How Serious Is This? Consider What The FBI Would Do To Us

[Geoist]

Hehehe.....

After the story broke about the documents I was imagining Trump using his beloved Sharpie to cross out 'top secret'.

 

[Phys251]

After the story broke about the documents I was imagining Trump using his beloved Sharpie to cross out 'top secret'.

It is possible that he did just that.

 

[Geoist]

It is possible that he did just that.

Wouldn't shock me in the least, at this point.

 

[iguanaman]

The notion of it, yes. I'd like to know that it was done with better responsibility and oversite than other examples of things that have done, like illegitimate wire taps on Trump people. I'm still pissed that the FBI agent that knowingly altered an email to falsify a warrant got off with a slap on the wrist.

LOL Please stop with that victimhood for that Putin loving traitor Carter Page. He already had one FISA Warrant in 2014 because of his being a mouthpiece for Putin and a friend of our adversary. They did not need much to get another one. He has sold out to Putin and that is why Trump wanted him. Just like with Manafort. You guys are either fools or you also approve and are a pawn of Putin. Is Putin holding loans on condos for you too? Putin is our enemy and wants to destroy the U.S. and has said so many times. Anyone who helps him in any way are traitors to all we believe in. It is sort of a red line, I'm sorry.

Carter Page acknowledges working as informal adviser to Russian President​

Page appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” following the release Saturday of new documents tied to his wiretapping, including the government’s application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and subsequent renewals. He found himself sparring with an increasingly exasperated Jake Tapper, the host.

The FBI wrote in the documents that it believed Russia was trying to recruit Page, a foreign policy aide on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign who now sits at the eye of the storm in ongoing investigations into Russian electoral interference and possible Trump campaign collusion. Page called himself an “informal adviser” to Russia in a 2013 letter.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018...-working-as-informal-adviser-to-russia-735559

 

[cpwill]

I appreciate you being one of the few anti-Trump conservatives around here, but holy shit, does all the 'both-sides' crap get annoying. There is absolutely no comparison. Hillary was not screaming 'RIGGED ELECTION!' when she lost. Hillary's supporters weren't storming the Capitol in an attempt to stop certification of a fair election. And Hillary's supporters are not targeting FBI agents and their families for murder.

You are conflating separate things. Wholeheartedly agree that Trump's big lie bit is in an entirely separate class from Hillary's flirtation with the "Russia stole the election" narrative. Wholeheartedly agree that Trump posed a unique and serious danger to the Republic. Wholeheartedly agree that his followers who threaten FBI agents and their families are beyond the pale, and I have consistently argued for legal consequences for those threats, just as I supported both impeachments.


But none of that is at question, here. Here we are looking at Trump's unlawful retention of government documents which may have been classified, and that is a direct parallel - if a lesser offense - to Hillary's unlawful taking and retention of similar documents. The precedents we set in 2016 to get Hillary off the hook are going to benefit Trump now.

 

[Fishking]

LOL Please stop with that victimhood for that Putin loving traitor Carter Page. He already had one FISA Warrant in 2014 because of his being a mouthpiece for Putin and a friend of our adversary. They did not need much to get another one. He has sold out to Putin and that is why Trump wanted him. Just like with Manafort. You guys are either fools or you also approve and are a pawn of Putin. Is Putin holding loans on condos for you too? Putin is our enemy and wants to destroy the U.S. and has said so many times. Anyone who helps him in any way are traitors to all we believe in. It is sort of a red line, I'm sorry.

Carter Page acknowledges working as informal adviser to Russian President​

Page appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” following the release Saturday of new documents tied to his wiretapping, including the government’s application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and subsequent renewals. He found himself sparring with an increasingly exasperated Jake Tapper, the host.

The FBI wrote in the documents that it believed Russia was trying to recruit Page, a foreign policy aide on Donald Trump’s presidential campaign who now sits at the eye of the storm in ongoing investigations into Russian electoral interference and possible Trump campaign collusion. Page called himself an “informal adviser” to Russia in a 2013 letter.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018...-working-as-informal-adviser-to-russia-735559

Oh...I guess that means that an FBI agent falsifying information to get a wire tap on someone is OK then

 

[iguanaman]

You are conflating separate things. Wholeheartedly agree that Trump's big lie bit is in an entirely separate class from Hillary's flirtation with the "Russia stole the election" narrative. Wholeheartedly agree that Trump posed a unique and serious danger to the Republic. Wholeheartedly agree that his followers who threaten FBI agents and their families are beyond the pale, and I have consistently argued for legal consequences for those threats, just as I supported both impeachments.


