What's new

Donald Trump - President of the USA's legal troubles

A US judge has ordered investigators to release a redacted version of court papers that convinced him to authorise a search of Donald Trump's estate.

The public version of the affidavit, a document that includes the evidence gathered by prosecutors, could reveal new details about the inquiry.

The Department of Justice had opposed releasing an uncensored version amid its ongoing investigation.

The FBI search was part of a probe into the potential mishandling of documents.

According to the search warrant, the FBI wanted to see if Mr Trump committed a crime by improperly handling government records when he took them from the White House to Mar-a-Lago as his administration ended.

US presidents are required to transfer documents and emails to the National Archives when they leave office.

The former US president has denied wrongdoing and insists the classified files that investigators say were found in Florida had already been declassified by himself.

On Thursday, US Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart ordered the affidavit to be released with redactions by noon (16:00 GMT) on Friday.

He said prosecutors had demonstrated a "compelling reason" to black out parts of the document, which would reveal the identities of witnesses, law enforcement agents and uncharged parties, as well as "the investigation's strategy, direction, scope, sources and methods".

His ruling came shortly after the justice department confirmed that it had submitted to the judge a copy of the affidavit with proposed redactions.

Even in redacted form, the affidavit could provide clues as to why Mr Trump allegedly took classified documents with him in the chaotic final days of his presidency and what he did with them while they were stored in Palm Beach.

The rest may have to wait for when - or if - any criminal charges are filed.

The warrant itself was released on 12 August alongside an inventory of recovered items that showed 11 sets of classified files were removed from the estate.

Several news organisations have applied for the affidavit to be unsealed, citing public interest given the historic nature of the search of a former president's home.

The Department of Justice, however, had resisted the move, arguing that its release could cause "irreparable damage" to its ongoing investigation. It also said the necessary redactions would render the document "meaningless".

Mr Trump and his lawyers - who have characterised the Mar-a-Lago search as politically motivated and unlawful - have called for the unredacted affidavit to be released.

A spokesman for Mr Trump, Taylor Budowich, said that efforts to "hide" its contents were "cynical" and could be used to "hide government corruption".

Earlier this week, Mr Trump's legal team asked that the investigation be frozen and that an independent third-party attorney, known as a special master, be brought in to oversee the documents that the FBI took during the search.

BBC
 
Trump's problem this time around has no easy way out.

1. He is not the President of the USA.
2. The items found in his house are not his property, they are the property of the National Archives.
3. He has no authority to take them.
4. The items have been missing, and his lawyers denied that he had them.
5. In effect, they are stolen property, and they were found in his private residence.

It's going to prove awfully difficult to prove that it was not Donald Trump who stole these items.
 
Uncle Trump is in a bit of a DooDO. I think he will either get pardoned or house arrest. NOT GOING TO A PRISON
 
Donald Trump took classified documents - some marked top secret - home to his Mar-a-Lago residence, an FBI affidavit has revealed.

The 32-page document, even in its redacted form, contains additional details about an ongoing criminal investigation into Mr Trump as he lays the groundwork for another presidential run.

Released by the US Justice Department, it highlights the amount of sensitive government documents that Mr Trump had taken to Mar-a-Lago and FBI concerns that the records were retained illegally.

While there are a number of details relating to the investigation, officials also redacted large chunks to protect the identity of witnesses and to avoid revealing sensitive investigative tactics.

"The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorised spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records," an FBI agent wrote on the first page of the affidavit in seeking a judge's permission for a warrant to search the property

The affidavit does not provide new details about the 11 sets of classified records recovered during the 8 August search at Mar-a-Lago.

However, it described a separate batch of 15 boxes that the National Archives and Records Administration received from the home in January - a year after he had left the White House.

In those boxes, according to the affidavit, officials located 184 documents bearing classification markings, including 67 marked as confidential, 92 secret and 25 top secret.

Agents who inspected the boxes found markings related to information provided by confidential human sources as well as information related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

The agent said the Justice Department had reason to believe there were more such records that had not been returned to the government still sitting inside Mr Trump's home.

The FBI submitted the affidavit to a judge so it could obtain a warrant to search Mr Trump's property on 8 August.

"Judge Bruce Reinhart should NEVER have allowed the Break-In of my home. He recused himself two months ago from one of my cases based on his animosity and hatred of your favorite President, me.

"What changed? Why hasn't he recused himself on this case? Obama must be very proud of him right now!"

SKY
 
The curtain of secrecy has been pulled back ever so slightly on the investigation into Donald Trump's handling of classified documents and presidential records at Mar-a-Lago. Even with all the redactions, the picture revealed should be concerning to the former president.

The public now has its first look at the court papers the US justice department used to obtain a search warrant for Mr Trump's Florida home. At least, part of it. And not the juiciest parts.

As expected, the document was heavily redacted by the justice department, with the approval of the judge who'd also signed off the unprecedented search by FBI agents on 8 August.

But the affidavit did provide an outline of the relevant laws in the case and described its work as "a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorised spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records".

That last little tidbit was further expanded later in the affidavit, as the government wrote that it had reason to believe it would find evidence of obstruction of justice in its Mar-a-Lago search.

How big are Trump's legal problems?

The affidavit also detailed the material kept at the seafront golf club that Mr Trump had already provided to the National Archives at the start of the year - albeit only after what the document described as repeated requests over more than six months.

Those boxes contained a random assortment of newspaper clippings, magazines and photos - but also 184 classified documents, including 25 marked "Top Secret", according to investigators.

The affidavit said that there was reasonable evidence to believe that there were more classified documents on the premises and that they were also stored in an unsecure location.

This may have been of particular concern to the government, given that there have already been instances where foreign nationals have gained access to Mar-a-Lago - with the most recent report being of a Ukrainian entering the estate in May 2021, meeting with associates of the former president and even posing for a golf-course photo with Mr Trump and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham.

This is a serious criminal investigation. It's not just about who gets to keep some presidential mementoes and souvenirs, it concerns the security of closely guarded US government secrets - ones involving human intelligence gathering, foreign surveillance and perhaps even court-authorised surveillance of US citizens.

There is still no indication, in the affidavit or elsewhere, as to why Mr Trump removed the allegedly sensitive documents from the White House and why he had been so reluctant to give them over to investigators when originally requested.

Why was so much of the document redacted?

About half of the 38-page document was redacted by the government, including entire pages in some cases. Some Republicans have pointed to this as evidence that the justice department is being insufficiently forthcoming and that there are uncomfortable details in the document it would prefer not to see the light of day.

In a separate filing, however, the justice department explained the reasoning behind its rescissions. Removed from the document was information about federal agents involved in the case and government witnesses who, if their identities were exposed, the justice department said could be subjected to "retaliation, intimidation or harassment, and even threats to their physical safety".

If current witnesses had their identities exposed, the government continued, it could discourage future individuals coming forward to share information relevant to the investigation.

Other redactions were made to prevent, in the government words, providing "a roadmap for anyone intent on obstructing the investigation".

The justice department wrote that it also was wary of revealing too much about the investigation for fear of giving out a "roadmap that could be used to obstruct the justice department's work".

For an affidavit like this to be unsealed, even in a heavily redacted form, is unusual. But this is not a usual case.

What happens next?

Now the justice department investigators will go back to work behind closed doors where they will continue to review the documents removed - working along with intelligence agencies to determine if national security has been compromised. Investigators also hinted about the possibility of reaching out to new witnesses.

