of all the extra stuff they found in Mar-a-Lago.
They’ll get some staffers to do the actual hard work of looking at the tax returns.
Keep looking through that pile of shit Mike. I am sure there is a pony in there somewhere.
Knowing Mike he'll sculpt on of the turds and then proudly announce he found it.
Trump's taxes were leaked to the New York Times years ago. If there was anything untoward about Trump's taxes, we would have heard about it and they would have gone after him for it long before now.
"Trump's taxes were leaked to the New York Times years ago"
Flashback: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/14/this-2005-donald-trump-tax-return-is-a-total-nothingburger/
The committee can hire smart young tax attorneys. The court did not allow the committee to release the records, only to see them.
Because no one at the IRS ever looked at them.
If you're hoping that "smart young tax attorneys" can find some novel interpretation or loophole in the law to find someone guilty of a crime that wasn't a crime at the time, you've basically crossed over the line into being a totalitarian POS.
There was no editorializing in his comment about what he hopes. It was a dry statement.
Fuck off.
Close, but:
Fuck off and die, you steaming pile of shit
Has a bit more cachet', doncha think?
It's important to put some stank on it in order to drive the point home.
"something that the IRS and New York haven't been able to find in years of work."
I would have never expected it from a used-car salesman like Trump, but he must be the cleanest politician in history to survive all those fishing trips.
Yeah I would have bet money 6 years ago that there would have been some skeletons in his closet. A clean New York construction mogul is amazing.
Businessmen don't get a free pass on corruption like politicians give each other. They are used to being hit up by the government over random 'fineable' things whenever the winds of politics either put them in the spotlight or a government agency needs some money. They are ethically corrupt, but employ enough tax and legal experts to ensure they are regulatorily 'clean.'
“.,,, random ‘fineable’ things.”
Interesting thought. If any illegality was cleared up by greasing the right palms they might need to be careful with accusations lest they implicate the corrupt regulators.
Haha. Casting stones and all that.
We're still living with fall-out, bad feelings, and revenge from the decades-old Bork debacle. If the FBI doesn't actually have the Goods on Trump, then it is likely that the political fallout from the Mar a Lago raid will last for decades.
We're still living with fall-out, bad feelings, and revenge from the decades-old Bork debacle.
That's not what kicked all this off, although the Bork and Thomas hearings were certainly a foreshadowing. This can all be traced to the 2000 election and then Bush invading Iraq in 2003.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/kamala-harris-aide-turned-msnbc-host-pleads-fbi-mar-a-lago-search-raid
Hot new marching orders coming in for the left: stop calling what happened at Mar-a-Lago a raid.
I think that they're just realizing how badly they fucked up.
Yeah, if nothing else the sheer brazeness of it, including not providing Trump's lawyers with a copy of the warrant or letting them observe the search and seizures, and asking them to turn off the security cameras, was a massive PR miscalculation given the current political climate.
Things had finally begun simmering down to a low boil, and all this did was essentially get the media to finally admit, "Yeah, both sides absolutely hate each other and it's not looking good for this country's long-term survival." At this point, although I'm not confident they are that cunning in this regard and this was simply "we're doing this because FYTW" hubris, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the FBI and Garland did this specifically to try and provoke a right-wing attack somewhere, so they'd have an excuse to go all out on going after conservatives.
There is no way to tell for sure what if anything was going through Garland's mind when he thought this up. I think that it is very possible that they did this hoping to inspire some kind of mass resistance or pushback from Trump supporters. That sounds like the kind of cockamamie scheme that Garland and the rest of the creatures in DOJ would think up.
Maybe I am too much of an optimist but I don't see this as being the end of the Republic and the beginning of the fall of the dark night of fascism in America the way many on the Right do. I see it as a total overreach and disastrous miscalculation by a tyrannical blundering idiot in Garland. I really think Garland and Wray thought this up and actually thought it was a good idea.
What convince me of that is the lack of media involvement. Had this been something the White House had thought up, it would have been better coordinated. The media would have been tipped off and told when to be there to film it. The major media would have had preapproved talking points about it. Instead, the media knew nothing about it and even now has no party approved talking points spinning it. DOJ can't even explain what they were doing much less give their media toadies talking points about it. That tells me that Garland and Wray did this more or less on their own initiative and did it trying to provoke a reaction or just out of sheer desperation and incompetence.
I think it is going to blow up in their faces badly. The public may or may not like Trump but they do not want the federal government exacting revenge on former Presidents and political opponents. No amount of BS about January 6th is going to make the large majority of the public okay with that. And if their plan is to try and pin some kind of mishandling classified information on him, that will go over even worse. Something like 63% of the public already thinks there is a two tiered justice system. If they go after Trump for some paperwork mistake after claiming "no reasonable prosecutor" would go after Hillary for having thousands of classified emails on an unsecured home server, the resulting public outrage will even the FBI and DOJ"s Democratic supporters in Congress to run for cover and turn on them.
I think it's important to emphasize it does not matter what was going through Garland's mind when he thought this up. Mens Rea is important for Criminal cases. If he was later charged it is important.
