(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, the source is John Solomon, and two anonymous sources of his?

Anyway, perhaps some of our lawyers here can weigh in, but there are exceptions for taking things in plain view that are not in the warrant. Additionally, what's the repercussion if some stuff not in the warrant or criminally related were seized? From what I'm reading, those things are just excluded and can't be used directly or to point to some other potential crime. So the items would just be returned.

Keeping this for the next time you post an article from an obscure source that is using sources that are not named.

Unnamed sources aren't the issue here, it's the named one.

(08-17-2022 09:21 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, the source is John Solomon, and two anonymous sources of his?

Anyway, perhaps some of our lawyers here can weigh in, but there are exceptions for taking things in plain view that are not in the warrant. Additionally, what's the repercussion if some stuff not in the warrant or criminally related were seized? From what I'm reading, those things are just excluded and can't be used directly or to point to some other potential crime. So the items would just be returned.

Keeping this for the next time you post an article from an obscure source that is using sources that are not named.

Unnamed sources aren't the issue here, it's the named one.

Read the whole comment. You want to bash Solomon, I question when you post something from a source that nobody has ever heard of.

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:21 AM)gdunn Wrote:  No heads will roll.. Offenders will be reprimanded and promoted to higher positions.

Right...you back the blue, don't you?

There's mountains of precedence of how things like this, if true, are handled. I would venture that in most all of them, the officers on scene aren't blamed and the items are just returned. It's probably pretty hard to prove that any officer were acting criminally.

Me backing the blue and supporting something that was possibly un-Constitutional are two different things, you trying to paint them as the same thing is absurd. While I support Law Enforcement, I also feel the need to call out things when it's done wrong. You should try it sometime instead of acting smug like nothing you've done is wrong.

And Tom, FBI agents are not called officers, they're called agents. And if these agents did what they're told I'm not upset, the ones I was referring to was the ones giving the orders.

Back to ignoreland.

Semantics, the FBI is a governmental police force that indeed has law enforcement capabilities. They were executing a search warrant. They are bound by the same laws as any local blue wearing cop when executing a warrant.

And we simply don't know enough yet to go off the deep end and claim a Constitutional violation. We don't know if the warrant was illegally obtained nor do we know that any right were violated in what was taken. The agents and the government get just as much benefit of the doubt as trump does...or at least they should if you believe in our system of justice.

(08-17-2022 09:27 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:21 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, the source is John Solomon, and two anonymous sources of his?

Anyway, perhaps some of our lawyers here can weigh in, but there are exceptions for taking things in plain view that are not in the warrant. Additionally, what's the repercussion if some stuff not in the warrant or criminally related were seized? From what I'm reading, those things are just excluded and can't be used directly or to point to some other potential crime. So the items would just be returned.

Keeping this for the next time you post an article from an obscure source that is using sources that are not named.

Unnamed sources aren't the issue here, it's the named one.

Read the whole comment. You want to bash Solomon, I question when you post something from a source that nobody has ever heard of.

This you?

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Back to ignoreland.

I don't hide my sources...I always provide links and you're free to distrust them all you like, never said otherwise. It's why I no longer post stuff from Salon, Huffpo, Mother Jones, etc.

And yeah, Solomon has a track record of not being very credible. I'd wait for a better source if I were you.

(08-17-2022 09:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:21 AM)gdunn Wrote:  No heads will roll.. Offenders will be reprimanded and promoted to higher positions.

Right...you back the blue, don't you?

There's mountains of precedence of how things like this, if true, are handled. I would venture that in most all of them, the officers on scene aren't blamed and the items are just returned. It's probably pretty hard to prove that any officer were acting criminally.

Me backing the blue and supporting something that was possibly un-Constitutional are two different things, you trying to paint them as the same thing is absurd. While I support Law Enforcement, I also feel the need to call out things when it's done wrong. You should try it sometime instead of acting smug like nothing you've done is wrong.

And Tom, FBI agents are not called officers, they're called agents. And if these agents did what they're told I'm not upset, the ones I was referring to was the ones giving the orders.

Back to ignoreland.