We may not hear more in this case until a decision is made on whether to bring any criminal charges for mishandling of presidential records or classified material, or obstruction of justice.

The legal battles over the 8 August search of Mr Trump's Florida residence haven't quite concluded, however.

The former president's lawsuit requesting an independent "special master" review of the seized items is still pending, although the judge in that case has already expressed some scepticism about the request.

That lawsuit could lead to a pause in the investigation while a review is done to ensure no documents were seized that should be protected by attorney-client privilege.

And Mr Trump's public-relations campaign against the justice department and the investigation goes on. He's called it a "witch hunt" and has inflated the scope of his lawsuit, claiming that he was challenging the constitutionality of the search itself (he wasn't).

He has claimed that all this is an attempt to prevent him from continuing to engage in national politics, although as he's travelling the US to hold political rallies and continues to fan speculation of a future presidential bid, there is little evidence that he is at all deterred.

BBC
 
A photo showing top secret documents uncovered during an FBI search of Donald Trump's Florida home has been released.

It comes as the US Justice Department claims it has uncovered efforts to obstruct its investigation into the discovery of classified documents at the former president's Mar-a-Lago estate.

The image, released in a court filing, showed cover pages of several paper-clip bound classified documents, some of which are marked as "top secret//sci" with bright yellow borders, spread out on the floor

One can be seen labelled as "secret//sci" with a rust-coloured border, along with pages that have been blanked out.

Beside them was a cardboard box filled with gold-framed pictures, including a Time Magazine cover which features Mr Trump alongside a number of other world leaders.

The filing by the department states that "government records were likely concealed or removed" from a storage room even after Mr Trump's representatives had told officials they had thoroughly searched the property.

The FBI carried out a raid on the estate on 8 August as part of an investigation into whether Mr Trump took classified records from the White House.

Officers seized 33 boxes containing more than 100 classified records during the search and found three confidential documents stashed in office drawers, the latest filing also revealed.

Investigators conducting the criminal probe have focused not just on why the records were stored at the estate, but also on whether the Trump team intentionally misled them about the unlawful presence of government secrets.

The document sheds new details on the events of this past May and June, when FBI and justice department officials issued a subpoena for the missing records and then visited a storage room at the property.

During that June visit, the filing states Mr Trump's lawyers told investigators all the records that had come from the White House were kept in the storage room.

They also said "there were no other records stored in any private office space or other location on the premises and that all available boxes were searched".

However, the justice department then said it had "developed evidence that government records were likely concealed and removed from the storage room and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct" the investigation.

Mr Trump's legal team have asked for a special master to review the files, with a US district judge set to hear arguments on the matter soon.

Lawyers have asked for the appointment to be made so there is someone responsible for looking over the documents and setting aside those protected by claims of legal privilege.

The judge has said it is her "preliminary intent" to appoint such a person, but also gave the Department of Justice an opportunity to respond.

On Monday, the department said it had already reviewed the files and only identified a "limited set of materials that potentially contain" privileged information.


https://news.sky.com/story/donald-t...former-us-presidents-mar-a-lago-home-12685820
 
So, to sum up.

Hundreds of classified documents were stolen from the US government.

The former President in June denied that he had the stolen documents.

A judge authorised a raid on his house, where the stolen documents were found.

There is no plausible defence, so his lawyers are arguing that he had declassified the documents, which fails to address their theft.
 
Lawyers for Donald Trump have argued that the storage of sensitive files at his Florida home "should have never been cause for alarm".

His legal team said the FBI search this month was "unprecedented, unnecessary, and legally unsupported".

Their filing comes on the eve of a court hearing about Mr Trump's call for a third-party official to oversee the evidence taken from Mar-a-Lago.

Officials say the search was necessary due to obstruction by the Trump team.

The 19-page legal filing posted by the former president's team on Wednesday night did not respond to the justice department claims of obstruction.

Upon leaving office, US presidents must transfer all of their documents and emails to the National Archives, which maintains historic White House records.

Mr Trump's legal team contended he had been engaged in a "standard give-and-take" with the National Archives over the return of his files when the search warrant was executed.

"There is no question... that the matters before this court centre around the possession, by a president, of his own presidential records," says the court filing.

Apparently classified files on the floor of Trump's Mar-a-Lago office in the 8 August search, released by the Department of Justice
His lawyers argue: "The notion that Presidential records would contain sensitive information should have never been cause for alarm."

The court filing came less than 24 hours after the justice department alleged that Mr Trump's aides had probably tried to conceal secret documents inside the West Palm Beach estate.

A National Archives team visited the seafront golf club in January and retrieved 15 boxes of White House records that contained "highly classified reports", said the filing.

The justice department began investigations which found evidence that "dozens of additional boxes" probably containing sensitive material still remained at Mar-a-Lago.

On 3 June, three FBI agents and a justice department lawyer arrived at Mar-a-Lago to collect materials, but were "explicitly prohibited" by Mr Trump's representatives from searching any boxes inside a storage room at the property, according to the 54-page filing.

Evidence was also found that records were "likely concealed and removed" from the storage area and that efforts were "likely taken" to obstruct the investigation, officials said.

On Thursday, a judge will hold a hearing on whether an independent legal official known as a special master should be appointed to oversee the evidence and determine whether any of it is protected under executive privilege - a rule which shields some presidential documents.

The justice department has argued that a special master is not necessary, given that it says most of the evidence has already been inspected by investigators.

In Wednesday's court papers, Mr Trump's lawyers accused the justice department of "gratuitously" including a photograph in its Tuesday filing of "allegedly classified materials" that had been "pulled from a container and spread across the floor for dramatic effect".

"Left unchecked, the DOJ will impugn, leak, and publicize selective aspects of their investigation," Mr Trump's lawyers wrote, arguing why a special master was necessary.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62747381
 
Trump’s handling of this theft of classified secrets scandal is starting to hurt the Republican Party, which I would normally support from afar.

I would describe US political affiliation as follows:

Democrat 40%
Traditional moderate Republican 30%
Trump base 10%
Floating centrist voters 20%.

Trump is using his usual counter-attacking tactics to try to convince his base that he ie being persecuted, when the reality is that any other American - including both Clinton’s or Obama - would be in jail if they stole Classified Top Secret documents and kept them at their home.

The two problems now are:

1. Traditional moderate Republicans and floating voters are horrified that a former President would have stolen classified documents in his possession that he had no authority to treat as his own property.

2. Traditional Republicans and floating voters are horrified by calls of “Defund the FBI” and by the sight of legal documents saying:

“Donald Trump v United States of America”.

I think the Senate is now a lost cause in the November mid-term elections.

We have reached a point at which electrifying the Trump base serves only to drive the floating voters into the Democrat camp.
 
Junaids said:
.. the reality is that any other American - including both Clinton’s or Obama - would be in jail if they stole Classified Top Secret documents and kept them at their home.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right!

This line cracked me up.

You clearly do not know much about corruption and connections of the Clintons.
 
Last edited:
sweep_shot said:
Yeah, right!

This line cracked me up.

You clearly do not know much about corruption and connections of the Clintons.
Click to expand...
Clearly I don’t.

Because the Clinton server was a duplication of material. Whereas the secrets at Mar-a-Lago were stolen and not replaced.
 
I am no Trump supporter. I condemn his decision to move Israeli embassy to Jerusalem.