It does not matter for this case, in which we ask should he be allowed to stay the head of the FBI. If this raid turns out to have been poorly founded that is enough reason to remove him.
That said, I say take the whole FBI down with him. We should not have this institution.
"I wouldn't be at all surprised if the FBI and Garland did this specifically to try and provoke a right-wing attack somewhere, so they'd have an excuse to go all out on going after conservatives."
You can almost bet on it.
If some misguided idiot doesn't step up to the plate soon, the FBI are going to have to do the job themselves.
I've noticed the white-boy mass shooting incidents calmed down almost immediately after that geek in Indiana got blasted by the kid who ignored the "no firearms" signs at the mall.
Redefining words yet again.
That order was received and implemented in the NYT comments on an article with raid in the headline. Fairly amusing.
Right-speech takes deliberate management.
Dee followed those orders above.
Remember when theReason</i. staff had sand in their pussies over the lawful arrests of suspected rioters and aronsists in Portland in 2020?
Just standard procedure after all riots.
Republicans have been running wild with the speculation—like suggesting that the FBI may have planted evidence...
Yeah, it's not like we're talking about an organization that doctored evidence to make it say exactly the opposite of what it said to get a FISA warrant or anything. It's not like we're talking about an organization that it's been documented knew the basis of of it's investigation of the very man in question was a complete fabrication and hid that fact.
This crap has gotten beyond parody. If you find yourself twisting yourself in knots to avoid acknowledging that these guys have been behaving like the Stasi or the NKVD, do yourself, the rest of us, and the concept of honesty a favor and stop calling yourself a libertarian. You're not. You're a garden variety progressive. If you were a libertarian, the target of this crap would be beside the point. A libertarian would insist government malfeasance was (at least) just as wrong when targeted on a politician they didn't like as if it were targeted to some inner city gangbanger.
Reason: Libertarians without principles.
The FBI and DOJ have done something totally outrageous and indefensible. The problem for reason is that both are run by Democrats and the victim is not just a Republican but the dreaded Trump. So, they can't just admit this was wrong and unequivocally condemn the FBI and DOJ. Reason never criticizes democrats without some kind of equivocation (usually some false equivalence argument that Republicans are just as bad). They can't do any false equivalence because the Republicans are victims and even they haven't tried something this bad.
So, reason ignores the underlying wrong doing and instead talks about how Republicans are somehow hypocritical for being angry about this and the old "pox on both houses, this is just the usual partisan fighting" bullshit dodge.
You don't have to have a very good imagination to see the reason reaction had the Trump DOJ raided Obama's house. I don't think there would have any calling out of Democratic hypocrisy or "Democrats Pounce" going on in reason's reaction.
The whole thing is just comical.
"You don't have to have a very good imagination to see the reason reaction had the Trump DOJ raided Obama's house."
There would be world ending levels of bitching.
Reason really seems to be glossing over the fact that the Democrats are using the DOJ and the FBI as tools in a political fight. This is not just a minor "both sides" political squabble.
The real story isn't the Democrats politicizing DOJ and the FBI. The real story is that the Republicans were not sufficiently skeptical of law enforcement before this.
This is basically reason's way of covering this issue.
If you're not willing to declare every police officer with a badge is no different than the Stasi, then you're not a real libertarian!
You know you would be a more effective troll and people would think of you as being less of an idiot if you didn't try and die on every hill no matter how stupid.
He can’t help what he is.
Being less of an idiot doesn't work when he's a fucking idiot. It's hard to act his way out of that one.
You really are a mendacious POS. I noted specific behaviors that were beyond the pale. I guess, if you consider that "every police officer with a badge" to not even be noted, I guess we can ascertain exactly how much of a "radical individualist" you are.
I'm opposed to the knee-jerk paranoia.
No you don't. You are all about that if it involves the other team. It is only because this involves Democrats that you are no all about "hey the FBI wouldn't do this without a good reason".
Just shut up. Really. You are so obvious and pathetic. Stop pretending no one notices. Who are you Ken White?
You’re a liar.
You have a pretty "idiosyncratic" (i.e. utterly mendacious) definition of "knee-jerk paranoia". It's never been taken to include believing that an organization that has been caught engaging in specific behaviors with respect to a particular target might continue to engage in those behaviors with respect to that target.
>>suggests the FBI was after classified documents Trump may have illegally retained
don't be the montage.
also ffs Sandy Berger.
https://twitter.com/Brick_Suit/status/1557378988871274496?t=l1PqalvTQ2hf4cvNM4rjJw&s=19
BIDEN: "Today we received news that our economy had zero percent inflation in the month of July."
REALITY: Inflation in July was 8.5%
[Video]
https://twitter.com/chipfranklin/status/1557148154331631617?t=3WMAwbvoKqKoQg0B4knygA&s=19
FBI, if you're listening, I want to see Marjorie Taylor Greene's phone confiscated next.
"Also, my neighbor Frank! He's always outside grilling and making all kinds of noise! Please FBI, do bad things to my enemies!"
