• 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 executes search warrant at Mar-a-Lago

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Did you ever stop and think that some people may have joined the protest for ulterior motives, such as what we also saw in the 60's and 70's during the anti-war protests?

BLM does not teach that violence should be used, although one of the founding members did try and justify its use.
I would say that there is no one single BLM platform. There are and were all sorts of BLM beliefs. Some of them very violent. Those on the right are correct that the narrative against the police was largely false. Not always, but largely. There are some clear abuses, but black people are often more likely to be one the receiving end of attention from the police because their economic situation makes them more likely to be both offenders and victims. And then there is the perceived "us against them" mentality of both sides.

The police situation is largely a mess because cities got to cheap and sent out hammers to deal with all of their social problems. The weaponization of police occurred largely because it was a way to save money. Well guess what? Weaponization only solves problems in one way. And it is not a good one. A mental health expert would be nice for many problems with police backup on hand would be ideal for many problems that the police face. But that is going to make policing much more expensive.

What I think will happen is that the populace as a whole will get tired of n excessively high crime rate and we will be back to business as usual.. Perhaps even made slightly worse when it comes to violence due to the underfunding of police departments and the continued policy of using hammers to solve all problems.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
There is no question that Trump is a caustic person who should never be in the WH again! But some of those wild claims that the Leftist media dismissed early on turned out to be true. There was an FBI lawyer convicted of altering documents between the CIA and FBI! FISA court abuse is now widely documented! There was bugging of Trump towers in an attempt to damage Trump. (R)'s get about 4% of the vote in Washington DC and (D)'s dominate the bedroom communities around Washington. The Fed-gov IS a (D) dominated institution.
Yes, and both the FBI and CIA have been problematic since the beginning of them (shortly after WWII). CIA is responsible for interfering in the affairs of other nations -- without permission from the US public or our knowledge. FBI was spying on senators from the beginning.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Yes, and both the FBI and CIA have been problematic since the beginning of them (shortly after WWII). CIA is responsible for interfering in the affairs of other nations -- without permission from the US public or our knowledge. FBI was spying on senators from the beginning.
Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
 

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
You noticed the weaponization of the FBI as well against political opponents of the left wing. How many times has raids been used on Republicans thus far?

The Left has been using intimidation and violence to advance their agenda for years in America. What's scary is that the Right has finally had enough and is willing to do the same. And don't forget, the left attempted to unseat an elected president with a fake Russian collusion conspiracy based on a spurious dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign. They've done everything they could to get Trump out of the way, this is just more of the same by a corrupt FBI.

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI

The FBI investigating political figures will always have partisan pushback.

I will be curious about what is found and how this plays out. I am no fan of Trump, so am biased in this regard. But if evidence is found, evidence is found.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
And there were consequences for that. If Trump did the same then he will probably not be able to run again since one of the punishments for the crime of a President illegally removing documents from the White House is an inability to run for President again.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System — FBI

The FBI investigating political figures will always have partisan pushback.

I will be curious about what is found and how this plays out. I am no fan of Trump, so am biased in this regard. But if evidence is found, evidence is found.
It's a fair enough statement. However Democrats have a poor track record for finding any evidence, assuming said evidence even exists.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It's a fair enough statement. However Democrats have a poor track record for finding any evidence, assuming said evidence even exists.
What makes you say that? They found more than enough evidence to impeach and convict Trump in his first impeachment. That is why the Republicans that were in charge of the trial part did not allow the presentation of any evidence at all against Trump.

They knew that if the evidence was presented that Trump would lose. They stopped that from happening and he still lost his reelection bid.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
And there were consequences for that. If Trump did the same then he will probably not be able to run again since one of the punishments for the crime of a President illegally removing documents from the White House is an inability to run for President again.
Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
That citizens fear brutish, violent men is a natural reaction. Now the behavior is being justified and tolerated by soft on crime (D)'s all over America.
If "soft on crime" means to act fairly towards all, then I'm on board. There should be no doubt whatsoever that justice is NOT blind when it comes to how minorities have been treated by our judicial system.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Those on the right are correct that the narrative against the police was largely false. Not always, but largely.
I'm glad you clarified this in the last sentence above.

The police situation is largely a mess because cities got to cheap and sent out hammers to deal with all of their social problems. The weaponization of police occurred largely because it was a way to save money. Well guess what? Weaponization only solves problems in one way. And it is not a good one. A mental health expert would be nice for many problems with police backup on hand would be ideal for many problems that the police face. But that is going to make policing much more expensive.
So well said, imo.

