Unfortunately, the timing of the serving of the warrant at Mar-a-Lago could have been much better.
They should have waited until Trump was there so that they could have had him standing out in the parking lot in his underwear waiting for them to complete their search.
As astonishing as the FBI raid on a former president's residence was, it was outdone by the Republican response. Initially they issued calls to defund the FBI while comparing it to the Gestapo, accused Biden of weaponizing the Department of Justice, and called for a congressional inquiry, to mention the more ostentatious. They were forced to switch horses after the unsealing of the warrant/inventory that listed 11 boxes of classified and secret documents, and now they're making different but equally absurd claims, like that Trump can simply declare documents unclassified, ignoring that not only is there a declassification process but also that under the three laws cited in the warrant, the Espionage Act, the Federal Records act, and Obstruction of Justice, the documents classification status isn't a factor.
Also amazing is the Republican turnabout on law and order, apparently only in favor when it suits them. They questioned whether the raid was necessary. Kevin McCarthy, the House minority leader, theatened to investigate the Justice Department if the Republicans take the house next year. If any Republican was concerned about secret US documents being kept in the basement of a private citizen they kept it to themselves.
Trump remained characteristically unashamed and belligerent. He falsely claimed that Obama "kept 33 million pages of documents, much of them classified" and had them "taken to Chicago." The reality is that unclassified Obama documents are in a NARA facility in Hoffman Estates, IL, pending completion of the physical Obama library, while classified ones are in Washington DC in a very secure NARA facility. NARA is the National Archives and Records Administration, meaning that all Obama's documents remain in the hands of the United States government.
The Republican response also tells us that Trump's hold on the Republican party is as strong as ever. He has not lost his grip on that poor besotted and blighted party which likely has only two possible destinies: eventual demise or the ruling party of an authoritarian state.
A related item that recently received attention, when Biden took office he ordered that Trump not be provided the briefings that former presidents usually receive as a courtesy, judging him a security risk.
The state of the people in the Republican party is such that they're threatening to make Dick Cheney look good. Alas, there are those 2 wars I believe that DC is heavily responsible for the U.S. getting into.
When Dick Cheney is a bright spot in your party, you party is most dismal.
Or something like that.
Moose
Added by edit:
In other words "the party of Dick Cheney" sounds a lot better than "the party of Trump".
The Republican party is collectively insane (aka "bat shit crazy"). This would seem to have to be a campaign advantage for Democrats.
I was composing within my mind a post again expressing puzzlement at the Republicans slavish worship of all things Trump when I discovered this opinion piece by Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post that says some of the things I was thinking: Trump has never been in so much peril. Nor has the GOP.
First Rubin describes all Trump's legal vulnerabilities, and I include here the one in New York that she left out:
The Espionage Act
Obstruction of justice
Theft of government documents
The phony elector scheme
The pressuring scheme on Mike Pence to declare some electors invalid
Incitement to riot and insurrection
Failure to carry out duties of office by not intervening in said riot and insurrection
Conspiracy to commit voter fraud in Georgia
Interference with performance of an official's duties in Georgia
Income tax violations in New York state
Then Rubin says exactly what I was thinking:
Jennifer Rubin: Republicans are apparently willing to stick with Trump even if he’s caught red-handed in committing crimes.
And it actually goes way beyond that. Not only are they willing to stick with Trump, but they'll attack any person or entity enforcing the law with respect to Trump. Republicans don't care about Trump's possible violations of the law, all of them extremely serious, but only that someone's trying to hold Trump responsible for violating these laws. And they're coming up with all kinds of spurious excuses, not because they make any sense to rational people, but because the Trump base eats them up. These would be excuses like, "Trump declassified these documents by verbally declaring them unclassified on his way out the door," and "What capitol riot? Oh, you mean that peaceful 6th January citizen visit?"
The reason Republicans are doing this is clear. No matter how many indictments Trump eventually suffers, which realistically could be as few as zero and as many as three or four, they know that Trump can still sink them in the November elections. So they at a minimum steer clear of any criticism of Trump, and at a maximum heap praise on him while castigating anyone daring to hold him accountable.
2024 is pretty far off, but given how slowly the law moves it's possible the Republican party could nominate for president someone who is under criminal indictment.
Words used by former Trump administration officials, which include big names like John Kelly, Mick Mulvaney and John Bolton, to describe this claim were: patently false, bullshit, foolish, total nonsense, it can't just be an idea in his head, no evidence, never heard of it, ludicrous, ridiculous, laughable, the president can't just wave a magic wand, strains credulity, nonsensical, deeply reckless.
The article's worth reading because it describes why people characterized the claim using these words.
Of course, none of this matters. What's important is that the Trump base believes Trump's claim, there's a lot of them, they're motivated, and they vote.
Edited by Minnemooseus, : Change "Redneck Liberal" to "Liberal Redneck" in subtitle (although I do think "Redneck Liberal" has a better ring).