Semantics, the FBI is a governmental police force that indeed has law enforcement capabilities. They were executing a search warrant. They are bound by the same laws as any local blue wearing cop when executing a warrant.

And we simply don't know enough yet to go off the deep end and claim a Constitutional violation. We don't know if the warrant was illegally obtained nor do we know that any right were violated in what was taken. The agents and the government get just as much benefit of the doubt as trump does...or at least they should if you believe in our system of justice.

It's not semantics.. Backing the blue and questioning the execution of a warrant or gathering materials that may or may not be covered by such a warrant and making people go through hoops to make it visible definitely needs to be questioned. I get it, you don't like to question anything for anything you support (see your inflation thread).

I'm not "going off a deep end". It's just weird they were onsite, had no issues, wanted a lock, and then did a raid.

Then they took passports that they weren't supposed to take and then returned them, which makes me question what else they swiped they weren't supposed to swipe along with not wanting people to witness what they were doing, wanting the cameras off, and showing the warrant far off. This is not standard.

So again, I support LEOs but I can question them.

Tom supports Democrats and never questions them.

Buh bye.

This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

If the guy is such a questionable source he should be easy to refute. I love the left questioning the rights support of law enforcement due to questioning the FBI's tactics and motives. The don't seem to understand that questioning or being critical of law enforcement when they are in the wrong or cross the line constitutionally does not mean they don't support law enforcement over all.

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

What criminal charges.. Please list them.

(08-17-2022 09:37 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

What criminal charges.. Please list them.

Good Lord I hope you only pretending ignorance. I mean all it does is take a simple Google search. Linked is a list of potential criminal and civil charges against Donald Trump. 22 of those are criminal in nature some have been closed but a majority remain ongoing. But if you're going to pretend like this doesn't exist, like most people here, you're really not worth the effort to be honest. I provided the link, once, only because I'm a really nice guy.

https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litig...ald-trump/

(08-17-2022 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:37 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

What criminal charges.. Please list them.

Good Lord I hope you only pretending ignorance. I mean all it does is take a simple Google search. Linked is a list of criminal and civil charges pending against Donald Trump. 22 of those are Criminal and some have been closed but a majority remain ongoing. But if you're going to pretend like this doesn't exist, like most people here, you're really not worth the effort to be honest. I provided the link, once, only because I'm a really nice guy.

https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litig...ald-trump/

Thats like saying you yourself have multiple criminal charges of beastiality with your dog waiting in the wings. You are either charged, or you're not. You cant be quasi-criminally charged.

(08-17-2022 07:23 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  So, the source is John Solomon, and two anonymous sources of his?

Anyway, perhaps some of our lawyers here can weigh in, but there are exceptions for taking things in plain view that are not in the warrant. Additionally, what's the repercussion if some stuff not in the warrant or criminally related were seized? From what I'm reading, those things are just excluded and can't be used directly or to point to some other potential crime. So the items would just be returned.

Exactly, this is a snoozer. Wake me up if the keystone cops find anything other than some bs paperwork misfiled. Gopher Garland isn’t fit to run a dog pound much less be a SCJ.

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

Please inform us of those charges. Be specific.

(08-17-2022 09:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  So again, I support LEOs but I can question them.

The root of this confusion on the left boils down to a fundamental disagreement on the purpose of the federal government. I'm all for LOCAL and STATE law enforcement 90% of the time. The exceptions are obvious when they abuse power. There's a couple of problems I have with our federal law enforcement agencies. One, they were never intended from the start. Two, they're clearly being used by the federal gov't in abuses of power. For the same reasons the military doesn't automatically get a pass from me either.

(08-17-2022 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:37 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

What criminal charges.. Please list them.

Good Lord I hope you only pretending ignorance. I mean all it does is take a simple Google search. Linked is a list of potential criminal and civil charges against Donald Trump. 22 of those are criminal in nature some have been closed but a majority remain ongoing. But if you're going to pretend like this doesn't exist, like most people here, you're really not worth the effort to be honest. I provided the link, once, only because I'm a really nice guy.

https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litig...ald-trump/

Well sunshine, be ready to produce when you make a claim, you can't be a one and done.