But none of that is at question, here. Here we are looking at Trump's unlawful retention of government documents which may have been classified, and that is a direct parallel - if a lesser offense - to Hillary's unlawful taking and retention of similar documents. The precedents we set in 2016 to get Hillary off the hook are going to benefit Trump now.

So if it is indeed confirmed that the TS/SCI document was about our latest nuclear program and it is about the tech that Trump "leaked" to the world while President we cannot even charge him with mishandling of documents? I find it hard not to charge him with a capital offense for that "carelessness" Whatever it is we have to assume the Russians have it don't you think?

All the times Donald Trump has leaked classified information, including nuclear secrets​

FBI’s Mar-a-Lago search is not the ex-president’s first alleged run-in with respect to confidential information​

​

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...mp-classified-nuclear-documents-b2143733.html​

 

[iguanaman]

Oh...I guess that means that an FBI agent falsifying information to get a wire tap on someone is OK then

It was a stupid move but I refuse to believe that there was no good reason to monitor Carter PAGE. Look him up is you do not believe me.

 

[cpwill]

So if it does indeed be confirmed that the TS/SCI document was about our latest nuclear program and it is about the tech that Trump "leaked" to the world while President we cannot charge him with mishandling of documents?.

Not if he was President. The President can literally (and, Trump once seems to have done this) tweet out his PDB. It's foolish and destructive, but, that's why we aren't supposed to elect foolish and destructive people to the office.

 

[Geoist]

You are conflating separate things. Wholeheartedly agree that Trump's big lie bit is in an entirely separate class from Hillary's flirtation with the "Russia stole the election" narrative.

Is the quoted an actual direct quote?

Wholeheartedly agree that Trump posed a unique and serious danger to the Republic. Wholeheartedly agree that his followers who threaten FBI agents and their families are beyond the pale, and I have consistently argued for legal consequences for those threats, just as I supported both impeachments.

I have no doubt you have.

But none of that is at question, here. Here we are looking at Trump's unlawful retention of government documents which may have been classified, and that is a direct parallel - if a lesser offense - to Hillary's unlawful taking and retention of similar documents. The precedents we set in 2016 to get Hillary off the hook are going to benefit Trump now.

You were discussing the Hillary faithful and seemed to be making a comparison to the Trump faithful and that is why I responded.

I wholeheartedly disagree on the parallels between her emails and Trump taking the classified documents, storing them in a room without a lock, and lying to authorities about returning them

There are parallels between her server and the Bush Administration servers/emails. There are parallels between her server and Trump Administration servers. And there are parallels to her server and Trump's refusal to use a secure phone.

 

[cpwill]

It was a stupid move but I refuse to believe that there was no good reason to monitor Carter PAGE. Look him up is you do not believe me.

It was an illegal move. The FBI has, tragically, given up the presumption of trustworthiness on this kind of question

 

[iguanaman]

It was an illegal move. The FBI has, tragically, given up the presumption of trustworthiness on this kind of question

You deny that Carter Page was a Russian stooge and that is why Trump picked him? Because he knew he was known and liked by Putin? Same with Tillerson too but that backfired badly on Trump. Tillerson was nobody's stooge. Exxon/Mobil was one of the very first companies to PERMANENTLY cease all operation in Russia after the disastrous invasion of Ukraine. You would think someone with such a "very good brain" would have known that?
Like Hillary's emails you are making a mountain out of one agents error in judgement.

ExxonMobil joins business exodus from Russia after decades of close ties​

American oil and gas giant ExxonMobil is ending its decades-long involvement in Russia, exiting a major oil and gas project off Russia's eastern coast and announcing it will not make new investments in the country.
The move comes as the global business community increasingly is moving to isolate Moscow over the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine.
https://www.npr.org/2022/03/01/1083...xodus-from-russia-after-decades-of-close-ties

​

 

[Geoist]

Not if he was President. The President can literally (and, Trump once seems to have done this) tweet out his PDB. It's foolish and destructive, but, that's why we aren't supposed to elect foolish and destructive people to the office.

Setting aside for a moment whether a president can actually declassify nuclear secrets, the crimes cited in the search warrant had nothing to do with whether the documents were classified or not:

The claim is also irrelevant to Mr. Trump’s potential troubles over the document matter, because none of the three criminal laws cited in a search warrant as the basis of the investigation depend on whether documents contain classified information.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

 

[cpwill]

Is the quoted an actual direct quote?

Perhaps at some point. She seems to pretty clearly be saying the election was "stolen"


And that it was "not on the level" and that "we really don't know what happened"

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

www.yahoo.com

Hillary Clinton dismissed President Trump as an “illegitimate president” and suggested that “he knows” that he stole the 2016 presidential election in a CBS News interview to be aired Sunday...

etc...