But, it seems like deep state wants to keep their chosen politicians in power. They don't want an unstable guy like Trump to mess up their plan. That's what it seems like.
 
Yes folks, Trump managed to ‘steal’ the only copies of confidential material in existence cos they were written by hand and not printed! :)))

Trumpism is on the rise, he is still packing out rallys like over sold rock concerts, while senile Joe and his side kick VP are reliant on green screens.
 
Technics 1210 said:
Yes folks, Trump managed to ‘steal’ the only copies of confidential material in existence cos they were written by hand and not printed! :)))

Trumpism is on the rise, he is still packing out rallys like over sold rock concerts, while senile Joe and his side kick VP are reliant on green screens.
Click to expand...

What is really phony about this entire situation is the fact they are going after Trump now. Why not before?

Is it because of the upcoming midterm election?

Trump would probably win if there is an election now and he is the candidate.
 
sweep_shot said:
What is really phony about this entire situation is the fact they are going after Trump now. Why not before?

Is it because of the upcoming midterm election?

Trump would probably win if there is an election now and he is the candidate.
Click to expand...

Liberals are afraid of Trump and simply would do anything by any means necessary to prevent him returning from office. If Trump had served his 2 terms, liberals would be crying about something else.

Meanwhile Republicans agree that Trump is the Ace card to win both Mid terms, and next GE.

Such is the power and gravitas of Trump. He is literally a king maker in Amreekan politics right now.
 
He’s going to face a federal indictment. Perhaps for this - which carries a penalty of ten years in jail per infraction:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

As for re-election, his rally supporters will never change but the swing voters will hear a steady drip-drip on the news which will render a second term impossible.
 
sweep_shot said:
What is really phony about this entire situation is the fact they are going after Trump now. Why not before?

Is it because of the upcoming midterm election?

Trump would probably win if there is an election now and he is the candidate.
Click to expand...
They asked for the stolen documents back in January.

He lied in June in response to a subpoena in May, stating that all documents had been returned. Nobody else would have been treated so courteously or deferentially.

His problem is that the lies that he had returned all the stolen documents were in a sworn affidavit by his lawyer. And she has clearly become a witness against him.

The midterms will actually prevent him from being indicted before December.

Which is terrible for the Republicans, who will be saddled with him as a lame duck 2024 presidential candidate. And being attacked not just by the Dems, but by Real Republicans like Liz Cheney in the GOP primaries.
 
sweep_shot said:
What is really phony about this entire situation is the fact they are going after Trump now. Why not before?

Is it because of the upcoming midterm election?

Trump would probably win if there is an election now and he is the candidate.
Click to expand...
The damage to the Republicans in the midterms is CAUSED by Trump.

Sarah Palin even lost her Alaska vote yesterday. Alaska!

The Senate is currently 50-50, but the hopeless Trump candidates like Dr Oz will convert this to a 48-52 loss.

The House is currently 220-211 in favour of the Dems, which I think will finished pretty much even. The problem here is that the Supreme Court abortion decision is a real problem in suburban America. Which is also Trump’s fault!
 
Technics 1210 said:
Meanwhile Republicans agree that Trump is the Ace card to win both Mid terms, and next GE.

Such is the power and gravitas of Trump. He is literally a king maker in Amreekan politics right now.
Click to expand...
Actually Trump is the Democrat's most effective weapon.

The Republicans were 5% ahead in midterm polling until Trump started to float the idea of announcing a 2024 campaign six weeks ago.

Now that 5% lead has turned into a 3% deficit. Trump has basically created an 8% swing against the Republicans in 6 weeks.

You need to understand the specific mechanics of how the Senate and the House elections work.

In terms of the Senate, candidate quality counts. And some Trump selections to run for the Senate - notably Dr Oz in Pennsylvania and Herschel Walker in Georgia - are so unelectable that they will gift their seats to the Democrats.

The House is different. In the Senate, the Christian right delivers 16 of the 100 seats from sparsely populated states like Wyoming, Idaho, the 2 Dakotas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Montana and Utah.

But the House reflects where people actually live, and what they believe. And the question which matters for the House is "what would a College-educated 35 year old married woman in the Philadelphia suburbs vote for?

And the diet of Guns, God and No Abortion does not play well to that audience. Those messages excite uneducated rednecks in Nebraska, but not educated professionals in cities.

Trump has nothing but contempt for his base, as we all know, but the problem is that we saw in 2020 that the more he plays to his base, the more he drives floating voters and moderate Republicans to Biden.

Traditional Republicans working as professionals, with a dual-income of $200,000 and a mortgage for a $700,000 house in the Philly suburbs don't think of Trump as "our guy". They liked the Bushes, they loved Reagan and they actually like Liz Cheney more than Donald Trump.

They are horrified by a potential Republican presidential candidate, even an ardent (and arguably vexatious) litigant suing the United States of America.

They are horrified at crazy claims like "Defund the FBI" or "The IRS are sending out armed goons to raid your small business at the end of a machine gun".

Trump alienates those voters. It's why he lost the popular vote in both 2016 and 2020 and also lost the Senate in 2020.

I think the Democrats are praying that he is the Republican nominee. They are scared of DeSantis, but they know that they can beat Trump.
 
Junaids said:
Actually Trump is the Democrat's most effective weapon.

The Republicans were 5% ahead in midterm polling until Trump started to float the idea of announcing a 2024 campaign six weeks ago.
Click to expand...

Yeah yeah, we've all seen such stats, these are meaningless as proven with Brexit, 2016 USA election, etc.

More recently, Kari Lake's win as GOP primary for Arizona governor.

The only result matters is on the day, political predictions and polls are pointless in this day and age.
 
Junaids said:
Actually Trump is the Democrat's most effective weapon.

The Republicans were 5% ahead in midterm polling until Trump started to float the idea of announcing a 2024 campaign six weeks ago.

Now that 5% lead has turned into a 3% deficit. Trump has basically created an 8% swing against the Republicans in 6 weeks.

I think the Democrats are praying that he is the Republican nominee. They are scared of DeSantis, but they know that they can beat Trump.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right. I'm just following pollsters.

I accept that there is a difference between people who think WWE is real and come to his rallies, and sensible Republican voters who believe in decency and standards of professional conduct. Now they have seen his true face, he won't be President again.

And the abortion ban is obviously key.
 
FBI found dozens of empty classified files at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home

The discovery raises questions over whether there are secret government papers that have not yet been found.

Empty folders marked as “classified” were among more than 11,000 documents recovered from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, a new court filing has revealed, raising questions over whether there are still government papers that have not been found.

FBI agents who searched the former President’s home last month found 48 empty folders marked as containing classified information as well as 40 more empty folders that they said contained sensitive documents the user should “return to staff secretary/military aide.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...mpty-classified-files-donald-trumps-mar-lago/

Democrats and Liberals must be imploding right now.

:)))
 
Technics 1210 said:
FBI found dozens of empty classified files at Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home

The discovery raises questions over whether there are secret government papers that have not yet been found.

Empty folders marked as “classified” were among more than 11,000 documents recovered from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, a new court filing has revealed, raising questions over whether there are still government papers that have not been found.

FBI agents who searched the former President’s home last month found 48 empty folders marked as containing classified information as well as 40 more empty folders that they said contained sensitive documents the user should “return to staff secretary/military aide.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-n...mpty-classified-files-donald-trumps-mar-lago/

Democrats and Liberals must be imploding right now.

