Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (3 Viewers)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads?
*
This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
*

Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.

www.yahoo.com

 

[Snarky Sack]

This is utter nonsense. You’re basically saying that Trump should be free to commit whatever federal crimes he wants because DOJ was not complete in a warrant application for surveillance on Carter Page - not Donald Trump but Carter Page (who even is Carter Page in Trump world?). And then a subsequent email was altered by an FBI agency counsel who isn’t even supervised by DOJ criminal division.

No, I am not saying that Trump "should be" able to commit whatever federal crimes he wants to because the DOJ/FBI lied its arse off in a warrant application to spy on a man patriotic enough to risk his life as a U.S. intel source. I'm saying that lying their tucus off makes it difficult for the same people to expect to be taken seriously the next time they accuse Trump of a crime.

Carter Page was in the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor, and so a warrant to spy on him was a de facto warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. They obtained that warrant by smearing a man who had done nothing suspicious but have contact with foreigners while acting as a source for the CIA. He was also one of the people smeared in the Steel Dossier that HRC paid for and that they FBI offered a million dollars to Steele to prop up.

I'm not sure what an FBI agency counsel is, or what difference it makes if he prepared the warrant application and lied on it. Is your point that he was a rogue actor and not supervised by the other participants in the effort to get Trump?

You continue to paint these examples - highly tangential to Donald Trump - as the primary evidence that Trump should have carte blanche to break whatever federal criminal law he wishes because DOJ can’t be trusted.

A more accurate interpretation would be that the DOJ can't be trusted when it comes to Donald Trump, and therefore the DOJ carries that burden of distrust into any prosecution of Donald Trump. From the standpoint of keeping Trump honest, yes. They have crippled their ability to fulfill their role in that.

I think you need to put these pieces together so that you can hang on to your dogged belief that Trump is innocent - fine, do what you need to do. But objectively, it’s nonsense in relationship to the current prosecution. It’s pure bullshirt.

I don't know that I've ever said "Donald Trump is innocent." How could I, when I haven't seen the evidence? Maybe I said "innocent until proven guilty," which is still the policy as far as I know.

I suppose you could accuse me of raining on the latest "this time we finally got him" parade. What's the rap on that?

 

[superchuck500]

No, I am not saying that Trump "should be" able to commit whatever federal crimes he wants to because the DOJ/FBI lied its arse off in a warrant application to spy on a man patriotic enough to risk his life as a U.S. intel source. I'm saying that lying their tucus off makes it difficult for the same people to expect to be taken seriously the next time they accuse Trump of a crime.

A better interpretation would be that the DOJ can't be trusted when it comes to Donald Trump, and therefor the DOJ carries that burden of distrust into any prosecution of Donald Trump.

I don't know that I've said "Donald Trump is innocent." How could I, when I haven't seen the evidence? I suppose you could accuse me of I'm raining on the latest "this time we finally got him" parade.

That’s a really weak “interpretation” of known information - we’ve been in these discussions for some time now and I actually believe that you’re smart enough to see the weakness of “Carter Page warrant means this whole prosecution can’t be trusted”. I read the Durham report, “lied its arse off” is a total mischaracterization.

But here we are again at “you do you” and we’ll just have to see how this goes. I don’t personally give a crap about “getting” Trump the politician. But if the case is strong enough to get Trump the criminal, I’m all for it. Though I assure you I’ll be fair to the evidence and case itself, not burdened by preconceptions about DOJ or Trump for that matter.

 

[Snarky Sack]

That’s a really weak “interpretation” of known information - we’ve been in these discussions for some time now and I actually believe that you’re smart enough to see the weakness of “Carter Page warrant means this whole prosecution can’t be trusted”. I read the Durham report, “lied its arse off” is a total mischaracterization.

But here we are again at “you do you” and we’ll just have to see how this goes. I don’t personally give a crap about “getting” Trump the politician. But if the case is strong enough to get Trump the criminal, I’m all for it. Though I assure you I’ll be fair to the evidence and case itself, not burdened by preconceptions about DOJ or Trump for that matter.

I'll be fair to the evidence if we ever see it.

 

[LA - L.A.]

We've been gaslit by descriptions of evidence that turn out to be inaccurate too many times for a thinking person to simply accept the DOJ's description of the evidence.

I agree. The Republicans have been gaslighting us like this going all the way back to W Bush's ramp up to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Then the Tea Party kicked it up a notch spreading lies about Obama and House Republicans did their part with constant Banana Republic investigations of Hillary Clinton.

Then Trump came along and said, "hold my beer," and turned it up to 11.

I totally get why your cynical and untrusting of Republicans when they say they have "evidence" that someone has done something wrong. I mean what reasonable person who's been paying attention wouldn't be.

 

[Snarky Sack]

I agree. The Republicans have been gaslighting us like this going all the way back to W Bush's ramp up to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Then the Tea Party kicked it up a notch spreading lies about Obama and House Republicans did their part with constant Banana Republic investigations of Hillary Clinton.

Then Trump came along and said, "hold my beer," and turned it up to 11.

I totally get why your cynical and untrusting of Republicans when they say they have "evidence" that someone has done something wrong. I mean what reasonable person who's been paying attention wouldn't be.

More whataboutism, LA-L.A.?