Democrats: "You want a republic? OK, here's a banana republic."
I want Tulsi Gabbard's phone next. Maybe she has some naked selfies that could be leaked.
Worth.
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1557383393075150849?t=xIxeYLVRHtw-gCySyQ1RJA&s=19
BREAKING: Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland is seeking an indictment of President Trump
[Link]
gotta be tough growing up a "Merrick"
Little Merry is still pissed that Trump kept him off of SCROTUS.
Democrats do not know how bad this week is going to be for them.
They thought Dobbs would drive the Democrat vote?
What do they think this will do? Even people irked by the GOP cave in on gun control will vote for them to spite the Dems.
They are going to try to indict him. The question is whether Democrats in Congress understand what a political disaster that is going to be. If they do, then you will see Garland start taking real flack from his own party and be forced to back off. If they don't, then Garland is going to ensure significant Republican majorities in the next Congress.
Biden needs to get Garland out of there anyway. It is virtually certain the Republicans are taking the House. When they do, the resulting investigations of Garland are going to be a big political liability. If the Republicans take the Senate, there will be no way to fire him or let him resign since Biden couldn't get an acceptable replacement through the Senate. The smart move would be to make Garland resign and put an acceptable replacement through the Senate before November. That way when the Republicans do investigate, DOJ can just blame everything on a guy who is no longer there and the public no longer cares about.
The smart move would be to make Garland resign and put an acceptable replacement through the Senate before November.
If Garland was to be replaced, it would be contingent on the GOP actually winning the Senate (likely, but not a given), and then ramming a candidate through before the new Senators take their seats in January.
Also, regardless of how this actually plays out in the public mind, this idea of Garland being replaced is sheer fantasy. If the Dems have demonstrated anything since Obama walked in the front door, it's that they will always double down regardless of how much negative attention they are getting. That's what happens when the core of your party is so completely self-righteous that it thinks literally anything it does is justified, regardless of the outcome or consequences.
I agree. I don't think they will replace Garland. I am just saying that is what they would do if they were smart. They are not smart. They are nuts. And they have gotten away with being nuts for a long time. I have a feeling, however, that run of good luck is going to end over the next couple of years.
They have reached the level of delusion beyond "my shit doesn't stink" to "my shit smells really good".
Biden is now claiming July's 8.5% inflation rate was actually "zero". We had ZERO inflation in July, per the WH.
Verbatim quote by Joe.
Well, if we redefine what "inflation" means...
Definitely not two quarters in a row.
Evidently there is no cure for Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Not Trump Fellation Syndrome.
You know Mike just because you have no principles and judge the propriety of law enforcement actions on your opinion of the victim of those actions, doesn't mean everyone else does the same. Some people are actually capable of thinking and understanding that it is not okay for the law to be abused even if it is to harm a "bad person".
You are what you are. But, it would be nice if you stop projecting that on everyone else.
Trump Fellation Syndrome - (n) the belief held by some non-leftists that the abandonment of all principles outside of blind obedience to totalitarian progressivism isn't necessitated by the presence of Donald Trump on the political scene.
Nope. Simpler than that. Excusing any boorish or reprehensible thing Trump says or does.
For values of "excusing" inclusive of not believing the unconstrained power of the state should be set on someone for the crime of "boorishness".
Sorry, I cannot parse your sentence. Did something get mistyped?
Everyone else understands it. Seems you would wonder why you can’t?
It's a Rainman thing.
Why do people come down with TFS? Can be anything from forgiving anything because he delivered the right Supreme Court nominees to liking because he owns those hated liberals.
Lol. Whatever you do mike, don’t look in the mirror.
Never, ever.
>>New Jersey cops are using the routine blood samples collected from newborn babies
as political donations.
Anything to keep Joe upright for two more years.
Get them into the system early!
The FBI raid of Trump's residence follows a pattern of the Feds fomenting discord in America, according to John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute
Repression, Terror, Fear: The Government Wants to Silence the Opposition
We didn’t know it then, but what happened five years ago in Charlottesville, Va., was a foretaste of what was to come……On August 12, 2017, government officials took what should have been a legitimate exercise in constitutional principles (free speech, assembly and protest) and turned it into a lesson in authoritarianism by manipulating warring factions and engineering events in such a way as to foment unrest, lockdown the city, and justify further power grabs.
On the day of scheduled protests, police deliberately engineered a situation in which two opposing camps of protesters would confront each other, tensions would bubble over, and things would turn just violent enough to justify allowing the government to shut everything down.
This is not much different from what is happening on the present-day national scene. Indeed, there’s a pattern emerging if you pay close enough attention.
The alt right people marched around Charlottesville for several days. There was no violence or any problem. Then on Saturday Antifa and various left wing groups showed up. Rather than separate the two groups, the police stood around and did nothing. So, Antifa attacked the alt right people and a riot started. During the course of that riot some nut drove a car down a crowded street and killed a woman.
If we actually had the rule of law in this country, the people who started and participated in that riot would have been held responsible for the death of that woman just like the nut who ran her over was. If you start a riot and someone gets killed, you are or should be guilty of felony murder.
