• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

FBI raids Trump's Mar-A-Lago Estate!

Will the FBI's Mar-A-Largo raid likely find incriminating evidence against Trump?

  • Most likely Yes.

    Votes: 18 58.1%
  • Most likely No.

    Votes: 8 25.8%
  • 50/50 Chance.

    Votes: 1 3.2%
  • Don't know.

    Votes: 4 12.9%

  • Total voters
    31

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Do you not listen to a variety of news sources? Or do you avoid some news sources because of your trash opinion of them?
I always use a variety on anything that's controversial, and your reference to my supposed "trash opinion" pretty much tells how "objective" you are. Maybe both study and avoid hypocritical statements as you do yourself much damage by making such accusations.
 

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Please note if Trump were convicted of willfully and unlawfully removing government documents, he would be legally prohibited from holding any office under the United States, including the Presidency,

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b)
Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Since the qualifications and limitations for holding the office of President are a matter of Constitutional Law - not criminal law - this would be another court case in addition to convicting Trump.

But I think the more likely outcome is that the FBI will be forced to return documents such as Trump's passports.

Do you still honestly believe that they will find something criminal in a place that had already been openly searched and to which another invitation to openly search had been offered?

National Archives: You have classified documents!
Trump: What documents?
Nation Archives: ... classified ones...
Trump: I declassifed everyhing I have... but feel free to search for these documents.
National Archives: Okay!
Trump: Did you find them?
National Archives: No, but you still have them!
Trump: Would you like to take another look?
National Archives: ...
FBI: an anonymous source just informed us that you have classified documents and we are seizing anything that looks official.
Trump: Hey, you just took my passports!
Twitter: flight risk!
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Since the qualifications and limitations for holding the office of President are a matter of Constitutional Law - not criminal law - this would be another court case in addition to convicting Trump.

But I think the more likely outcome is that the FBI will be forced to return documents such as Trump's passports.

Do you still honestly believe that they will find something criminal in a place that had already been openly searched and to which another invitation to openly search had been offered?

National Archives: You have classified documents!
Trump: What documents?
Nation Archives: ... classified ones...
Trump: I declassifed everyhing I have... but feel free to search for these documents.
National Archives: Okay!
Trump: Did you find them?
National Archives: No, but you still have them!
Trump: Would you like to take another look?
National Archives: ...
FBI: an anonymous source just informed us that you have classified documents and we are seizing anything that looks official.
Trump: Hey, you just took my passports!
Twitter: flight risk!
Has Trump even denied that he took the documents in question?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
If this is true it is certainly an indication that they are seriously considering indicting him.

Still, it might not even be true.
CBS is saying on Twitter that no passports were taken.

Trumpists are replying with screen shots of a purported email from the FBI to Trump saying that the passports are being returned.

... so I don't know at this point.
 

Suave

Simulated character
Since the qualifications and limitations for holding the office of President are a matter of Constitutional Law - not criminal law - this would be another court case in addition to convicting Trump.

But I think the more likely outcome is that the FBI will be forced to return documents such as Trump's passports.

Do you still honestly believe that they will find something criminal in a place that had already been openly searched and to which another invitation to openly search had been offered?

National Archives: You have classified documents!
Trump: What documents?
Nation Archives: ... classified ones...
Trump: I declassifed everyhing I have... but feel free to search for these documents.
National Archives: Okay!
Trump: Did you find them?
National Archives: No, but you still have them!
Trump: Would you like to take another look?
National Archives: ...
FBI: an anonymous source just informed us that you have classified documents and we are seizing anything that looks official.
Trump: Hey, you just took my passports!
Twitter: flight risk!

I fear Trump might have indeed declassified the RQ-180 stealth drone's performance specifications allowing his agents to then legally sell this highly sensitive military knowledge regarding the RQ-180's capabilities and limitations to the highest bidder who might very well be an agent of a U.S. foreign adversary. For our national security's sake, this document would have rightfully been taken by force from Trump who may be a clear and present danger to our national security.

92a53d7af5ebd109dff7778d5a5bc62e.png


tumblr_nx7em2oWWI1t382eqo3_500.gif


 
Last edited:

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
Has Trump even denied that he took the documents in question?

Great question! Just what documents are in question that Trump supposedly took...
that he failed to return
that the National Archives claims he had yet didn't find in an open search
that the FBI acquired during their raid?​
If they can't say what they were looking for or what they found, then there is nothing to deny; there is only wrongdoing on the part of law enforcement. The warrant itself does not indicate any specific documents. Instead, it mandates an acquisition of documents fitting general descriptions such as "with classification markings". Maybe they didn't know what they were looking for or what they would find when they went into Mar-a-Lago. They saw a passport created between Jan 20, 2017 and January 20, 2021 and took it because the warrant was broad enough to include such a document.

In other news, the FBI returned Trump's passports. When will they return the attorney-client priviledged documents they took? Are they going to hold on to Roger Stone's Executive Grant of Clemency?

What is it that they think Trump had? Some boxes labelled "Classified"? When the affadavit finally gets revealed is it going to be someone telling the FBI that they saw some boxes labelled "Classified" at Mar-a-Lago? When someone's home is searched, there is no such thing as a blind assumption that they had a good reason to search or seize. They must provide a good reason. If they can't, then it is unlawful.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
the National Archives claims he had yet didn't find in an open search
that the FBI acquired during their raid?
They were not his to take and remove.

there is only wrongdoing on the part of law enforcement.
That's only your assumption, so why did you post this as if it is a fact?

When the affidavit finally gets revealed is it going to be someone telling the FBI that they saw some boxes labelled "Classified" at Mar-a-Lago?
Affidavits are almost never released, and in this case national security would likely be at risk as we are told that it is roughly 30 pages in length and contains some highly classified information.

All the Trump camp is doing is trying out one lie after another to see which might stick against the wall.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Great question! Just what documents are in question that Trump supposedly took...
that he failed to return
that the National Archives claims he had yet didn't find in an open search
that the FBI acquired during their raid?​
If they can't say what they were looking for or what they found, then there is nothing to deny; there is only wrongdoing on the part of law enforcement. The warrant itself does not indicate any specific documents. Instead, it mandates an acquisition of documents fitting general descriptions such as "with classification markings". Maybe they didn't know what they were looking for or what they would find when they went into Mar-a-Lago. They saw a passport created between Jan 20, 2017 and January 20, 2021 and took it because the warrant was broad enough to include such a document.

In other news, the FBI returned Trump's passports. When will they return the attorney-client priviledged documents they took? Are they going to hold on to Roger Stone's Executive Grant of Clemency?

What is it that they think Trump had? Some boxes labelled "Classified"? When the affadavit finally gets revealed is it going to be someone telling the FBI that they saw some boxes labelled "Classified" at Mar-a-Lago? When someone's home is searched, there is no such thing as a blind assumption that they had a good reason to search or seize. They must provide a good reason. If they can't, then it is unlawful.
He had several boxes containing nuclear documents.
He hasn't yet denied that he had the boxes at his home, as far as I know.
You don't get to steal classified nuclear documents from the White House and keep them in your unsecured basement for anyone to wander into and find.
What do you think would happen to you, as a regular old citizen of the USA, if you did the same thing?

Well, they did provide a good reason apparently, hence the search warrant they were able to obtain.
 
Top