 

[MT15]

True story: Carter Page had left the Trump campaign BEFORE the FBI got its warrant. Nobody ever, ever spied on the Trump campaign. Well, nobody from the American government. They had an awful lot of contacts with Russian agents.

 

[LA - L.A.]

More whataboutism, LA-L.A.?

More avoidance and deflection, Snarky Sack?

See everyone, anyone can play the "I'm rubber, you're glue" game. Most of us adults have outgrown that. Obviously, some of us haven't. All I have to say to those who haven't outgrown it is "nana nana boo boo."

 

[Snarky Sack]

True story: Carter Page had left the Trump campaign BEFORE the FBI got its warrant. Nobody ever, ever spied on the Trump campaign. Well, nobody from the American government. They had an awful lot of contacts with Russian agents.

So, why did they lie so much to get the warrants on Page? They knew that he was talking to foreigners as part of his work as a CIA source.

 

[MT15]

So, why did they lie so much to get the warrants on Page? They knew that he was talking to foreigners as part of his work as a CIA source.

Evidently he had been recruited by Russian spies in the past, and they felt they needed to be sure that he hadn’t turned. Seems like normal spy stuff, actually.

 

[Snarky Sack]

Evidently he had been recruited by Russian spies in the past, and they felt they needed to be sure that he hadn’t turned. Seems like normal spy stuff, actually.

That's why they lied?

 

[MT15]

That's why they lied?

You will have to ask them why. I’m just speculating. From what I read, going from memory, there was a great deal of concern that he had decided to cooperate with Russian spies.

 

[Snarky Sack]

You will have to ask them why. I’m just speculating. From what I read, going from memory, there was a great deal of concern that he had decided to cooperate with Russian spies.

LoL!

Your memory fails you, I'm afraid.

The FISA court itself has admonished the FBI for lying to get the warrants.

 

[MT15]

LoL!

Your memory fails you, I'm afraid.

The FISA court itself has admonished the FBI for lying to get the warrants.

I didn’t say they didn’t lie. You asked why they lied. Geesh.

 

[FullMonte]

Carter Page was in the Trump campaign as a foreign policy advisor, and so a warrant to spy on him was a de facto warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.

For clarification, between Sept 23 and Sept 25,2016, three different spokespeople for Trumps campaign said publicly thst Page was not a part of Trumps campaign. On Sept 26,2016, Page told the Washington Post that he had taken a leave of absence from Trumps campaign.

On Oct 21, 2016, the FBI applied for, and was granted, a warrant to surveil Page.

They were not, in any way, spying on Trumps campaign. They were performing surveillance on an individual who three people said was not a member of the campaign, and who himself had said he was no longer a member of the campaign almost a month earlier.

Timeline of Carter Page’s Contacts with Russia [Updated]

At the heart of the recent Nunes memo controversy lies a FISA order application for former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. But Page had piqued the interest of FBI investigators long before the Trump campaign, owing to his contacts with the Russian government and energy sector. For example, his...

www.justsecurity.org

 

[Snarky Sack]

For clarification, between Sept 23 and Sept 25,2016, three different spokespeople for Trumps campaign said publicly thst Page was not a part of Trumps campaign. On Sept 26,2016, Page told the Washington Post that he had taken a leave of absence from Trumps campaign.

On Oct 21, 2016, the FBI applied for, and was granted, a warrant to surveil Page.

They were not, in any way, spying on Trumps campaign. They were performing surveillance on an individual who three people said was not a member of the campaign, and who himself had said he was no longer a member of the campaign almost a month earlier.

Timeline of Carter Page’s Contacts with Russia [Updated]

At the heart of the recent Nunes memo controversy lies a FISA order application for former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. But Page had piqued the interest of FBI investigators long before the Trump campaign, owing to his contacts with the Russian government and energy sector. For example, his...

www.justsecurity.org

I give you credit for bringing facts.

However, Page was only on leave from the campaign, in spite of what the staffers said, and there is no other reason for the FBI to lie about an American who was a CIA assett except that he had been part of the Trump's campaign. The reason that he was on leave was due to the FBI's hostile investigation him while he was working the campaign. It was Trump, not Page, that they were going after to "STOP it," as we have in the FBI's own words.

The idea that they were just honestly concerned about foreign contacts of a guy that was a CIA asset and worked for the Trump campaign is pure sophistry.

 

[DaveXA]

I give you credit for bringing facts.

However, Page was only on leave from the campaign, in spite of what the staffers said, and there is no other reason for the FBI to lie about an American who was a CIA assett except that he had been part of the Trump's campaign. The reason that he was on leave was due to the FBI's hostile investigation him while he was working the campaign. It was Trump, not Page, that they were going after to "STOP it," as we have in the FBI's own words.

The idea that they were just honestly concerned about foreign contacts of a guy that was a CIA asset and worked for the Trump campaign is pure sophistry.

I'm pretty sure he went on leave BEFORE the FBI started investigating him. Stating the reason you gave doesn't make any sense.

 

[Snarky Sack]

I'm pretty sure he went on leave BEFORE the FBI started investigating him. Stating the reason you gave doesn't make any sense.

MT15 brought facts, and I respected that. What you are 'pretty sure" of is of no interest to me.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

MT15 brought facts, and I respected that. What you are 'pretty sure" of is of no interest to me.

No, you don't. It was FullMonte, and you disputed his facts with unsupported claims. That's not respectful in any way.