Since we don't have a rule of law and we especially don't have anything approaching an honest media. Only the nut was held responsible for the death. And the media convinced the country that the alt right was responsible for the riot and Antifa and the left who started the whole thing were blameless. Worse, the police allowed the riot to start specifically so the media could blame it on the alt right.
I am no alt right guy. Unlike Mike Larson, however, I judge incidents based on the facts not my personal opinion of the people involved. So, the people responsible for Charlottesville in my view are Antifa and the cops. Had Antifa not shown up or the cops not let Antifa start a riot, the nut never runs over anyone and that woman is still alive.
" During the course of that riot some nut drove a car down a crowded street and killed a woman. "
He drove a car down a crowded street and killed a woman IN SELF DEFENSE. Because antifa.
That is what he claimed. I don't know if that is true or not. Whatever the truth, the jury didn't buy his claim. Regardless, the woman died as result of the riot and the people who started that riot, Antifa, are responsible for her death.
"I don't know if that is true or not. "
Personally, I'm skeptical.
he is schizophrenic and bipolar with a history of violence against his family, his caretakers and history of noncompliance with multiple antipsychotic meds including hospitalization into psych units. He acted in a predictable manner when provoked given his psych instability and impairment. He became an archetypal symbol to the Left of an ideology he likely failed to comprehend, yet his case demonstrates how the Left parrots talking points by feigning concern for disadvantaged groups, e.g. the mentally ill, but will crucify them as needed. This situation was never about the death of Heather Heyer who also had her history of instability and poor judgement. Anyone there was exercising poor judgement.
Cville was a disgrace on both sides and also on behalf of the govt.
Cville was a disgrace on both sides and also on behalf of the govt.
Yes it was. This is especially true of the government. I don't expect the nutcases who show up to something like that to have any judgement. I do, however, expect the government and the police to have some judgement and do their jobs to keep the peace. Standing back and allowing a riot to happen because you think you can blame it on your political enemies is not acceptable. Indeed, the government's actions were the worst of all. The people like the guy who drove the car were crazy. What is the government of Virginia and C'Ville's excuse other than malice?
Now do parades in Kenosha.
Kenosha parades IN SELF DEFENSE. Because antifa.
I'm sure the red SUV in Waukesha was definitely used in self-defense.
It all depends on who was driving it. One of us or one of them.
He should have just stopped and let the crowd work out their feelings. You know, like this guy - https://news.yahoo.com/driver-pulled-truck-beaten-black-144628849.html
Or this guy - https://www.theledger.com/story/news/coronavirus/2020/06/07/lakeland-man-beaten-during-memorial-boulevard-unrest-speaks-out/41968679/
I think you miss the point, trueman. This was one of the first incidences where 'counter-protesting' was allowed to escalate. The Alt right group had the right to be there, to do their thing. They had the permits, the paperwork, the police etc. All in place. Agree with their stance or not, they were the ones legally there.
This is one of our basic tenets. The right to assemble. There are procedures to follow for that right to assemble. They were followed.
The counter-protestors did not have the right to be there. They did not get permits, they did not get security. They showed up expressly to agitate. That was the goal. In our rule of law, these agitators should have been countered with the police and the legitimate assembly be allowed to continue. It was not.
Not only that, the media sided with the Antifa group and painted the Alt right group as the oppressors and agitators. This started the pattern of 'counter-protest' that escalated over the summer.
It was also the incident of 'fine people on both sides' myth. Never corrected and still promoted to this day. The rules, laws, rights have been pushed aside now. If one doesn't agree with a position it is okay for one to just show up and bludgeon the opponent with your viewpoint, whether they are legally there or not.
It is definitely a regression of manners, rules, laws and liberty.
"The counter-protestors did not have the right to be there. "
Were their internal passports not in order?
"They showed up expressly to agitate. "
They are anarchists, mostly. Their aim is to disrupt their enemy's efforts at organizing, attracting new members and getting their message across to the public.
"Not only that, the media sided with the Antifa group and painted the Alt right group as the oppressors and agitators."
The media has been anti-nazi for decades now, since WWII. They should know that sympathetic treatment by the press is not going to happen by now. Internet platforms are a better venue, where they can control the conversation in comfortable anonymity. For Fascists to parade on the street, clash with antifa, run over people, they shouldn't be surprised at getting bad press.
Right. You prove my point. They did not have, okay, the 'legal' right to assembly in direct protest to an already legal assembly. They were agitating anarchists.
They should know that sympathetic treatment by the press is not going to happen by now.
Again proving my point on what we have lost as a society. A free, true press would have sided with Alt right in spite of their feelings about the assembly. Instead, they basically said the rights of the assembled were not valid as they did not agree with the Alt rights viewpoint.
The resultant protests in the future devolved quickly into violence as a stance as a 'counter protestor' carried more weight than lawful assembly. Mob violence is now the rule. Make sure you are on the right side of the mob, or armed like Rittenhouse.
"They did not have, okay, the 'legal' right to assembly in direct protest to an already legal assembly."