:)))
Click to expand...

Imploding?

I think the non-Trump base - even mainstream Republican supporters like me - are split between those who think that:

Option 1: Trump is a shallow, vain halfwit who was always a spoiled brat and has just assumed that “l’etat, c’est moi”.

Or

Option 2: Trump was corrupted by the Russians long ago, and there is a straight line from his first impeachment (trying to extort Zelensky in a protection racket) to the missing documents - the theory would be that Trump was passing them American secrets all along. There is no proof of this, but we are obviously all wondering whether this could be the case.

But it shows how low Trump’s standing has fallen that these seem to be the only two options to explain why stolen classified property of the USA was found in a private citizen’s residence - and why further secrets are STILL missing.
 
Junaids said:
Imploding?

I think the non-Trump base - even mainstream Republican supporters like me - are split between those who think that:

Option 1: Trump is a shallow, vain halfwit who was always a spoiled brat and has just assumed that “l’etat, c’est moi”.

Or

Option 2: Trump was corrupted by the Russians long ago, and there is a straight line from his first impeachment (trying to extort Zelensky in a protection racket) to the missing documents - the theory would be that Trump was passing them American secrets all along. There is no proof of this, but we are obviously all wondering whether this could be the case.

But it shows how low Trump’s standing has fallen that these seem to be the only two options to explain why stolen classified property of the USA was found in a private citizen’s residence - and why further secrets are STILL missing.
Click to expand...

Option 3: Option 1 plus Option 2.

Putin saw his weakness for flattery and played him like a banjo.
 
Technics 1210 said:
Yes folks, Trump managed to ‘steal’ the only copies of confidential material in existence cos they were written by hand and not printed! :)))
Click to expand...
SCI documents (Sensitive Compartmentalised Information) cannot be duplicated, photocopied, photographed or even summarised.

These are the most sensitive secrets that the USA has, so there is a single copy which cannot be declassified and which can only be viewed (but not removed from) approved sites.

So there was one, single copy of these documents. Some of them have been retrieved from Trump's desk at Mar-a-Lago and some from his storage room, neither of which is an approved SCI location, given that the building is a country club!

But some are reportedly missing, and we can only fear that they were passed on to Moscow.
 
Robert said:
He’s going to face a federal indictment. Perhaps for this - which carries a penalty of ten years in jail per infraction:
Click to expand...

He will be indicted if this is a case of a spoiled brat with a tiny IQ taking home national secrets to impress his friends.

I doubt that Trump will be indicted if he has been working for Russia and passing American secrets to them.

That would take us into Anthony Blunt territory. He would simply be quietly told that if he runs for the Presidency he will be indicted, and he will simply never declare his candidacy. He will keep floating it, to grift more money from his base, but he will not run.
 
Junaids said:
He will be indicted if this is a case of a spoiled brat with a tiny IQ taking home national secrets to impress his friends.

I doubt that Trump will be indicted if he has been working for Russia and passing American secrets to them.

That would take us into Anthony Blunt territory. He would simply be quietly told that if he runs for the Presidency he will be indicted, and he will simply never declare his candidacy. He will keep floating it, to grift more money from his base, but he will not run.
Click to expand...

Interesting thought, and though I don’t doubt that he is a Russian asset, I doubt that he was working for them. If you see the difference.

If they force him to not run on pain of indictment he will still remain de facto boss of the GOP through the voting bloc of his numpty army.

I say get a good grip and pull the weed out at the roots.
 
Robert said:
Interesting thought, and though I don’t doubt that he is a Russian asset, I doubt that he was working for them. If you see the difference.

If they force him to not run on pain of indictment he will still remain de facto boss of the GOP through the voting bloc of his numpty army.

I say get a good grip and pull the weed out at the roots.
Click to expand...
Whether he remains the de facto leader of the Republican Party is more of a political consideration, which I don’t think will be allowed to influence a decision on whether to indict.

But if he has been performing espionage on behalf of Russia that goes beyond a political issue and becomes an earth-shattering national security breach. And I think that every country would bury that rather than declare it.

So as I see it, this is where we stand.

1. Sensitive classified security papers were stolen from the US government.

2. They were found in Donald Trump’s possession after his lawyer signed an affidavit that he didn’t have them.

3 a) If this happened because Trump is a vain fool who wanted to impress his friends, he will be indicted after the mid-term elections.

3 b) If this happened because Trump was passing secrets to Russia, he will never be indicted but he will not be permitted to run for President again.
 
WASHINGTON, Sept 2 (Reuters) - The FBI recovered more than 11,000 government documents and photographs during its Aug. 8 search at former President Donald Trump's Florida estate, as well as 48 empty folders labeled as "classified," according to court records that were unsealed on Friday.

The unsealing by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon in West Palm Beach came one day after she heard oral arguments by Trump's attorneys and the Justice Department's top two counterintelligence prosecutors over whether she should appoint a special master to conduct a privilege review of the seized materials at Trump's request.

Cannon deferred ruling immediately on whether to appoint a special master but said she would agree to unseal two records filed by the Justice Department.

Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr, who was appointed by Trump, questioned the usefulness of such an appointment.

"I think at this stage, since they've (FBI) already gone through the documents I think it's a waste of time" to have a special master, Barr said in an interview on Fox News.

Barr, who left the post in late December 2020, defied Trump by not backing his false claims that the presidential election that year had been stolen from him.

In the interview, Barr added that he saw no "legitimate reason" for Trump having documents at his Florida estate if they were classified.

He added, "I frankly am skeptical of this claim (by Trump) that 'I declassified everything.' Because frankly I think it's highly improbable and second, if he sort of stood over scores of boxes not really knowing what was in them and said 'I hereby declassify everything in here,' that would be such an abuse, show such recklessness that it's almost worse than taking the documents."

One of the records, released on Friday, provides a little more detail about the 33 boxes and other items the FBI found inside Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, as part of its ongoing criminal investigation into whether he illegally retained national defense information and tried to obstruct the probe.

It shows that documents with classification markings were at times co-mingled with other items such as books, magazines and newspaper clippings.

Also found were unspecified gifts and clothing items.

Of the more than 11,000 government records and photos, 18 were labeled as "top secret," 54 were labeled "secret" and 31 were labeled "confidential," according to a Reuters tally of the government's inventory.

"Top secret" is the highest classification level, reserved for the country's most closely held secrets.

There were also 90 empty folders, 48 of which were marked "classified," while others indicated that they should be returned to staff secretary/military aide.

It is not clear why the folders were empty, or whether any records could be missing.

The other record that was unsealed is a three-page filing by the Justice Department updating the court about the status of its investigative team's review of the documents seized.

That filing, dated Aug. 30, said investigators had completed a preliminary review of the materials seized and will investigate further and interview more witnesses.

The Justice Department's criminal investigation could be potentially put on pause if Cannon agrees to appoint a special master to come in and conduct an independent third-party review of the seized records.

However, Cannon signaled at Thursday's hearing she might be willing to permit U.S. intelligence officials to continue reviewing the materials as part of their national security damage assessment, even if a special master is appointed.

The Justice Department has previously said in court filings it has evidence that classified documents were deliberately concealed from the FBI when it tried to retrieve them from Trump's home in June.