You were discussing the Hillary faithful and seemed to be making a comparison to the Trump faithful and that is why I responded.

And, since the context was "defending someone for unlawfully retaining government documents", that comparison was apt.

I wholeheartedly disagree on the parallels between her emails and Trump taking the classified documents, storing them in a room without a lock, and lying to authorities about returning them

Respectfully, the difference in your levels of outrage may be piushing you towards that conclusion. I'm no Trump fan, but, in this particular act, his offense was less than that of Hillary's, as his taking was lawful, and hers was not, and both of their retentions were unlawful.

 

[cpwill]

You deny that Carter Page was a Russian stooge and that is why Trump picked him? Because he knew he was known and liked by Putin? Same with Tillerson too but that backfired badly on Trump. Tillerson was nobody's stooge. You would think someone with such a "very good brain" would have known that?
Like Hillary's emails you are making a mountain out of one agents error in judgement.

It wasn't an error of judgment. It wasn't a mistake. It was a deliberate lie to get around someone's constitutional protections. It doesn't matter how unsympathetic or toady or dislikeable Page is - those actions are still illegal, and the FBI has no one to blame but itself for the damage it has done to it's own reputation.

 

[cpwill]

Setting aside for a moment whether a president can actually declassify nuclear secrets, the crimes cited in the search warrant had nothing to do with whether the documents were classified or not:

The claim is also irrelevant to Mr. Trump’s potential troubles over the document matter, because none of the three criminal laws cited in a search warrant as the basis of the investigation depend on whether documents contain classified information.

Presidential Power to Declassify Information, Explained

In an interview, Mr. Trump again insisted that “I declassified everything.” He added that as president, “you can declassify just by saying ‘it’s declassified’ — even by thinking about it.”

www.nytimes.com

Somewhat correct - "does not depend on" is not the same as "has nothing to do with". However, he asked about the President's authority to declassify information, and so the answer he got was about the President's authority to declassify information.

 

[iguanaman]

It wasn't an error of judgment. It wasn't a mistake. It was a deliberate lie to get around someone's constitutional protections. It doesn't matter how sympathetic or toasdy Page is - those actions are still illegal, and the FBI has no one to blame but itself for the damage it has done to it's own reputation.

LOL Again one agent does not make an agency but I get it. You are a stickler for total legal accuracy when it is in Trump's favor. Page is certainly a strange hill to die on is all I am saying. Also that warrant was renewed twice and that only happens if the info supports that and renewals have nothing to do with the original warrant. But why let all of Trump's"indescretions" slide with some sort of Nixonian executive privilege then? Presidents are not above the law.

 

[cpwill]

LOL Again one agent does not make an agency but I get it

That is certainly correct, and the problem becomes when one particularly bad abuse becomes part of a pattern.

. You are a stickler for total legal accuracy when it is in Trump's favor. But let all of Trump's"indescretions" slide with some sort of Nixonian executive privilege? Presidents are not above the law.

No they are not, and I've been pointing out for days now that Trump's retention of these documents was unlawful; it is simply that his taking off them wasn't.

 

[Geoist]

Perhaps at some point. She seems to pretty clearly be saying the election was "stolen"


And that it was "not on the level" and that "we really don't know what happened"

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

www.yahoo.com

Hillary Clinton dismissed President Trump as an “illegitimate president” and suggested that “he knows” that he stole the 2016 presidential election in a CBS News interview to be aired Sunday...

etc...

Do you believe Russia meddled in the 2016 Election?

And, since the context was "defending someone for unlawfully retaining government documents", that comparison was apt.

I don't know many who actually defend Hillary over using private servers (the same as those in other administrations, including Trump's). The outrage was more over the timing of the FBI's investigation and hearing.

Respectfully, the difference in your levels of outrage may be piushing you towards that conclusion. I'm no Trump fan, but, in this particular act, his offense was less than that of Hillary's, as his taking was lawful, and hers was not, and both of their retentions were unlawful.

And I am no Hillary fan. The issue for the FBI is not specifically classified v. unclassified. It's over whether Trump's actions violate the Espionage Act.

 

[Geoist]

Somewhat correct - "does not depend on" is not the same as "has nothing to do with".

If the violations cited do not depend on whether the files were classified or de-classified, then the argument is moot.

 

[JasperL]

He literally posted a video last month with "accelerationist" in the title. It was a walkthrough of how many supplies one needs to survive the downfall of society, dog whistled as "hey guys, whatever you do, don't do this!!" *wink*

That, coupled with his support of keeping AR 15s legal kinda tells one all they need to know. (Along with the title of his channel, and his videos - he's not hiding anything, he is literally laying it out.)