Again, antifa are anarchists, mostly. They are not there to protest, but to attack their enemies and disrupt their efforts to organize and recruit new members. Has antifa ever applied for permission from the government to pursue their aims? Somehow I doubt it. Liberals and conservatives believe in protest and demonstrations. Anarchists believe in direct action. It's a fundamental distinction that nobody here seems to grasp.
"A free, true press would have sided with Alt right in spite of their feelings about the assembly."
It's a corporate press and their sympathies for nazis dried up with WWII.
I want *fewer* political parties to exist. I know there's only 2 but we need to get that down to 0.
Me, too. And no tribal behavior. And no irrational thinking. And no lying, stealing, and cheating.
Probably not gonna happen.
and no need for commenting forums, internet, smart phones, texting, emoticons, social media apps, and the many other excuses people use to not break bread together and interact face to face. Not going to happen either but...needs to happen
This is the 21st century. The idea that Congress needs to fit inside a single building is completely anachronous and the People need far more representatives to get the Congress back to actually being representative. George Washington suggested a ratio of 1/30,000 which was adopted for the Constitutional Convention. Any ratio smaller than 1/100,000 is shameful. If you don't want to increase the number of Senators, then at least limit them to a single 6 year term or require additional terms to be elected by a supermajority.
James Madison was a truly good and brilliant man.
none of this matters until the government's scope and power are decreased.
the FBI was after classified documents Trump may have illegally retained.
Are we really supposed to believe that super-rich POTUS Trump packed up boxes of classified documents or even directed others to pack up the boxes? To what purpose? If he had the documents, he had already read the information. If he wanted to 'illegally retain' the information, taking a picture with his phone would do the trick and be far less risky.
If some staffer improperly packed up classified documents, then asking for them would be an appropriate first step. Instead, the FBI got a warrant to rifle through the safe and private papers of the opposition leader of the current administration. The same FBI that seized safe deposit boxes and and cataloged their contents in direct defiance of the warrant authorizing the raid of U.S. Private Vaults that explicitly forbade the FBI from seizing the safe deposit boxes or their contents.
This is so stupid that I seriously can't believe it happened.
Also Trump when he was President had the authority to declassify any document he wished. So, they are asking us to believe that Trump took classified documents with him out of the White House and never bothered to declassify them. Yeah, that sounds plausible.
The story I am hearing is that the claim is that Trump ordered the documents declassified but the White House council's office never did the paperwork. First, it is the President's order that declassifies the material. The paperwork just memorializes that. So, if Trump ordered them declassified, the materials were no longer classified at the moment he did that.
Second, even if you think it is the paperwork that declassifies them, at best you have Trump on a paperwork error. If these animals think the public outside the braindead true believer base is going to see that as legitimate and be okay with such a charge, they are more delusional than I thought they were.
I don't think they can get an indictment even from a DC grand jury on this BS. Moreover, even if they did, the indictment would almost certainly be facially invalid and be quashed before Trump was ever tried. They are not going to get a conviction on this. But they are going to show the country just what kind of thug tyrants they are. And I don't think that will end well for them.
So, they are asking us to believe that Trump took classified documents with him out of the White House and never bothered to declassify them. Yeah, that sounds plausible.
Because Trump is such a detail-oriented person.
Yes he is. Trump has been investigated more than any person in history and they have never found anything. You don't run a real estate development firm and you don't face the force of the entire federal government coming down on you and walk out clean on the other side because you are sloppy.
You really are incapable of thinking aren't you. You just spew various talking points. God you are a clown.
Trump was successful because he hired loyal people to clean up his messes, like Cohen.
And do things like make sure any documents he took were declassified. Thanks for proving my point. Dipshit.
And do things like make sure any documents he took were declassified.
Then let's see the proof.
That’s how it works now? Lol, you just keep exposing what you are.
Don’t even think it is disputed that he took classified documents out of the White House. Some were returned in March.
So, are you siding with Trump on this, or pretending to?
The story I am hearing is that the claim is that Trump ordered the documents declassified but the White House council's office never did the paperwork.
Yes, that is the claim, from one guy, who didn't even work in the White House at the time, who claims to have been in the room when Trump declassified a bunch of documents but the staff didn't follow up with the paperwork, but not even he will say which ones were the declassified ones.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/05/documents-mar-a-lago-marked-classified-were-already-declassified-kash-patel-says/
Patel did not want to get into what the specific documents were
So even if we completely believe 100% the story of this one man who claims to have seen it all, not even he will say which were the declassified ones.
He had the authority to declassify all of it. There is no reason to think he would not have done that had he intended to take the documents. Again, it is the order that makes them no longer classified. The paper work is just a formality.
Unless you can explain why he would not declassify them, you don't have a case.
Beyond that, even if you could, you have a case that Trump forgot to declassify documents that he had a right to declassify before taking them. We know now thanks to the Hillary case, that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case against a woman who created an at home server for the specific purpose of avoiding FOIA and archiving laws and then stored thousands of classified emails on this unsecured server. So, I am pretty sure no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges here either.