The Justice Department also opposes the appointment of a special master, saying the records in question do not belong to Trump and that he cannot claim they are covered by executive privilege, a legal doctrine that can be used to shield some presidential communications.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us...s-stemming-fbi-search-trumps-home-2022-09-02/
 
Donald Trump has called President Joe Biden an "enemy of the state" at his first rally since the FBI searched his Florida resort for sensitive files.

Speaking to thousands of supporters in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, the ex-president accused Mr Biden of weaponizing the FBI against him.

The raid was "one of the most shocking abuses of power by any administration in American history", Mr Trump claimed.

He was in the state to promote two Republican candidates.

Dr Mehmet Oz is running for the US Senate, and state Senator Doug Mastriano is in the race to become Pennsylvania's next governor.

Both spoke only briefly - as always, the rally on Saturday night was really about one person: the headliner.

Mr Trump, 76, spent the first part of his nearly two-hour speech criticising the FBI search, but later returned to familiar themes: false claims that the 2020 election was stolen from him, attacks on rivals in the Democratic Party, and promises to "save our country".

Several times, he called for people who deal drugs to receive the death penalty.

Here are four key things you need to know about Donald Trump's rally.

The former president is currently involved in a legal tussle with federal authorities over a cache of classified documents that the FBI seized last month.

Government authorities say Mr Trump improperly took and stored White House documents, including some marked "top secret," at his Florida home - the Mar-a-Lago resort.

Federal prosecutors now say he may have obstructed the investigation into his possession of the documents.

Mr Trump has previously spun investigations and attacks against him as "witch hunts," and it was no different on Saturday.

He came out swinging, calling the FBI's search "the shameful raid and break-in on my home in Mar-a-Lago" a "travesty".

The former president has long built his appeal by casting himself and his supporters as political outsiders and persecuted figures.

Mr Trump linked his personal legal troubles to his supporters' political frustrations, claiming: "We are being assaulted… by the FBI and DOJ".

"It was not just my home that was raided… it was the hopes and dreams of every citizen who I've been fighting for since the moment I came down the golden escalator in 2015, wanting to represent the people," he said, drawing boos from the crowd.

The crowd was on his side when it came to the FBI's search.

This region supported Mr Trump in the 2020 election, even though Pennsylvania overall slipped from his grasp and chose Mr Biden.

Two supporters had already procured "Defund the FBI" T-shirts to wear to the rally.

Gail McCloskey, from the city of Altoona, nearly a three-hour drive away, told the BBC she thought the FBI visit was "a set up".

Meanwhile, Kelly Borgogelli, 60, who had driven four hours from Buffalo, New York, to see Mr Trump, said: "They're just going after him for pure hate."

Asked if she believed any of the multiple accusations made against Mr Trump over the years - that he incited a violent mob to storm the US Capitol last year, that he improperly pressured Ukraine's president to investigate his political enemies, or that he falsified claims of election fraud in 2020 - Mrs Borgogelli replied she did not.

"They've never given us any proof," she said.

Her companion, Maureen Ewart, 62, said if the justice department actually charged Mr Trump, the country would be "divided".

"It will be crowded out there, the streets will be full," Ms Ewart said, emphasising that she did not condone violence - but feared any criminal charges against the former president could spark civil unrest.

At one point, Mr Trump himself claimed that the latest investigation into his possession of government documents was "going to produce a backlash" the likes of which the country had not seen before.

Mr Trump's name might not be on the ballot in Pennsylvania this year, but Trumpism certainly is.

He hand-picked the US Senate candidate, celebrity medical expert Dr Oz, and endorsed the far-right election conspiracy theorist Mr Mastriano for governor after his surprising primary win.

Their performance in the November election will be seen as a referendum on the strength of Mr Trump's endorsement, and the political ideologies he's unleashed on the Republican Party.

The outcome could have ramifications for 2024.

Mr Trump has not announced another presidential campaign, but has left the door wide open.

Should his candidates prevail, the Republican Party will see it as a sign of Mr Trump's continued dominance of their base voters.

Should they lose, however, it could indicate to Mr Trump's potential 2024 rivals that they may have a chance at the White House after all.

Rallygoers were far more enthused about Mr Mastriano - a candidate more closely forged in the former president's mould - than they were about Dr Oz.

The crowd roared when Mr Mastriano was brought onstage. However Dr Oz was invited to join Mr Trump onstage well over an hour into the rally.

The celebrity doctor spoke for less than two minutes, and after his remarks, someone in the back of the crowd shouted "he's a Rino!" or "Republican in name only," a criticism that Dr Oz is not sufficiently conservative.

Both parties eye Pennsylvania
The state is vital to Democrats' hopes as well. They want to pick up a US Senate seat by propelling Lt Gov John Fetterman to victory.

The governor's race has taken on extra significance with Mr Mastriano's landslide win in the Republican primary. He attended the 6 January 2021 attack on the US Congress and played a key role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in Pennsylvania.

Should he win the governorship, he would have significant power over the state's election implementation.

To oppose him, Democrats have put forth the state's attorney general, Josh Shapiro, and President Biden held several high-profile events in the state in recent days to help whip up the Democratic base.

In fact, he also visited Wilkes-Barre, on 30 August to give a major speech about guns and public safety and two days ago he gave a primetime address in Philadelphia.

He argued that Trump's ideology - which he called "Maga Republicans" after his predecessor's famous campaign slogan - threatened American democracy.

"Not every Republican, not even a majority of Republicans, are Maga Republicans," Mr Biden said.

"But there's no question the Republican Party today is dominated, driven and intimidated by Donald Trump and the Maga Republicans, and that is a threat to this country."

On Saturday, Mr Trump called Mr Biden's address the most "vicious hateful and divisive speech ever delivered by an American president".

BBC
 
A judge has granted Donald Trump's demand for a "special master" to oversee the case into his handling of classified materials.

Mr Trump is being investigated for allegedly taking documents with him when he left the White House.

But the "special master" is an independent lawyer who decides if any of the records are covered by attorney-client or executive privilege.

The move is seen as a blow to prosecutors and a win for Mr Trump.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62799425
 
It's a win for Trump not because it justifies the theft of documents he didn't own, but because it delays the process and makes it impossible for justice to be applied to him like any other citizen, because of the mid-term elections.
 
Technics 1210 said:
A judge has granted Donald Trump's demand for a "special master" to oversee the case into his handling of classified materials.

Mr Trump is being investigated for allegedly taking documents with him when he left the White House.

But the "special master" is an independent lawyer who decides if any of the records are covered by attorney-client or executive privilege.

The move is seen as a blow to prosecutors and a win for Mr Trump.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62799425
Click to expand...

Trump keeps on winning.

I think he would've won 2020 election too. But, he botched a few things up (COVID handling and George Floyd incident).

Anyway. I think he can win in 2024 election if he runs. Biden has been very bad.
 
Trump really is a Super-Genius, just like a lower-functioning version of Wile E. Coyote.

He lost the 2020 Presidential election by 4.4%, or 7 million votes.

Now Joe Biden leads him by 8.0% - he has almost doubled his lead since 2020. He’s on course to beat Trump by 13 million votes!

And Super-Genius Trump has responded by saying:

"We are leading Biden and everyone else, including the Republicans, by record numbers in the polls."

So he is beating Biden by a record number of Minus Eight Percent.

As well as beating his own party!!!!!
 
Junaids said:
It's a win for Trump not because it justifies the theft of documents he didn't own, but because it delays the process and makes it impossible for justice to be applied to him like any other citizen, because of the mid-term elections.
Click to expand...

