Sean Hanity sums it up

Meaning what?

That they were just following orders from Der Fuher?
Why does authorizing the investigation of the illegal removal of classified documents from the WH make Garland Der Fuhrer?
 
Allegations with no evidence
COURT ISSUED WARRANT

Do you have any clue what those words mean? It means EXACTLY OPPOSITE of what you've just said, it necessitates EVIDENCE presented to the court.

Take your horseshit somewhere else, because the only thing you are doing here is making a fucking clown of yourself.
 
COURT ISSUED WARRANT

Do you have any clue what those words mean? It means EXACTLY OPPOSITE of what you've just said, it necessitates EVIDENCE presented to the court.

Take your horseshit somewhere else, because the only thing you are doing here is making a fucking clown of yourself.
Because the FBI has NEVER EVER lied in order to obtain a warrant....And speaking of warrants, why did they go to a local magistrate and not a federal judge?

Fucking clown indeed.
 
Because the FBI has NEVER EVER lied in order to obtain a warrant...
There is zero evidence anyone lied on anything having to do with the evidence presented to the court for this warrant. You WOULD LIKE for that to be the case, but that doesn't make it so.

So why don't you go get some popcorn and stop running your mouth about things you don't know anything about.
 
No evidence that the Stasi lies!
What is the evidence that someone lied about what was presented in this warrant application?

If you can't coherently answer that question then just give it a rest already.
 
Your link says that Trump’s lawyers looked through the box, not the government.
Reading comprehension issues?
"Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added."
 
Liar.

What is the Presidential Records Act?

  • After former President Nixon refused to hand over White House records during the Watergate scandal, Congress in 1978 passed a law requiring presidents to preserve all historically relevant materials.
  • "The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records," the law says.
  • The National Archives and Record Administration (NARA), which oversees the process, sifts through the documents to determine which can be made public and which should be redacted based a number of factors, including but not limited to "the interest of national defense or foreign policy" and relating to appointments to federal office, trade secrets and commercial or financial information.
  • A president can only destroy a document if they receive permission from the Archives to do so.

The advantage liberals have over conservatives when it comes to having the facts on our side is that you folks believe inveterate liars like Hannity. Someone who works for a cable station with a business model designed to misinform its audience for profit.

All of those records should have been handed over to the National Archives directly from the White House once Trump left office in January 2021, as required by the Presidential Records Act, the agency noted.

That law “mandates that all Presidential records must be properly preserved by each Administration so that a complete set of Presidential records is transferred to the National Archives at the end of the Administration,” U.S. Archivist David Ferriero said in the statement.

The Feds went thru the boxes of records previously, so the raid was illegitimate.
"Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added."
 
Reading comprehension issues?
"Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added."
Oh well if Bobb said so. It’s not like Trump or his lawyers have ever been accused of being anything but totally truthful. I mean, if they committed felonies they obviously would have said so.
 
And you know this how?
Are you an FBI agent that was there doing the search?
I know because the Feds already went thru the boxes of documents, duh. The raid was bullshit, looking for J6 evidence, not archive records.
Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added.
 
Horseshit, Archives clearly has been fighting to get documents Trump took for a long time. To now assert that nothing was taken inappropriately is just silly nonsense.
The Feds already went thru the boxes of documents, duh. The raid was illegitimate.
"Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added."
 
I know because the Feds already went thru the boxes of documents, duh. The raid was bullshit, looking for J6 evidence, not archive records.
Bobb said she and Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran met later with a senior Justice Department official whose name she could not recall. Trump appeared at the beginning of the meeting, in June, and greeted investigators, Bobb said, adding that the former president was not interviewed. Federal officials then looked through boxes of material, Bobb added.

So, they were the exact same boxes. You know for 100% fact that nothing was added to them between the meeting in June and now?

You know with 100% fact they were not looking for anything else when they went there but those exact boxes?
 
So, they were the exact same boxes. You know for 100% fact that nothing was added to them between the meeting in June and now?

You know with 100% fact they were not looking for anything else when they went there but those exact boxes?

Do you have any evidence at all that there was anything illegal was done? Isn't that really the crux of the whole thing? Our justice system requires sufficient grounds based on hard evidence as opposed to suspicions of any illegal activity before we raid somebody's house. You gotta have some reason to believe that there were other boxes or that something was added. Coulda been doesn't cut it, you gotta have more than a suspicion.

You don't raid somebody's house without cause and then later say see, look what we found! We were right, he did this, this, and this! Cuz if that is okay then the 4th Amendment doesn't mean a fucking thing. I gotta be honest here, this has all the appearance of another witch hunt similar to what the democrats did in 2016.
 
Do you have any evidence at all that there was anything illegal was done? Isn't that really the crux of the whole thing? Our justice system requires sufficient grounds based on hard evidence as opposed to suspicions of any illegal activity before we raid somebody's house. You gotta have some reason to believe that there were other boxes or that something was added. Coulda been doesn't cut it, you gotta have more than a suspicion.

You don't raid somebody's house without cause and then later say see, look what we found! We were right, he did this, this, and this! Cuz if that is okay then the 4th Amendment doesn't mean a fucking thing. I gotta be honest here, this has all the appearance of another witch hunt similar to what the democrats did in 2016.
He has nothing but his blind hatred for all things Orange Man.
 
Do you have any evidence at all that there was anything illegal was done? Isn't that really the crux of the whole thing? Our justice system requires sufficient grounds based on hard evidence as opposed to suspicions of any illegal activity before we raid somebody's house. You gotta have some reason to believe that there were other boxes or that something was added. Coulda been doesn't cut it, you gotta have more than a suspicion.

You don't raid somebody's house without cause and then later say see, look what we found! We were right, he did this, this, and this! Cuz if that is okay then the 4th Amendment doesn't mean a fucking thing. I gotta be honest here, this has all the appearance of another witch hunt similar to what the democrats did in 2016.

I do not have any evidence one way or the other, which is why I am withholding judgment till we have more information.
 

Forum List

Back
Top