There is nothing here. You claim there is because you are a partisan piece of garbage who would defend and embrace any amount of tyranny and irrationality just so long as doing so supports your side.
He had the authority to declassify all of it. There is no reason to think he would not have done that had he intended to take the documents.
Fine, then let's see the proof. Or do you expect me to just take your and Trump's word for it?
Would you simply take Biden's word for any of his claims?
So, I am pretty sure no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges here either.
We don't even know if there are any charges on the table at all.
Fine, then let's see the proof.
It is not his job to prove his innocence dipshit. If he said he did, that is reasonable doubt unless you have some proof he is lying.
We don't even know if there are any charges on the table at all.
Yes we do. You only get a search warrant if you believe there is evidence of a crime where you are searching. So either charges are on the table or they lied to get the warrant. Which is it.
Sorry but you can't dodge the Hillary precedent. They are trying to charge Trump on technicalities when they let Hillary walk despite evidence of massive law breaking on her part. You think that is okay. But that is because you are a partisan asshole who doesn't believe in the rule of law.
you are a partisan asshole who doesn't believe in the rule of law.
Like so many who fall to the Prog side, jeffy craves vengeance against those he perceives as bullies. It is inspired by deep-seated shame over never having stood up for themselves. At least, not face-to-face anyways. Their anonymous internet bravado is legendary.
Yes Jeffy, please keep going with the talking point Trump needs to probe his innocence. It’s awesome.
We don't even know if there are any charges on the table at all.
TDS is the gift that keeps on giving. Tell us, oh wise jeffy, what is probable cause to search if no crime has been committed. Oh, right, FYTW.
You continually prove the need for your extermination.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause
Probable cause is a requirement found in the Fourth Amendment that must usually be met before police make an arrest, conduct a search, or receive a warrant. Courts usually find probable cause when there is a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for an arrest) or when evidence of the crime is present in the place to be searched (for a search).
Complete non-sequitur. The FBI has to have proof of a crime to think evidence of it may exist. Guessing is not allowed.
You suck at this game.
As we have seen echoed around the media and Twitterverse, enough people want Trump politically gelded and will accept any storyline that promises that outcome--realistic (or legal) or not.
See Jeff above. The guy will literally believe anything he is told just so long as it supports what the Democrats want. I think, however, the Jeffs of the world are in the minority. The majority of the public sees this for what it is.
Imagine believing this is all legit and not realzizing it's all court intrigue? Who is that kind of person?
You just watch!
They're gonna nail a gardener who worked for Trump on an unpaid parking ticket charge and Tony will be here bragging on it!
Then you'll see!
I am left to wonder if this isn't because Garland is still angry over Trump pulling his Supreme Court nomination and has gone rogue over this because he is just that big of a petty prick. You really can't underestimate how big of piece of shit Garland is.
You might be right, but regardless of the cause, the raid was blatantly political; someone should be charged with using the FBI as a political weapon.
How about charging the FBI directors for allowing their agency to be used as a political weapon? Start with the guy that authorized that warrant request.
"Start with the guy that authorized that warrant request"
Also the judge who signed it, providing he's not one of us.
Reason's coverage of this is equally mind boggling. They are super opposed to what the FBI did at U.S. Private Vaults and are just fine with this. No fact checking that the warrant was signed by a judge that defended Epstein. Complete waffling about the political fishing expedition.
the Justice Department is possibly being a bit petty
Are you serious??? Go fuck yourself ENB. I hope you get raided by the FBI.
Sure the FBI is being used to investigate and smear a former President and possible Democratic rival in 2024 in violation of every established norm of behavior in this country. That is just DOJ being a little petty. The real story is how Republicans are pouncing. The whole thing is just more partisan fighting. Pox on both houses baby.
That is literally reason's take on this. And they still claim to be a "libertarian magazine" with a straight face. How is that possible?
Sure the FBI is being used to investigate and smear a former President and possible Democratic rival in 2024 in violation of every established norm of behavior in this country. That is just DOJ being a little petty. The real story is how Republicans are pouncing. The whole thing is just more partisan fighting. Pox on both houses baby.
This is the Disinformation Governance Board 2.0. It is taking a story, which looks bad, and catastrophizing it into something that is far worse, for the purposes of demagoguery and intentionally generating outrage. That's the Team Red strategy here.
DGB - a poorly-named board for coordinating the government's response to 'disinformation' online targeted against migrants coming here and foreign influence in the elections.
That is bad enough. The government shouldn't be investigating 'disinformation' at all.
But that wasn't enough for the Team Red outrage machine. Oh no, it became ORWELL COMES TO LIFE and BIDEN CREATES MINITRUE. And these were the claims that were coming out within mere hours of the revelation of this board, when there was so little information about what was going on.
And here we have the FBI executing a search warrant to recover classified documents that Trump allegedly took from the White House. Yes it looks bad. No maybe the FBI shouldn't be doing that to a former president. But again just talking about how improper it is doesn't stoke enough outrage. Instead it is called BANANA REPUBLIC and actual legislators are saying DEFUND THE FBI and smears against the judge who approved the search warrant. Again this is occurring within mere hours afterwards, and we don't even know what the search warrant actually said!