It makes no justification. It just slows the process down allowing him to get more donations from his numpty base and stave off bankruptcy for longer.. The negative press coverage will continue.
 
US federal judge Raymond Dearie has been chosen to review the files seized in the FBI's search of former US President Donald Trump's Florida home.

Mr Dearie, 78, will be "special master" and decide whether any documents are off limits in any legal proceedings.

He had been proposed by Mr Trump's team and the US Department of Justice previously said it did not object.

The former US president is being investigated for his handling of classified materials.

Department of Justice officials previously said that documents stored at Mr Trump's Florida home were likely to have been concealed as part of an effort to obstruct an FBI investigation.

The authorities say these documents should have been handed over to the National Archives - which US presidents are legally obliged to do upon leaving office.

Mr Trump denies any kind of wrongdoing, arguing that as president he had declassified all the documents, and that they were kept securely at his Mar-a-Lago home.

Who is the special master reviewing seized Trump files?

The request for a special master - an independent lawyer who decides if any of the records are covered by attorney-client or executive privilege - was made by Mr Trump's team.

Earlier this month, a judge granted Mr Trump's request - and banned the US government from reviewing or using the seized materials for its investigation until the special master's independent review has been completed.

On Thursday, US federal Judge Aileen Cannon appointed Mr Dearie and also ruled that the Department of Justice was not allowed to resume the files review.

The department had earlier said it would take the case to an appeals court if Judge Cannon ruled against their request.

It means the justice department's ongoing criminal investigation will now be slowed down because the government cannot review or seize materials for its investigation until the special master's review has been completed.

The Department of Justice resisted Mr Trump's request saying that any presidential records seized in the FBI's 8 August search of Mar-A-Lago "belong to the United States, not to the former president".

It is not clear how long the special master's review will take.

Mr Trump's lawyers have argued some of the documents are covered by attorney-client privilege - a part of US law that allows people to keep conversations with their lawyers private.

His legal team have also claimed "executive privilege" over the documents, which allows presidents to keep certain communications under wraps.

However, some legal experts argue that these moves are merely a tactic to delay proceedings - since the documents have already been looked at.

BBC
 
Donald Trump and three of his children have been served with a lawsuit alleging "years of bank, tax and insurance fraud".

New York attorney general Letitia James is suing the former US president, his family, and the Trump Organisation.

If successful, it could halt Mr Trump's ability to do business in the state for years - and even includes a referral for possible federal prosecution.

The penalties could effectively be a "death penalty" for his organisation, Ms James said.

The suit, more than 220 pages in length, details alleged efforts by Mr Trump to inflate his personal net worth to attract favourable loan agreements while also deflating his worth and holdings to gain better tax benefits.

It also named the former president's sons Donald Trump Jr and Eric, and his daughter Ivanka Trump as defendants.

Ms James is asking a court to bar Mr Trump and his children from serving as officers or directors in any New York business.

Donald Trump granted an independent expert to review FBI seized documents in 'victory' for former president

The Trump Organisation has denied any wrongdoing.

At a news conference, Ms James said the suit alleged more than 200 instances of fraud over 10 years.

"While the AG's office says they are not seeking a dissolution of the Trump Organisation, the penalties they seek could amount to an effective 'death penalty' for the Trump Organisation to continue in New York," she added.

The lawsuit came on the same day the Justice Department said Mr Trump has failed to provide any evidence he declassified records seized from his Florida estate.

The former president had sued the Justice Department after the FBI search in August at his Mar-a-Lago home, asking for the investigation to be frozen while an independent lawyer was appointed to oversee it.

Of the more than 11,000 documents seized by the FBI, about 100 had classified markings.

Mr Trump had claimed at the time he was President he had declassified them.

However, the Justice Department's lawyers wrote in a filing late on Tuesday: "Plaintiff again implies that he could have declassified the records before leaving office.

"As before, however, Plaintiff conspicuously fails to represent, much less show, that he actually took that step."

The Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation of Mr Trump for retaining government records, some
marked as highly classified, including top secret, after leaving office in January 2021.

Mr Trump has denied wrongdoing and has said the investigation is a partisan attack.

SKY
 
Has he ever done anything legal. Can’t believe he is out running around. And not in jail.
 
He really is approaching Wile E Coyote SuperGenius levels now.

The man described by a Republican Senator as “the Orange Jesus” has announced that he can declassify top secret documents just by thinking about it!

There is a fairly obvious reason why not - having a brain is a prerequisite for being able to think, which obviously disqualifies Trump.

And anyway, whether or not the documents he stole from his country were classified fails to address the fundamental problem that they were stolen and found at his house in his possession.
 
Junaids said:
He really is approaching Wile E Coyote SuperGenius levels now.

The man described by a Republican Senator as “the Orange Jesus” has announced that he can declassify top secret documents just by thinking about it!

There is a fairly obvious reason why not - having a brain is a prerequisite for being able to think, which obviously disqualifies Trump.

And anyway, whether or not the documents he stole from his country were classified fails to address the fundamental problem that they were stolen and found at his house in his possession.
Click to expand...

Nothing has been found that is stolen. Can you provide a source for this, considering it was the Whitehouse staff that packed and delivered the documents.
 
Junaids said:
He really is approaching Wile E Coyote SuperGenius levels now.

The man described by a Republican Senator as “the Orange Jesus” has announced that he can declassify top secret documents just by thinking about it!

There is a fairly obvious reason why not - having a brain is a prerequisite for being able to think, which obviously disqualifies Trump.

And anyway, whether or not the documents he stole from his country were classified fails to address the fundamental problem that they were stolen and found at his house in his possession.
Click to expand...

How is this for genius Junaids.

The federal magistrate judge who authorized this week's FBI raid on Donald Trump's home and office in Florida six weeks earlier recused himself from the former president's lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats in the Russia collusion scandal, citing concerns he couldn't be impartial.
Click to expand...

This is the judge that the FBI used to sign the search warrant for Trumps house.
 
Gilly said:
Nothing has been found that is stolen. Can you provide a source for this, considering it was the Whitehouse staff that packed and delivered the documents.
Click to expand...
The documents were reported missing.

Trump’s lawyer signed an affidavit that they were not at Mar a Lago, but almost certainly gave the FBI the truth.

Then the documents were found at Trump’s house.
 
Gilly said:
Nothing has been found that is stolen. Can you provide a source for this, considering it was the Whitehouse staff that packed and delivered the documents.
Click to expand...

You don’t take Top Secret documents home. Trump should be on trial for Treason.
 
Robert said:
You don’t take Top Secret documents home. Trump should be on trial for Treason.
Click to expand...

This is the FBI's statement when investigating Hilary Clinton when she had classified information on her own server at home.

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges.
Click to expand...
 
Gilly said:
This is the FBI's statement when investigating Hilary Clinton when she had classified information on her own server at home.
Click to expand...

If they feel there is sufficient evidence against Clinton, they should bring charges. As with Trump.
 
Robert said:
If they feel there is sufficient evidence against Clinton, they should bring charges. As with Trump.
Click to expand...

Its normally not an issue but there is political mileage to be gained from people that hate Trump. Trump haters will think this is a big issue and he has stolen documents. MSM is feeding the people that they have brainwashed about Trump.
 
Gilly said:
Its normally not an issue but there is political mileage to be gained from people that hate Trump. Trump haters will think this is a big issue and he has stolen documents. MSM is feeding the people that they have brainwashed about Trump.
Click to expand...

