Go here to read the story. The alleged dispute over documents between Trump and the National Archives is a complete red herring. No one really cares about it, as Presidents routinely in the past have taken tons of documents with them, most of which end up eventually in their Mausoleums of Vanity Presidential Libraries. The raid about the documents was all pretextual so the FBI and the DOJ could go on a huge fishing expedition in their never ending hunt for the Great Orange President. That is why the decision by the Judge to appoint a special master and to unilaterally reveal more of the documents stolen by the FBI is a body blow to this effort. The Deep State never accepted Trump as President and actively warred against him, and continue to war against him. This type of criminal action against an elected President make our democratic pretensions seem like a huge con game perpetrated on the American people to convince them that they have a power, to choose their own rulers, that they do not in fact possess.
They are following orders.
The DoJ, FBLie, ATF, et al are cadres of the Democrats’ police force.
The DoJ, FBLie, ATF, et al are cadres of the Democrats’ police force.
Nonsense, and worse it’s nonsense that objectively even the idiots above don’t buy into. (They obviously thought they’d have more cover, though.)
You don’t hide that there’s going to be a warrant served from the local field office if they’re on your side.
There’s an active effort to make sure everyone who isn’t progressive “knows” that “everyone” is against them. Remember the sound-barrier breaking from the moving goal posts a week or three ago?
These guys don’t have the support they need, and there’s only so long they can cheat. Wounded animals are dangerous, but if this was, oh, the mid-90s– would we even hear about this in less than a year?
Or would this release of documents be totally hidden in a few backwater specialized reports, rather than being spun on the front page of the New York
Slimes Times?(I’m dying, here, they’re spinning it as “experts” and “specialists” saying that requiring them to show they actually have a right to these documents ‘could slow the document investigation’… twits, that’s what you’re supposed to show before you take the documents!)
Another place had some Berkley legal “expert” saying he had no idea how “likelihood” could be used in a legal opinion.
…
:facepalm:
Yet another example of the “actually do your job and appoint judges” thing bearing fruit!
https://ballotpedia.org/Aileen_Cannon