At some point, will you acknowledge that Team Red intentionally catastrophizes stories for the purpose of inflaming the public, stoking outrage, and generating votes and power for their tribe by creating a narrative of an oppressive government gone wildly insane, before all the facts are in, before we actually know what is going on? That this is a narrative/messaging strategy on behalf of Team Red for acquiring power?
I mean, Team Blue absolutely does the same thing. For four years Trump was a Nazi, he was a danger to the Republic, everything he did was either collusion with Russians or support for white supremacy or horribly evil oppression. They did so cynically to scare votes for themselves and to expand their power. They are still doing so today by trying to claim that Team Red as a whole is a threat to democracy and that voting for any Republican, no matter how sane, is a vote against the Republic.
Would you even at least admit that Team Red does the exact same fucking thing? Is that too much to ask?
This is the Disinformation Governance Board 2.0. It is taking a story, which looks bad, and catastrophizing it into something that is far worse, for the purposes of demagoguery and intentionally generating outrage. That's the Team Red strategy here.
No former President has ever been investigated like this or subjected to an FBI raid. It is outrageous and everyone sees that and knows it. This is banana republic bullshit.
And here we have the FBI executing a search warrant to recover classified documents that Trump allegedly took from the White House. Yes it looks bad.
A search warrant that was never taken to a judge and was instead taken to a magistrate who is a Democratic Partisan and former attorney for Jeffrey Epstein. They also never asked for these documents or made any effort to resolve the matter. It doesn't look bad. It is bad. It is the weaponization of the FBI. Everyone sees that. No amount of lying on your part makes people not believe their lying eyes.
At some point, will you acknowledge that Team Red intentionally catastrophizes stories for the purpose of inflaming the public, stoking outrage, and generating votes and power for their tribe by creating a narrative of an oppressive government gone wildly insane, before all the facts are in, before we actually know what is going on? That this is a narrative/messaging strategy on behalf of Team Red for acquiring power?
That is right. The FBI being used to go after political opponents is not the problem. The problem is that Republicans are making a big deal of it. Who cares if the FBI selectively goes after people based on politics. What is the big deal that law is only applied to Republicans and opponents of Democrats and never to Democrats? I mean how could that be a problem? Can you please stop embarrassing yourself. I am getting embarrassed for you.
The FBI being used to go after political opponents is not the problem. The problem is that Republicans are making a big deal of it.
There are TWO problems here: 1. The FBI search itself 2. Team Red's cynical narrative strategy of intentionally catastrophizing the search into something far worse
Can you acknowledge BOTH problems?
If the FBI search is problematic, the Republicans objecting to it cannot be a problem. Objecting to the political abuse of the FBI is not a problem.
Right, so you can't acknowledge both problems.
Right, because calling a problem a…problem, is not a problem dumbfuck.
He's a piece of sht alrighty.
Trump is not stupid. He went to an Ivy League college, after all. But desperate and traumatized people do stupid things. He may have also been acting on legal advice of dubious quality, given his unconventional choices in legal council.
There is a LOT of evidence that Trump is indeed stupid.
Believing that is what makes you stupid.
"There is a LOT of evidence that Trump is indeed stupid."
Judging by what you see on TV? It's a performance. Part of his shtick. A New York billionaire has to play the buffoon to appeal to his constituency, mostly America's marginalized and dispossessed.
The FBI has lost our trust. It isnt the first time Americans have come to distrust the FBI
The FBI, the Judiciary and Trump:
Given the recent history of abuse, it’s foolish to assume the bureau is now acting appropriately
Some have suggested a double standard in that the FBI just seized documents from Mr. Trump’s home, but in 2016 exonerated Hillary Clinton on her handling of classified materials and her use of a home server without even giving Justice prosecutors a chance to do their lawful duty to determine whether charges should be brought….. the FBI deserves no presumption of innocence.
87,000 new IRS agents, folks.
What? You thought they would call the secret police 'Secret Police'?. LOL! You better practice sounding sincere about your loyalty to the government for your interview.
The final redpill is accepting that “the Cathedral” is actually a synagogue
https://mobile.twitter.com/lennydykstra/status/1557097606232301569?s=21&t=qWy1HE1n2qDdhKNQ7v1Z0g
So is the hack who approved this part of a synagogue or not? I can't tell.
Yes, though the picture is a bit of a giveaway.
https://forward.com/fast-forward/513804/judge-who-approved-trump-search-warrant-attacked-for-synagogue-involvement/?amp=1
Fuck off.
Cool story Shlomo
Ron Paul in 1988:
"It almost looks like the FBI was designed to spy on Americans who might be disagreeing with policy."
https://mobile.twitter.com/Woj_Pawelczyk/status/1557102856821526529
It's the institution defined by J. Edgar Hoover. We all know it is to be feared.