There are 5 that are criminal.. Most are political.. Good job.

But please point out my ignorance, because apparently you're ignorant cause you can't count.

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

Sure they are. You must really enjoy drama movies. Go back to your Lifetime channel and enjoy.

(08-17-2022 09:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:21 AM)gdunn Wrote:  No heads will roll.. Offenders will be reprimanded and promoted to higher positions.

Right...you back the blue, don't you?

There's mountains of precedence of how things like this, if true, are handled. I would venture that in most all of them, the officers on scene aren't blamed and the items are just returned. It's probably pretty hard to prove that any officer were acting criminally.

Me backing the blue and supporting something that was possibly un-Constitutional are two different things, you trying to paint them as the same thing is absurd. While I support Law Enforcement, I also feel the need to call out things when it's done wrong. You should try it sometime instead of acting smug like nothing you've done is wrong.

And Tom, FBI agents are not called officers, they're called agents. And if these agents did what they're told I'm not upset, the ones I was referring to was the ones giving the orders.

Back to ignoreland.

Semantics, the FBI is a governmental police force that indeed has law enforcement capabilities. They were executing a search warrant. They are bound by the same laws as any local blue wearing cop when executing a warrant.

And we simply don't know enough yet to go off the deep end and claim a Constitutional violation. We don't know if the warrant was illegally obtained nor do we know that any right were violated in what was taken. The agents and the government get just as much benefit of the doubt as trump does...or at least they should if you believe in our system of justice.

It's not semantics.. Backing the blue and questioning the execution of a warrant or gathering materials that may or may not be covered by such a warrant and making people go through hoops to make it visible definitely needs to be questioned. I get it, you don't like to question anything for anything you support (see your inflation thread).

I'm not "going off a deep end". It's just weird they were onsite, had no issues, wanted a lock, and then did a raid.

Then they took passports that they weren't supposed to take and then returned them, which makes me question what else they swiped they weren't supposed to swipe along with not wanting people to witness what they were doing, wanting the cameras off, and showing the warrant far off. This is not standard.

So again, I support LEOs but I can question them.

Tom supports Democrats and never questions them.

Buh bye.

Dude, you're just lying.

And if don't know WHY they went back for this "raid" you're just ignorant of how this whole thing went down from start to finish. Dude, they found additional stuff, stuff they had issued a subpoena for that trump never complied with! Doesn't that tell you why then went back?

(08-17-2022 10:03 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 07:26 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...you back the blue, don't you?

There's mountains of precedence of how things like this, if true, are handled. I would venture that in most all of them, the officers on scene aren't blamed and the items are just returned. It's probably pretty hard to prove that any officer were acting criminally.

Me backing the blue and supporting something that was possibly un-Constitutional are two different things, you trying to paint them as the same thing is absurd. While I support Law Enforcement, I also feel the need to call out things when it's done wrong. You should try it sometime instead of acting smug like nothing you've done is wrong.

And Tom, FBI agents are not called officers, they're called agents. And if these agents did what they're told I'm not upset, the ones I was referring to was the ones giving the orders.

Back to ignoreland.

Semantics, the FBI is a governmental police force that indeed has law enforcement capabilities. They were executing a search warrant. They are bound by the same laws as any local blue wearing cop when executing a warrant.

And we simply don't know enough yet to go off the deep end and claim a Constitutional violation. We don't know if the warrant was illegally obtained nor do we know that any right were violated in what was taken. The agents and the government get just as much benefit of the doubt as trump does...or at least they should if you believe in our system of justice.

It's not semantics.. Backing the blue and questioning the execution of a warrant or gathering materials that may or may not be covered by such a warrant and making people go through hoops to make it visible definitely needs to be questioned. I get it, you don't like to question anything for anything you support (see your inflation thread).

I'm not "going off a deep end". It's just weird they were onsite, had no issues, wanted a lock, and then did a raid.

Then they took passports that they weren't supposed to take and then returned them, which makes me question what else they swiped they weren't supposed to swipe along with not wanting people to witness what they were doing, wanting the cameras off, and showing the warrant far off. This is not standard.