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable." - John Kenneth Galbraith
It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn't know what he was talking about. - Paul Krugman (as stolen from Chiroptera's signature)
"My fellow Americans, I'm pleased to tell you today that I've signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. We begin bombing in five minutes" - Ronald Reagan (1984)
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose
The big lie in the memo? That the only reasonable conclusion is that Trump could not have obstructed justice for a crime he wasn't convicted of. In their bizarro world, if you obstruct justice to the extent that you escape conviction then you didn't actually obstruct justice.
Think of it. In their world if captured bank robbers intimidate or even murder witnesses and eventually escape conviction then their witness tampering efforts were not obstruction of justice.
Let me give an example from the memo:
Memo to Barr:The [Mueller] Report thus suggests that the President's exercise of executive discretion for any improper reason, including the prevention of personal embarrassment, could constitute obstruction of justice if it impeded a pending investigation. As we have discussed with you, we do not subscribe to such a reading of the obstruction-of-justice statutes.
The style of writing minimizes and obscures its serious problems, so let me translate. They're saying that if the President has an "improper reason" (their example is preventing personal embarrassment) for any exercise of his legitimate power that impedes an investigation, it's not obstruction of justice.
Here's where they discuss Trump's efforts to impede the Special Counsel's investigative efforts:
Memo to Barr:The Special Counsel considers, for example, whether the President obstructed justice by asking the White House Counsel to direct the firing of the Special Counsel; by asking Corey Lewandowski to contact the Attorney General and seek his assistance in narrowing the Special Counsel's investigation; and by asking the Attorney General to reverse his recusal and to supervise the Special Counsel's investigation.
Firing Mueller, narrowing his investigation, and asking the Attorney General to supervise his investigation are all unambiguously obstruction of justice, yet the memo goes on to assert that they are not obstruction of justice. One example of their reasoning is that White House Counsel Don McGahn didn't actually carry out the order to fire Mueller, therefore Trump did not obstruct justice.
Think about it. In their odd legal world if an attempt to break the law fails then it isn't actually breaking the law. In their logic trying but failing to obstruct justice is not a crime. Can you imagine any defense attorney arguing that because the bank robbers he's defending were apprehended before they actually obtained any money that they're not actually guilty of a crime?
If the Dems can hold the House and regain the Senate, I think you will see even more investigations come to light. Not just in the House and Senate, but the DOJ will have the confidence that the people and political class have their back. Right now there is probably concern that if the #GQP gets back into power individual investigators and prosecutors will be arrested and persecuted. We are truly on the knife's edge as to whether our Constitution holds.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
quote:This is a grave travesty, and what is unredacted only further supports President Trump’s position, there was NO reason for a raid — it is all politics!” —Trump spokesman
The long and short of it is that the earlier recovery by the National Archives of 15 boxes of material brought to light 184 classified files. More than half the affidavit is redacted, and a separate partially redacted document also unsealed today says that the redacted portions name the many individuals who provided information. Quoting from this other document, the redactions were necessary to:
quote:...protect the safety and privacy of a significant number of civilian witnesses, in addition to law enforcement personnel, as well as to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigation and to avoid disclosure of grand jury material.
Of course all Trump has to do is call it politics and a witch hunt and his supporters will believe him. Considering the evidence on the merits independent of Trump claims isn't a trait common among them.
On the matter of who could have provided the information to law enforcement, a guest on Joy Reid (MSNBC) just now described that whoever it was had to have had intimate knowledge of the layout of the place, so it could have been friends, family members, or staff.
Staff. With all the fear and hate mongering MAGAts have used about "illegals are taking your jobs away", Trump's staffing practices traditionally involve employing illegals, including recruiting them from overseas. Furthermore, his businesses are known to create falsified documentation for those workers, including the creation of false social security numbers.
But then they go that extra step which is standing operating procedure (SOP) for human traffickers: they take possession of those workers' documentation in order to exert control over those workers, basically in order to enslave them. The same practice as recruiting you to work in another country, then they take your passport away from you so you cannot leave.
Could some of that information about Trump's Espionage Act violations have come from one of his human trafficking victims? Curious minds want to know.
In a recent interview on Fox News about docugate former attorney general William Barr said:
WaPo:“it is clearly foolish what happened, and inexplicable,” he added that it was not clear whether the actions should be criminally prosecuted, considering, among other things, the documents were ultimately recovered.
Imagine this scenario. A bank is robbed and the thieves get away with several hundred thousand dollars but are later apprehended and all the money recovered. The local prosecuting attorney declines to prosecute because “the money was ultimately recovered.”
That would never happen, of course, but it seems that in Bill Barr’s world that if you steal money then you go to jail, but if you steal documents that put the security of the entire country at risk then you go free.
™ Version 4.2