What I think will happen is that the populace as a whole will get tired of n excessively high crime rate and we will be back to business as usual.. Perhaps even made slightly worse when it comes to violence due to the underfunding of police departments and the continued policy of using hammers to solve all problems.
I hope your prediction is wrong, but... :shrug:
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.
I was not a "fake dossier" as it has been misrepresented continuously by the right.

Steele got intelligence about Trump from both Russian and Dutch sources, but he couldn't verify it and he stated as such. Obama was informed of this but chose not to go public with it, especially since the 2016 election was drawing near.

BTW, the RNC was financing it before they abandoned it after Trump got the nomination, so the DNC picked it up but they also couldn't verify it.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Remember that time when national security advisor Sandy Berger smuggled documents out of the National Archive and destroyed them?
I just looked it up. The washington post still has an article about him being fined in 2005. He was trying to get rid of records "...about the Clinton administration's response to reports of terrorist threats in 2000 as he was preparing to respond to questions from the commission..." He would have been better off facing the commission. He lost his law license and 50,000$.
Which is fine by me, he's a mental case. They investigated the fake Russia dossier, paid for by the DNC, for his entire presidency. Some see this as more of the same political witch-hunt. It sets a terrible precedent going forward.
Which bit everyone in the butt when he was impeached for something impeachable. From the time he was elected many would-be influencers never stopped talking about impeaching him. The same happened during the previous six or so presidencies. I remember people always talking about impeaching bush, clinton and bush. I remember hearing Rush Limbaugh during Clinton's first term saying the country was held hostage.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
I was not a "fake dossier" as it has been misrepresented continuously by the right.

Steele got intelligence about Trump from both Russian and Dutch sources, but he couldn't verify it and he stated as such. Obama was informed of this but chose not to go public with it, especially since the 2016 election was drawing near.

BTW, the RNC was financing it before they abandoned it after Trump got the nomination, so the DNC picked it up but they also couldn't verify it.
Dang! I was so hoping that our Trump-trumpeter got at least something right. Some folks just cant get a break. :(
What did I get wrong?


Unauthorized removal and destruction of classified material[edit]

The National Archives building in Washington, D.C.
On July 19, 2004, it was revealed that the United States Department of Justice was investigating Berger for unauthorized removal of classified documents in October 2003 from a National Archives reading room prior to testifying before the 9/11 Commission. The documents were five classified copies of a single report commissioned from Richard Clarke covering internal assessments of the Clinton Administration's handling of the unsuccessful 2000 millennium attack plots. An associate of Berger said Berger took one copy in September 2003 and four copies in October 2003, allegedly by stuffing the documents into his socks and pants.[20][21] Berger subsequently lied to investigators when questioned about the removal of the documents.[22]

In April 2005, Berger pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material from the National Archives in Washington, D.C.[23]

Berger was fined $50,000,[24] sentenced to serve two years of probation and 100 hours of community service, and stripped of his security clearance for three years.[22][25] The Justice Department initially said Berger only stole copies of classified documents and not originals,[26] but the House Government Reform Committee later revealed that an unsupervised Berger had been given access to classified files of original, uncopied, uninventoried documents on terrorism. During the House Government Reform Committee hearings, Nancy Kegan Smith — who was the director of the presidential documents staff at the National Archives and Records Administration — acknowledged that she had granted Berger access to original materials in her office.[27]

On December 20, 2006, Inspector General Paul Brachfeld reported that Berger took a break to go outside without an escort. "In total, during this visit, he removed four documents ... Mr. Berger said he placed the documents under a trailer in an accessible construction area outside Archives 1 (the main Archives building)". Berger acknowledged having later retrieved the documents from the construction area and returned with them to his office.[28][29]

On May 17, 2007, Berger relinquished his license to practice law as a result of the Justice Department investigation. Saying, "I have decided to voluntarily relinquish my license. ... While I derived great satisfaction from years of practicing law, I have not done so for 15 years and do not envision returning to the profession. I am very sorry for what I did, and I deeply apologize." By giving up his license, Berger avoided cross-examination by the Bar Counsel regarding details of his thefts.[30]
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Thus, Berger was prosecuted. So, should Trump be exempt?
No, I didn't say Trump should be exempt. Trump may not have wanted his document accidently stolen and destroyed by (D)'s going into the archives and accidently slipping them into ones socks.
 
Top