So again, I support LEOs but I can question them.

Tom supports Democrats and never questions them.

Buh bye.

Dude, you're just lying.

And if don't know WHY they went back for this "raid" you're just ignorant of how this whole thing went down from start to finish. Dude, they found additional stuff, stuff they issued a subpoena for that trump never complied with! Doesn't that tell you why then went back?

Where did I lie?

Please show me where I lied.

I forget... If it doesn't fit your narrative it's a lie. I forgot you're never dishonest, you've told us so on several occasions.

(08-17-2022 09:50 AM)appst89 Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

Please inform us of those charges. Be specific.

Well, of course there is espionage. Dr. Evil and Trump teamed up to sell top nuclear secrets to the Rocket man in North Korea. Also, Trump wanted to amends to the Iranians for wiping out their General so they definitely deserve access as well.

Finally, after seeing how pathetic the Russian military has become still operating as though it was 1944 Dr. Evil and Trump not only sent the nuclear secrets to them but also instructions they can follow to figure it out.

(08-17-2022 09:44 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:37 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:35 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  This is sort of like taking a McDonald's hamburger wrapper. Then telling Trump lawyers they're returning that and having Trump pretend on Truth social that he's demanding his personal property back. All it does is put them at the scene of the crime. But Donald is too stupid to know that when he has multiple Criminal charges waiting in the wings he needs to keep his mouth shut. Thanks for helping orange moron:-)

What criminal charges.. Please list them.

Good Lord I hope you only pretending ignorance. I mean all it does is take a simple Google search. Linked is a list of potential criminal and civil charges against Donald Trump. 22 of those are criminal in nature some have been closed but a majority remain ongoing. But if you're going to pretend like this doesn't exist, like most people here, you're really not worth the effort to be honest. I provided the link, once, only because I'm a really nice guy.

https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/litig...ald-trump/

Trump is bad. Trump is a criminal. Trump is about to go to prison.

How do I know? I googled it! LMAO!!!

(08-17-2022 10:06 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 10:03 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:34 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 09:28 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-17-2022 08:02 AM)gdunn Wrote:  Me backing the blue and supporting something that was possibly un-Constitutional are two different things, you trying to paint them as the same thing is absurd. While I support Law Enforcement, I also feel the need to call out things when it's done wrong. You should try it sometime instead of acting smug like nothing you've done is wrong.

And Tom, FBI agents are not called officers, they're called agents. And if these agents did what they're told I'm not upset, the ones I was referring to was the ones giving the orders.

Back to ignoreland.

Semantics, the FBI is a governmental police force that indeed has law enforcement capabilities. They were executing a search warrant. They are bound by the same laws as any local blue wearing cop when executing a warrant.

And we simply don't know enough yet to go off the deep end and claim a Constitutional violation. We don't know if the warrant was illegally obtained nor do we know that any right were violated in what was taken. The agents and the government get just as much benefit of the doubt as trump does...or at least they should if you believe in our system of justice.

It's not semantics.. Backing the blue and questioning the execution of a warrant or gathering materials that may or may not be covered by such a warrant and making people go through hoops to make it visible definitely needs to be questioned. I get it, you don't like to question anything for anything you support (see your inflation thread).

I'm not "going off a deep end". It's just weird they were onsite, had no issues, wanted a lock, and then did a raid.

Then they took passports that they weren't supposed to take and then returned them, which makes me question what else they swiped they weren't supposed to swipe along with not wanting people to witness what they were doing, wanting the cameras off, and showing the warrant far off. This is not standard.

So again, I support LEOs but I can question them.

Tom supports Democrats and never questions them.

Buh bye.

Dude, you're just lying.

And if don't know WHY they went back for this "raid" you're just ignorant of how this whole thing went down from start to finish. Dude, they found additional stuff, stuff they issued a subpoena for that trump never complied with! Doesn't that tell you why then went back?

Where did I lie?

Please show me where I lied.

I forget... If it doesn't fit your narrative it's a lie. I forgot you're never dishonest, you've told us so on several occasions.

"Tom supports Democrats and never questions them."