That's a dishonest summary of that video. It's linked right there in case anyone wants to watch it for themselves. It was a walkthrough of the devastating impacts on the people at the bottom of what an 'accelerating' path would be, that it won't hurt those the action is intended to hurt at the top who will be in their compounds, doing fine, and that it will drive the people into the arms of the U.S. military.

So you didn't watch it or are lying.

 

[cpwill]

Do you believe Russia meddled in the 2016 Election?

Respectfully, this appears to be a setup for a Motte and Bailey argument. Yes, Russia wanted to create chaos in the US and weaken our domestic unity, and so they attempted to meddle in the 2016 election. We have instances for example of them helping to foment right-wing and left-wing violence against each other, and they did things like memes.

However, that is not the same as them stealing the election, or Trump being an illegitimate president because they posted a cartoon of Hillary arm wrestling Jesus, anymore than the likely extra-legal changes to voting structures, such as increasing the number of drop boxes without legislative input, stole the 2020 election and makes Joe Biden an illegitimate president.

For the broader audience, because context is important, I am not arguing that what Hillary did is the equivalent of what Trump did. Trump attempted to launch a coup and end our system of self-government.

I don't know many who actually defend Hillary over using private servers (the same as those in other administrations, including Trump's).

Well, pretty much the entire Democratic Party, all left-leaning media, and the vast majority of left-leaning posters on this board who engaged the topic. Heck, we have people in these threatds today who are still doing it.

The outrage was more over the timing of the FBI's investigation and hearing.

I think you may be thinking of the later announcement after the initial investigation was closed that the FBI had discovered even more unclassified emails as part of their investigation into Anthony Weiner.

And I am no Hillary fan. The issue for the FBI is not specifically classified v. unclassified. It's over whether Trump's actions violate the Espionage Act.

Given what we currently know, it seems likely that he has unlawfully retained a set of government documents, which may or may not have been classified. As he was president when he took them however, he did not unlawfully take them, which appears to be the sticking point for a lot of people. :-/

 

[cpwill]

If the violations cited do not depend on whether the files were classified or de-classified, then the argument is moot.

Words have meaning, but, yes, 793 does not require the information be classified, though it seems reasonable that in the vast majority of such cases it is.

 

[iguanaman]

Respectfully, this appears to be a setup for a Motte and Bailey argument. Yes, Russia wanted to create chaos in the US and weaken our domestic unity, and so they attempted to meddle in the 2016 election. We have instances for example of them helping to foment right-wing and left-wing violence against each other, and they did things like memes.

However, that is not the same as them stealing the election, or Trump being an illegitimate president because they posted a cartoon of Hillary arm wrestling Jesus, anymore than the likely extra-legal changes to voting structures, such as increasing the number of drop boxes without legislative input, stole the 2020 election and makes Joe Biden an illegitimate president.

For the broader audience, because context is important, I am not arguing that what Hillary did is the equivalent of what Trump did. Trump attempted to launch a coup and end our system of self-government.




Well, pretty much the entire Democratic Party, all left-leaning media, and the vast majority of left-leaning posters on this board who engaged the topic. Heck, we have people in these threatds today who are still doing it.





I think you may be thinking of the later announcement after the initial investigation was closed that the FBI had discovered even more unclassified emails as part of their investigation into Anthony Weiner.



Given what we currently know, it seems likely that he has unlawfully retained a set of government documents, which may or may not have been classified. As he was president when he took them however, he did not unlawfully take them, which appears to be the sticking point for a lot of people. :-/

You are splitting hairs again since the minute he was out of office it was illegal to possess the documents. How long was he in office when those documents were at Mar a lago? I'm pretty sure he was no longer President when they arrived meaning it was a crime to take/have them.

WHAT LAWS MAY TRUMP HAVE BROKEN?​

The warrant gave prosecutors the right to seize records containing evidence in violation of three laws, with code numbers 793, 2071 and 1519.

While the list of items agents took from Mar-a-Lago notes that many of the documents were classified, those three laws deal with mishandling of federal government records regardless of whether or not they are classified.
The law with number 793 prevents unauthorized possession of national defense information, without mentioning whether the records are classified or not. It is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

That law was initially passed under the 1917 Espionage Act, which predates the statutory classification system.

The other laws, 2071 and 1519, make it illegal to conceal or destroy official U.S. documents. They are punishable by up to three and 20 years in prison, respectively. Neither law requires the information in question to be classified.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/what-charges-might-trump-face-removing-white-house-records-2022-08-10/

 

[cpwill]

You are splitting hairs again since the minute he was out of office it was illegal to possess the documents.

I have consistently pointed out that Trump appears to have awfully taken and unlawfully retained government documents. This is not splitting hairs, it is being accurate, especially when people are making the claim that said documents were stolen.