It is a big issue. You don't take national security documents home. Why were they in his house? What was he doing with them?
 
Robert said:
It is a big issue. You don't take national security documents home. Why were they in his house? What was he doing with them?
Click to expand...

They are archive documents that the Whitehouse services packed and sent to Trumps residence. Its all been photographed and documented by the Whitehouse.

Just like they do with all Presidents.
 
As Donald Trump's legal woes mount, donors and the Republican party have paid millions in dollars of his legal fees.

His newest legal headache saw him and three of his children hit with a fraud lawsuit, which alleges they lied about the value of property "by billions".

Financial data shows that he has already spent more than $1m (£890,000) of donations fighting the case in 2022.

Mr Trump has denied any wrongdoing.

The latest lawsuit, announced by New York state Attorney General Letitia James, was the culmination of a long-running civil investigation which began in 2019.

Millions of dollars spent combatting these charges have come from Mr Trump's Save America political action committee (PAC) - which takes donations from Trump supporters across the country - Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show.

Save America has paid more than $1.12m this year alone to law firms hired to defend Mr Trump in the New York case. As a so-called "Leadership PAC", it can use money to pay for expenses that cannot be funded by campaign committees, such as some personal travel or some leadership expenses.

The website of Save America's Joint Fundraising Committee - which contributes both to Save America and a second Trump PAC, Make America Great Again - makes no mention of legal bills, saying only that "the future of our Country [sic] is at stake and President Trump is calling on all Patriots to join his fight to Save America".

Of the $1.12m spent, more than $942,000 has gone to the firm of Alina Habba, a New Jersey-based attorney who has doubled as a Trump spokeswoman.

Another lawyer, New York-based Alan Futerfas, received nearly $185,000 in July. Mr Futerfas is representing Mr Trump's children - Don Jr, Ivanka, and Eric - in the New York fraud case.

It is unclear how much of his own money Mr Trump has spent on his legal cases.

One donor told the BBC the idea of funding the lawsuits didn't bother him at all.

"In my opinion, he can do whatever he wants with the money," said Rom Solene, a Republican from Arizona.

"The non-stop nonsense and antics being conducted by the Democrats on a man who no longer holds political office shows the extent to which the Democrats are willing to go to persecute a political opponent. Not to mention, it shows how much the Democrats and other Washington insiders fear Mr Trump."

The fraud investigation is just one of several expensive legal challenges facing the former president, however.

The other cases include:

A criminal investigation into possible property crimes, which is linked to the civil fraud case in New York. The state attorney general referred evidence to federal prosecutors and the Internal Revenue Service. The Manhattan District Attorney's office is also investigating.
Allegations Mr Trump mishandled classified documents, which saw FBI agents search his Mar-a-Lago property on 8 August. He is also being investigated for obstruction of justice.

The chief prosecutor of Georgia's Fulton County is investigating potential state election crimes related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election. Part of this revolves around a phone call, in which the former president told a top state election official to "find 11,780 votes".

A congressional committee has accused Mr Trump of inciting "an insurrection" when his supporters ransacked the Capitol on 6 January 2021. There have been no charges arising from this investigation, which is ongoing.

Various lawsuits by police officers who have accused Mr Trump of inciting the 6 January attack in which they suffered injuries.
line
In August alone, Mr Trump spent more than $3.8m on legal fees in the wake of the FBI's search of his Palm Beach estate, Mar-a-Lago, the bulk of which - about $3m - went to a nearby Florida firm.

Smaller amounts went to lawyers involved in his other legal issues, including a Georgia investigation into whether he and his allies tried to illegally overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

But there is no indication the former president's method of settling his legal bills violates any statute.

Erin Chlopak, a campaign finance expert at the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington DC-based non-profit, told the BBC that legal expenses often fall into a "grey area", where it is left up to the Electoral Commission to decide if the expense is "personal" or whether it would exist "irrespective of a person's status as a candidate or officeholder, in which case the money can be used".

"That's a real problem in campaign finance law," Ms Chlopak said. "We've seen that not just in the context of legal expenses, but in even more blatant personal uses, like personal travel, dining out at expensive restaurants and staying in hotels."

In Mr Trump's case, Ms Chlopak added, the subject is complicated by the array of legal issues he is currently facing.

"The results of applying the same standard would likely be different in circumstances related to business dealing that has nothing to do with one's status as a former president, as opposed to actions that someone took based on their status as an officeholder."

In the past, the Republican National Committee (RNC) has also helped pay for some of Mr Trump's legal bills, including some related to the New York attorney general's investigation.

In late August, however, Politico reported that the RNC would not pay legal fees related to the Mar-a-Lago search - and that it would completely stop paying legal fees if Mr Trump were to formally announce his intention to run for president in 2024.

Ms Chlopak noted that the RNC is free to use funds as it sees fit.

While he has hinted at the prospect, Mr Trump is yet to announce that he'll run for the White House again in 2024.

BBC
 
The Trump interview with Sean Hannity would be hilarious were it not sad to be watching a human being descend into lunacy in public.

He has always been thin-skinned, but his multiple legal setbacks have clearly made him crack.

Among the craziest comments in the puff-piece interview:

"if you're the President of the USA, you can classify just by saying it's declassified. You can do it even just by thinking about it".

But then it got crazier. So much crazier.

"There's a lot of speculation of what was so severe that the FBI raided my house. Were they looking for the Hillary Clinton emails that were deleted? They may have thought it was there."

A sitting President who spouted such unhinged nonsense would be removed under the 25th Amendment and transferred for care in a room with rubber walls. It's a shame that the former President does not appear to have anybody looking after his best interests.
 
Junaids said:
The Trump interview with Sean Hannity would be hilarious were it not sad to be watching a human being descend into lunacy in public.

He has always been thin-skinned, but his multiple legal setbacks have clearly made him crack.

Among the craziest comments in the puff-piece interview:

"if you're the President of the USA, you can classify just by saying it's declassified. You can do it even just by thinking about it".

But then it got crazier. So much crazier.

"There's a lot of speculation of what was so severe that the FBI raided my house. Were they looking for the Hillary Clinton emails that were deleted? They may have thought it was there."

A sitting President who spouted such unhinged nonsense would be removed under the 25th Amendment and transferred for care in a room with rubber walls. It's a shame that the former President does not appear to have anybody looking after his best interests.
Click to expand...

Don't make him out to be too stupid, this one went right over your head.
 
Gilly said:
They are archive documents that the Whitehouse services packed and sent to Trumps residence. Its all been photographed and documented by the Whitehouse.

Just like they do with all Presidents.
Click to expand...

Sounds wrong. If that were the case then the practice would be well known and the Feds would know and there would be no raid.
 
Technics 1210 said:
A judge has granted Donald Trump's demand for a "special master" to oversee the case into his handling of classified materials.

Mr Trump is being investigated for allegedly taking documents with him when he left the White House.

But the "special master" is an independent lawyer who decides if any of the records are covered by attorney-client or executive privilege.

The move is seen as a blow to prosecutors and a win for Mr Trump.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-62799425
Click to expand...

That turned out to be false. That blew up in trumps face.
 
Gilly said:
They are archive documents that the Whitehouse services packed and sent to Trumps residence. Its all been photographed and documented by the Whitehouse.

Just like they do with all Presidents.
Click to expand...

