Depends on the documents. "Mishandling" is also a nice suitcase term for, you know, "steal"... could even be hiding/destroying evidence. It may make for good martyr material for Trump (as if he needed more of that) but I don't want our institutions overly worried about campaigns in their decision-making. Institutional trust is at an all time low, especially among the right, because there's always a convenient excuse for bad behavior. "It was a plot by the (insert other duopoly party here)... and if it wasn't... it's still better than the alternative!"
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2022/08/mike-lee-lawyer-former-federal.html August 9, 2022 Mike Lee — lawyer, former federal prosecutor, and current member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — has a lot of questions about the Mar-a-Lago raid... ... so many that he lost count. I'll copy them all, and don't think I skipped one (he jumped from "Third" to "Fifth" [ADDED: and from "Tenth" to "Twelfth"]): As a lawyer, former federal prosecutor, and current member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have a few questions about the FBI’s raid of Mar a Lago. First, did Attorney General Garland personally sign off on this action? Second, why break into the safe rather than seize it, take it into custody, and then seek a warrant to open it? Third, why obtain and execute a search warrant rather than first seeking the items in question either through an informal process or with a subpoena? Fifth, perhaps there’s something here we don’t know—something that, once known, will clarify the reasons for the raid. If there is, FBI needs to bring forward the justification for this unprecedented action—as soon as possible. But if there isn’t, we’ve got problems at the FBI. Sixth, classification authority belongs to the president of the United States — and NOT to bureaucrats at the National Archives. Seventh, if this turns out to be the product of the growing political weaponization of federal law enforcement agencies, shouldn’t this incident cause all Americans to be even more outraged by the Democrats’ plan to hire an additional 87,000 agents? Eighth, how is this aggressive action defensible in light of the FBI/DOJ treatment of Hillary Clinton, who was never subjected to a raid like this, even though she (1) mishandled classified material, and (2) destroyed evidence? Ninth, what should we make of the fact that this is occurring while FBI and DOJ have taken no discernible action regarding (for example) flagrant violations of the law by (a) Hunter Biden, or (b) pro-abortion extremists threatening Supreme Court justices at their homes? Tenth, why should we assume that the FBI is above targeting Republicans when it creates documents like this one, which encourages agents to be suspicious of people who display the Betsy Ross Flag or the “don’t tread on me” Gadsden Flag? Twelfth, shouldn’t all Americans be suspicious of the FBI based on its use of warrantless “backdoor searches” under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (about which Christopher Wray expressed very little concern when I questioned him at last week’s hearing)? These questions should all have been thought of and considered in advance. What are the answers? Posted by Ann Althouse at 7:33 AM
Yes, law enforcement should solely decide enforcing the law based on how they think enforcing said law may affect the next election. Totally great way for them to operate.
Kind of depends on the nature of the classified material that he is withholding. It's breaking the law either way, but if it is pertinent to other on-going investigations around election fraud or orchestrating January 6th violence then I think a raid is pretty well justified.
Will anything come of this? I mean I know there are many who were duped into thinking Trump was definitely, 100% going to prison like 4 years ago, and I'm sure they think this will be the thing that takes him down. But beyond those people, does anyone think this will lead to anything real? I'm asking genuinely here because I have no clue (but I'm leaning towards this will be nothing major).
Right? Everybody jumps to their partisan battlestations immediately. I want to live in a country where our institutions aren't perceived as subject to partisan whims anymore.
Doing my best MojoMan™ impression. It's absolutely insane how Republican campaign strategy over the last 10 years has been 100% projection.
I seriously doubt they'd call for a raid solely on him just withholding documents. Almost certainly he was doing something bad with said documents (disclosing or selling them to someone he shouldn't have been) or refusing to give them up for an investigation or something like that if it warranted both the calling of a raid and the approval of a search warrant from a judge. They also definitely had some other sort of evidence to get that approved. Regardless though it's kind of a dumb exercise to speculate what it's about until there's official word. With people like Yang, the fact that we don't know yet allows him some prime opportunity to push his brand, that he can pretend both sides are bad and hes above it all
If the case against him sticks here he will be DQ'd from ever holding/running for federal office again. Would be a convenient excuse to retire and milk the whiny b**** crybaby narrative until he dies.
Hahahahah.... You mean THIS Mike Lee??? https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...donald-trump-mike-lee-capitol-police-1340867/ God bless you OsTrig always bringing in such unbias opinions to expand our minds on. I am 100% sure that Mike Lee has ALOT of questions about the Mar A Lago raid indeed.
this is the correct answer. Although it still may be a case of overreach given it's a former United States President we're talking about. As a constitutional case-in-the-making, this one will be fascinating for years to come
Do tell. Do you truly believe Trump is an innocent man? Do you believe he isn't involved in criminal activity?
TBF those questions are all pretty basic and probably all have very simple explanations to them. The fact this dude is rattling them off like he's just been pulled over and is late for work isn't really any criticism of the FBI, just looks like posturing.
I'd like to be optimistic that this **** stain never is able to hold office again, however, he appears to be able to dodge everything with the help of his republican comrades.
He already committed a crime when he took classified documents to his resort. This is a continuation of that case.
Should the arguments be considered without the context of the argumenters own personal stake in the argument? How would you be presenting arguments written in an Op Ed by Hunter Biden on the questions around the Durham Investigation started under AG Barr and Trump?? Would you as an unbias independent free thought promoter not think to mention that Hunter Biden might or might not have some involvement in the investigation??
