Eric Trump reveals HE told Donald FBI raided Mar-a-Lago: Ex-President's son claims agents 'ransacked

Why don't you want until you have all the facts before occupying a lofty self-righteous perch?

 

Ok.

 

Source for highlighted?

Your link:

The president says it's "harassment." Democrats say they're playing catch-up after two years with virtually no oversight from Republicans.

 

Oh dear, long on rhetoric and short on facts.

Do search warrants only get issued if the person behind the complaint meets your requirements and if so, what are those requirements?

I imagine that the person/s behind the complaint are very well aware of the power and influence of the person whose conduct they have complained about.

I imagine whoever swore the relevant Affidavit is very well aware of the power and influence of the person whose conduct they have sworn said affidavit about.

I imagine of head of the FBI is very well aware of the power and influence of the person whose conduct has been complained about.

I imagine the particular FBI Officers who obtained the Warrant are very well aware of the power and influence of the person whose conduct has been complained about.

I imagine the Judicial Officer who issues the Warrant is very well aware of the power and influence of the person whose conduct has been complained about.

They all would have been walking on eggshells, ensuring every i was dotted and t crossed, knowing there would be a furore when the matter arrived in the public domain.

In short, Elde Fruit, neither you nor I or anyone in www land are blessed with all the relevant information, and thus there is much speculation as is evidenced in your puff piece under reply.

 

They've moved on to Hunter Biden and the Laptop of Wonders.

 

So, you are diverting to something other than the circumstances around this warrant, and have red herringed some other matter. Okay. How about we talk about this Warrant?

 

Given the fact that even the National Archives has said Trump was corroborating with them your argument won't hold up in court. This was an obvious fishing expedition to "get" Trump over an "insurrection" on 1/6. It's the only thing that can prevent him from holding office.

 

Just based upon the Times assessment, the Muller report alone cost at least 35 million in tax payer moneys. With 50+ investigations, merely need to do the math to summarize that the cost to tax payers is astronomical.

https://time.com/5557693/mueller-report-cost/

But hey, if you have a better number, I'd love to see it.

 

Do I need to teach Trumpists the difference between gross costs and net costs again?

 

https://www.history.com/news/presidents-electoral-college-popular-vote

Since most states (48 plus Washington, D.C.) award all of their electoral votes to the person who wins the statewide popular vote, it’s mathematically possible to win more electoral votes while still losing the popular vote. For example, if one candidate wins by large percentages in a handful of very populous states, for example, they’ll probably win the popular vote. But if their opponent wins a bunch of smaller states by tight margins, he or she could still win the Electoral College. That’s basically what happened in 2016.


John Quincy Adams (1824) Democratic-Republican
Rutherford B. Hayes (1876) Republican
Benjamin Harrison (188 Republican
George W. Bush (2000) Republican
Donald Trump (2016) Republican

In a surprise victory that defied most pre-election polling, outsider Republican candidate Donald Trump beat Democrat Hillary Clinton, wife of the former president, Bill Clinton, despite the fact that Hillary Clinton received 2.8 million more votes in the popular vote—the largest such disparity yet.

Clinton performed very well in big cities and populous states like California and New York, where she beat Trump by 30 percentage points and 22.5 percentage points respectively. But Trump saw narrow victories in battleground states like Wisconsin (0.8 percent), Pennsylvania (0.7 percent) and Michigan (0.2 percent).

In the end, Trump may have lost the popular vote by millions, but he won the Electoral College convincingly with 304 electoral votes to Clinton’s 227.

 

Sure... Go for it. You've pretty much batting about a .100 at best right now. Good luck.

 

Didn't that happen already?
And yes, if one has broken laws, then the FBI or IRS should be involved if they have evidence.

 

https://www.history.com/news/presidents-electoral-college-popular-vote.

 

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...resident-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/

Constitutional powers supersedes Congressional acts. It's a separation of power thing.

 

Weird, you'd think if there were anything there, he'd have wanted to have the FBI look into it more? Oh right it was just a play to his low informed (uneducated he calls them) base. Hmm almost like the 11 investigations over Bennngaaaaaaazzzi might have been just political too?


Boehner’s likely successor credits Benghazi committee for lowering Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers


"Everybody though Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right?" McCarthy asked. "But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought."

"I give you credit for that," said Hannity. "I'll give you credit where credit is due."

...McCarthy's answer was indeed at odds with 16 months of Republican talking points on the investigation, led by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.). Whenever he was asked if the committee was political, outgoing Speaker of the House John Boehner typically expressed disgust at the mere suggestion. Democrats were talking politics while lifetime prosecutor Trey Gowdy was talking about events that led to the murders of four Americans.


"This is all about getting to the truth," Boehner said in May 2014. "This is not going to be a sideshow, this is not going to be a circus. This is going to be a serious investigation."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-for-lowering-hillary-clintons-poll-numbers/

Another Republican admits: Benghazi panel is political

In an interview with WIBX 950 in New York on Wednesday, moderate Republican Rep. Richard Hanna said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy was speaking the truth when he said this month that the committee had successfully injured Clinton. “Sometimes the biggest sin you can commit in D.C. is to tell the truth,” Hanna told the upstate New York radio station. “This may not be politically correct, but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton.”
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...an-admits-benghazi-panel-political-msna703166


Two years, $7 million, 800 pages later, GOP Benghazi report lands with a thud
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/t...s-later-gop-benghazi-report-lands-with-a-thud

 

The Raid: Difference Between Trump and Clinton.



"Any sitting POTUS has the intrinsic authority to declassify any classified material. That’s right. "

"Trump declassified any previously classified material that may have been in his possession in 2022."

Vile rogues. Solution is at the election box.

 

So far, the only crowd to try and stop, well change, political participation and the voters will, have been trump and those he convinced about his lie of a stolen election.
They even went so far as to raid the Capitol during the counting process to stop the count.

 

It doesn’t take 2 years to turn over docs

 

More likely they leaked fake info because they knew that as usual it would be jumped at and they would look stupid when nothing comes out of it and thus convincing more and more people that the narcissistic con man is actually victim

Ultimately this will help Trump get re-elected not hurt him

 

Trump's base is predictably acting all violent and terroristic in response to this:


The same radical right extremists and domestic terrorists who "stormed" the Capitol, in their own words, want to "lock and load" and get violent again because Dear Leader's tropical resort was raided.

 

Nor should it take three years to investigate a laptop.

 

MSNBC.....lolz! I see the propaganda machine is in full BS mode.

 

NOPE! Nothing there to back up your claim that tRaitor tRump investigations have cost "hundreds of millions of dollars", no reference to any cost.

 

Did it take five years for someone to turn over the laptop after they were told it was illegal for them to keep it? If so, you have a good comparison. If not, your argument is full of ****.

 

Will you obsess over the FSB laptop for as long as you've obsessed over Clinton's emails?