Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can PP who referenced the murder suicides in Russia post a link? Thanks.

DP, but here.
https://globalnews.ca/news/8790242/russian-oligarchs-suicides-ukraine/amp/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a tough spot. Iff a citizen is illegally storing nuclear secrets at their house, you take steps to secure them regardless of what the person’s last job might have been.

This. They had to get the warrant, and they had to retrieve the material. Part of me wonders if they’ll ever have strong enough case to press charges—He will deny and lie and if they can’t prove he knew the documents were in his possession, it will be difficult to charge him—but they secured the material and that’s what matters.

Unless his fingerprints are on the documents/boxes.

Anonymous wrote:Can PP who referenced the murder suicides in Russia post a link? Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have we talked about Rand Paul yet?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a tough spot. Iff a citizen is illegally storing nuclear secrets at their house, you take steps to secure them regardless of what the person’s last job might have been.

This. They had to get the warrant, and they had to retrieve the material. Part of me wonders if they’ll ever have strong enough case to press charges—He will deny and lie and if they can’t prove he knew the documents were in his possession, it will be difficult to charge him—but they secured the material and that’s what matters.

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a tough spot. Iff a citizen is illegally storing nuclear secrets at their house, you take steps to secure them regardless of what the person’s last job might have been.

Anonymous wrote:The feds have told Trump’s attorneys that they have found documents covered by attorney client privilege. What happens with those materials now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like Putin cultivating Trump as an asset might still be paying off for Russia.

Makes you wonder about all the recent Russian murder-suicides . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A GOP strategist on CNN was saying that Garland needs to indict Trump or resign, because the extraordinary step of searching a former President's home was too great not to have good reason to indict.

I could see his point, and I do believe Garland made the same calculation, but isn't the entire point of a warrant when you have reason enough to search, but are looking for the evidence to indict? So if the evidence isn't there, well you can't go on to that step, can you?

But the point was brought home that Garland is definitely risking a LOT. He can't do otherwise. It's a tough spot to be in.

What does the GOP strategist think about the FBI Director announcing a few weeks before a Presidential election that one nominee is under investigation and the eventually admitting there was nothing there; and meanwhile the other nominee also was being investigated but the FBI Director did not reveal that? That seems much worse than okaying the execution of a grand jury search warrant supported by evidence that a disgruntled former government employee with a documented history as a petulant security threat has taken Top Secret government files.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A GOP strategist on CNN was saying that Garland needs to indict Trump or resign, because the extraordinary step of searching a former President's home was too great not to have good reason to indict.

I could see his point, and I do believe Garland made the same calculation, but isn't the entire point of a warrant when you have reason enough to search, but are looking for the evidence to indict? So if the evidence isn't there, well you can't go on to that step, can you?

But the point was brought home that Garland is definitely risking a LOT. He can't do otherwise. It's a tough spot to be in.

What does the GOP strategist think about the FBI Director announcing a few weeks before a Presidential election that one nominee is under investigation and the eventually admitting there was nothing there; and meanwhile the other nominee also was being investigated but the FBI Director did not reveal that? That seems much worse than okaying the execution of a grand jury search warrant supported by evidence that a disgruntled former government employee with a documented history as a petulant security threat has taken Top Secret government files.