Democrats "Nobody is above the law!" starter pack.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ImMeme0/status/1557098262129250306
"Nancy is up there saying ‘No one is above the law.’ She’s fresh off insider trading, her husbands been crooked for the last 3 decades, she flies her son over on a government jet to Asia to cook up lithium deals, electric car battery deals."
https://mobile.twitter.com/RealMacReport/status/1557122927551811585
We should have let him hang Mike Pence just to clarify things.
Libertarians are dickless losers, the TDS-addled steaming pile of lefty shit needs to fuck off and die.
When did he call for that?
Part perpetuity of the witch-hunt. The little boys and girls in the swamp have gone mad. TDS plus Covid has them dizzy, seeing double, their souls already corrupted by the fast-fading power. It isn’t an easy thing to live in a state of paranoia.
I figure M. Garland hasn’t quite recovered from his ignominy. Sorry for the spectacle, pal. The Justice who wasn’t. All that promise and pride, all to sit at a dull bureaucratic desk, like a starting pitcher doomed to the bullpen.
He’s become another nobody. So what to do. What to do. Well, he’ll show ‘em.
But not Reason-commentator-level nobody, which is something.
Libertarians are dickless losers, the TDS-addled steaming pile of lefty shit needs to fuck off and die.
This article was just as trash as I expected. Ah well, you wrote one good article yesterday and that will have to tide us over until next month.
Any more explanation of why the article was trash?
Surely they could've simply inventoried the National Archive for what was missing.
I believe that was done. It was the National Archive that instigated the investigation in the first place.
Newsweek exclusive fills in details of the FBI’s removal or documents from Mar-a-Lago:
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-informer-told-fbi-what-docs-trump-was-hiding-where-1732283
“In response to the Hillary Clinton email scandal, Trump himself signed a law in 2018 that made it a felony to remove and retain classified documents.”
The limited government center right has certain blind spots where they feel expansion of government and or regulation is acceptable. For Reason writers, that's appears to be anything related to Trump, immigration, and police.
Only willful ignorance can explain how the staff doesn't believe what's happening to Trump isn't a witch hunt. I mean just 3,4 weeks ago some low level staff member made up stories about Trump putting lunging at the driver. In a sane world everyone would laugh at the J6 committee and refuse to take any of them seriously.
Why does the FBI deserve any benefit of the doubt? They lied on their FISA application to put surveillance on Carter Page. They tried to railroad Flynn on a BS logan act charge when no policy discussion ever took place with Russians. The Russia probe was based on a nonsensical dossier. Leaked communication between revealed agents ready to act on Trump even before he was elected. Trump's attorney is alleging the agents requested cameras be turned off and didn't provide a physical warrant.
Is the takeaway from this really "Gee, more political bickering incoming"? You see stunts like this, and leftists threatening America's courts and institutions over abortion, and you don't feel something is off?
"Why does the FBI deserve any benefit of the doubt? "
The head of the FBI was appointed, and presumably chosen and approved, by Trump.
And? This means absolutely nothing. It is ENTIRELY irrelevant.
But then, you already know that.
Hi, I'm reason and I'm here to tell you why you should avoid the news and this is all just partisan fuckery.
Fuck off cunts. You've been defending this fascist forever.
Just a side effect of [WE] mob democracy without boundaries.
[WE] mobs rule!!/s
Until people start to comprehend that the USA is a ***CONSTITUTIONAL*** Republic and they honor that Constitution above [WE] mob rules democracy there will only be more gang-land style battles between [WE] mobs.
Democrats are actually treasonous to the USA by their very platform.
The Mar-a-Lago Raid Starts Another Cycle in a Partisan Feedback Loop"
That's a funny way to say the FBI just went full Gestapo.....
I read the line "Not all conservatives are drinking the Kool-Aid about this being a sign the U.S. has become a banana republic." and thought, "Right. David French wouldn't think it was a banana republic if the entire economy, save banana exports, were shut down." Sure enough...
It's not even good parody anymore.
Less talk more action.
Before the first Civil War, there was John Brown and his raid to really kick things off.
Are you going to be the John Brown this time around?
Can anybody name a conservative position French has espoused in the last 4 or so years?
Once he got paid by a leftie, all of his beliefs changed. Because he's a man of honor, you see.
Holy unhinged hysterics, Batman!
Who you gonna shoot 1st, loser?
Are you inciting an uprising?
Less talk more action.
Unmask your email and you can get exactly what you're asking for here.
He's fortified his basement and told mom to buy a gun.
That would be exercise.
French and Williamson write "The Conservative Case For a Banana Republic".
You first.
"reckoning"?
You've got some big ideas about yourself, little feller.
You're the one wanting "more action," fat boy, don't puss out now.
Sooo tough, I love it!
I'm almost there, lil' buddy.
Maybe wave a snake flag at my dick?
With a 20 year supply of Hot Pockets and Dr. Pepper?
Be careful. I've heard that Jeffy knows karate.
Your penis obsession is noted.
He took a lesson once.
Actually his friend online told him a bout a lesson he took. Close enough for jeff
Missionary position?
Don’t forget the cookies.