Monday, August 8, 2022

Domestic Terrorism at Mar-a-Lago

 Domestic Terrorists, dressed as FBI agents looted the home of President Trump in Florida.

"My beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents," Trump said in a statement Monday evening.

Yep. They let the Bidens steal America, and raid the safe of the rightful President of the United States.


  1. Or, maybe Trump broke the law.

    1. Can't be. If the DOJ went after law breakers, the Bidens and the Clintons would be in prison.
      Must be political.

    2. Did anyone ever present any credible evidence to obtain a search warrant or such against the Bidens or Clintons?

      At this point, we really don’t know exactly what the FBI was looking for or why but there’s a lot of talk over mishandling classified documents. I suspect more will come out, most likely, bigly but again, my speculation.

      It is indeed interesting how conservatives went from “lock her up” over mishandled classified documents to now defaulting to defending Trump.

    3. The FBI is in possession of the laptop, the most damning evidence.
      Can't present evidence without a court case or a grand jury.
      Won't be a court case or a grand jury without a prosecutor that will initiate one.
      Glad I could explain how it works to you.

  2. Something about National Archives' recovering of White House records - which Trump had been cooperating with. Also it's interesting to note, the Judge that issued the warrant was the Florida federal magistrate judge who signed off on a search warrant is also linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Funny how things keep going back to Epstein and that list of names that would incriminate many of the politicians and officials we see now pushing to arrest and ruin Donald Trump.

    1. Bald-faced political persecution.
      Nothing demanding a 30 person team of domestic terrorists.


    Hard to get 'credible evidence' past a corrupt DOJ. Well, with Hillary we can start with "records show the chairman of Russian-owned Uranium One gave over $2 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation, which the Clintons’ didn’t disclose." Least that's how the NYT reported it. The same deal which garnered Bill, acting as the bag man, a half million $$$ for a 20 minute speech from a Kremlin connected bank as part of the deal package.

    While the Times could not declare this a 'crime' they at least admitted "the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy ..., presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.” In other words, selling state interests for personal gain. Well, they have lots of company, but hers is a very bad case of it.

    Trump's crime - other than a pugnacious NY persona - is thinking he could drain the swamp and steer policy in the best interests of the citizenry. This is a MESSAGE at best. At worst it's an attempt to smoke out others who might stand for his defense in constitutionally permissible ways the Marxists in power don't like. And ignite a false flag op to declare yet more "emergency powers" to squelch remaining dissent.

    And speaking of criminals, we have Birx quietly getting her book out, admitting they were full of sh*t and possibly carrying a back room get-out-of-jail-free-card in her back pocket. Karen Kingston, who has seen a LOT in her long career with pharma, believes "there are some things called non-prosecution agreements and plea bargaining when you are going to be brought in as an expert witness. . . . This would appear to be a plea-bargaining agreement from a legal perspective, I would say. So, this is why she is coming forward, and likely she is having her sentence reduced for coming forward and telling the American public the truth about what happened.”

    True? Dunno. Plausible? Quite. Believable? Entirely.

    1. I'm not a fan of Alex Jones, but he just lost a huge amount of money because someone said that something he said brought them harm, hurt their feelings.
      Birx and Fauci said some things that harmed a lot of people horrendously.

    2. Yes, agree totally. An apt comparison. Maybe WE felt bad hearing the stream of lies out of Fauci's mouth and watching our businesses evaporate and all my tenants move because of them. Gives one an idea. He's got dough.

  4. Link omitted:

  5. It was all political. 0biden's, et. el. are trying to turn us into their Banana Republic Utopia. I predict there will be bloodshed, probably on both sides.

  6. Welcome to the Banana States of America.....

  7. WOW Ed... Former President trump himself and through his lawyers has acknowledged having White House documents. Whether they are classified or not, I do not know.

    But simply having White House documents when you are no longer president, is itself a crime. A violation of the Presidential Records Act, a bipartisan law signed by President Carter in the aftermath of Watergate.

    As conservative judges, the SCOTUS and commentators have said for years to left leaning folks looking for relief from the courts, you may not like the laws, but they are the laws we have. If you don't like them, change them, but until then, we follow them.

    Why is this different?

    1. Dave, Dave, Dave.
      Even if it was, did it call for an armed raid with no oversight by Trump's lawyers and an order that video surveillance be turned off? Short answer: NO.
      And get back to me when Hillary turns over the emails.

  8. Ed... I think as a matter of policy, law enforcement takes guns with them whenever they serve a search warrant. As for the cameras, I'm sure they did that for safety as they have no faith Trump would not have publicized those tapes, broadcast the faces of agents and put their lives at risk from ppl angry at the DOJ for even searching Mar a Lago.

    As for Hillary, she was deposed by a GOP committee for over 8 hours under oath. She was investigated by the FBI, headed by a lifelong Republican. They undertook multiyear investigation into her conduct, and her staff, ran extensive forensics, and examining whether her actions allowed hostile actors to compromise U.S. security.

    And they decided, even the GOP Congressional Committee, that while what she did was wrong, it was not criminal. They did not feel they had evidence of intent to commit a crime to get a conviction.

    So it's apples and oranges.

    Except for this... in 2017, President Trump signed new law that made it a felony to even possess classified or top secret material, off site, without explicit government approval.

    So we're there...

    But the larger issue for me goes like this...

    Two things can be true at the same time. Or, yes, HRC got off. That does not mean we should excuse the behavior of Trump.

    Unless consistency does not matter.