That is the lie that Trump’s proxies spread to his supporters, but his legal submissions made no such claims.

Their submissions so far state very vaguely and generally that the material “might” have ended up in a Trump Presidential Library.

But all such material first:

1. Has to be approved for preservation in the National Archive.

2. Has to have any classification level independently reviewed prior to acceptance into the National Archive.

3. Has to be released from the National Archive to a Presidential Library by the National Archive, which requires an external review of any amended classification status.

These are onerous processes, which never happened. None of the documents had been cleared for release from the National Archive, and nobody in the White House had the authority to do so.

Many of these documents were still very highly classified state secrets which were not cleared for removal by the President or anybody else. And the President has failed to demonstrate EITHER that he had the authority to do so OR that he legally did so.

The bottom line is that these were state secrets which were missing, having been unlawfully stolen from the US government.

And they were found in the ex-President’s house.

If the stolen materials hadn’t been found in his possession he could have made these vague claims. But now the onus is on him to produce a paper trail of who declassified those secrets and when if he wishes to use a “they were already declassified” defence.

But even then, he’s going to have to also produce evidence of when the documents were admitted to the National Archive, and when he applied to the National Archive for them to be released to a library which isn’t built yet, and precisely which documents were authorised for release from the National Archive to the Trump Presidential Library.

That’s why the Espionage Act was cited in the warrant. And Trump appears to have no defence to fall back upon.
 
SalimBhai said:
Please elaborate. What's your point
Click to expand...

His point is that Trump is an expert deflector and by claiming that other leaders are also allegedly treasonous normalises treason. If treason is normalised, he cannot be criticised if he is accused of treason.
 
Robert said:
His point is that Trump is an expert deflector and by claiming that other leaders are also allegedly treasonous normalises treason. If treason is normalised, he cannot be criticised if he is accused of treason.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense. But you are dealing with the Republican Party here.
 
Special Master Dearie has instructed Trump to produce evidence that the Feds planted evidence in his house.

That accusation has just backfired. Trump is now risking perjury charges and his lawyers are facing disbarment, if they present false evidence.
 
Robert said:
Special Master Dearie has instructed Trump to produce evidence that the Feds planted evidence in his house.

That accusation has just backfired. Trump is now risking perjury charges and his lawyers are facing disbarment, if they present false evidence.
Click to expand...
It was always a moronic defence by the orange simpleton.

Trump was seeking to have the stolen documents returned to him. But if they were planted, surely he had no claim to have them returned.

Trump is the village idiot, but has learned to deflect the attention of his intellectually-challenged base. But those tactics don’t work in a court room where you need to produce evidence or shut up.
 
<b>BREAKING</b>

Donald Trump is suing CNN, with the former US president claiming defamation as he seeks $475m (£420m) in punitive damages, according to a court filing.

He is taking legal action against the US news network in federal court in Florida.
 
James said:
<b>BREAKING</b>

Donald Trump is suing CNN, with the former US president claiming defamation as he seeks $475m (£420m) in punitive damages, according to a court filing.

He is taking legal action against the US news network in federal court in Florida.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that.

Trump is just exposing himself to more risk here.

He can be compelled to testify under oath - which he has been trying to avoid (he took the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination 443 times in a day a couple of months ago), and any testimony he gives can be used in the SDNY Civil Case where he stands to be punished to the tune of between $750 million and $950 million.

He must be a nightmare to have as a legal client. He invents vast sums to impress his base, but just engages in an orgy of self-incrimination.

This is probably just a desperate strategy from a man who knows that his legal problems are going to end in bankruptcy and possibly prison too.
 
James said:
<b>BREAKING</b>

Donald Trump is suing CNN, with the former US president claiming defamation as he seeks $475m (£420m) in punitive damages, according to a court filing.

He is taking legal action against the US news network in federal court in Florida.
Click to expand...

CNN have been using words like “insurrectionist” and “Hitler”. They will invoke the First Amendment so I don’t see how he can succeed.

Unless it is to scrounge more sawbucks off his numpty base? He’s bleeding money from multiple suits.

Another problem is to find lawyers who will work for him, as he has a track record of not paying legal fees.
 
Donald Trump Sues CNN For Defamation, Seeks $475 Million In Damages
Trump, in the lawsuit filed in a US District Court in Florida, accused CNN of waging a campaign of "libel and slander" against him because it "fears" he will run for president again in 2024.

Washington: Former US president Donald Trump sued CNN on Monday, accusing the cable television news network of defamation and seeking $475 million in punitive damages.
Trump, in the lawsuit filed in a US District Court in Florida, accused CNN of waging a campaign of "libel and slander" against him because it "fears" he will run for president again in 2024.

"CNN has sought to use its massive influence -- purportedly as a 'trusted' news source -- to defame the plaintiff in the minds of its viewers and readers for the purpose of defeating him politically," Trump's lawyers said in the 29-page complaint.

"As a part of its concerted effort to tilt the political balance to the Left, CNN has tried to taint the plaintiff with a series of ever-more scandalous, false, and defamatory labels of 'racist,' 'Russian lackey,' 'insurrectionist,' and ultimately 'Hitler,'" the complaint said.

Trump, who requested a jury trial, had a caustic relationship with CNN and other major news outlets like The New York Times during his presidency, branding them "fake news" and repeatedly raging against them on social media.

NDTV
 
daytrader said:
"As a part of its concerted effort to tilt the political balance to the Left, CNN has tried to taint the plaintiff with a series of ever-more scandalous, false, and defamatory labels of 'racist,' 'Russian lackey,' 'insurrectionist,' and ultimately 'Hitler,'" the complaint said.

NDTV
Click to expand...

I wonder which label he objects to?
 
Last edited:
Junaids said:
It was always a moronic defence by the orange simpleton.

Trump was seeking to have the stolen documents returned to him. But if they were planted, surely he had no claim to have them returned.

Trump is the village idiot, but has learned to deflect the attention of his intellectually-challenged base. But those tactics don’t work in a court room where you need to produce evidence or shut up.
Click to expand...

Its hard to imagine you work in the health care system in Australia. You don't display the intellect of a health care professional. This is childish stuff and somehow I think you know.
 
Recent polls have Republicans on in front for mid-term elections.

It is very clear that the Republicans have united in one voice, that is of Trump - America First/Make America Great again.
 
Trump ordered worker to hide boxes of classified information at his Mar-a-Lago residence

A worker of former US President Donald Trump has confessed to the FBI that the latter asked him to hide boxes with classified information in his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida after the Justice Department subpoenaed the former president in May for illegal possession of government documents.

The employee in charge of Trump removed the boxes with classified documents of national interest from a storage room in a basement and moved them to the Mar-a-Lago residence, facts corroborated by security camera recordings to which the FBI has had access, as reported by the newspaper 'The Washington Post'.

The order took place moments after Trump's legal team received a subpoena from the US Department of Justice for the former president to confess the location of these documents, among which were state secrets or even information on the defense of other countries.

This testimony would suggest an effort to conceal the documents from the U.S. Government by Trump despite efforts by the National Archives and Records Administration and the Department of Justice to seek cooperation from the former U.S. president.

Still, the employee who has confessed the information to the FBI worked at the tycoon's Florida residence and was requested by federal agents on several occasions.

In a first interview, he flatly denied having handled sensitive documents or the boxes that could contain such documents. However, as they gathered evidence, the agents decided to re-interview the witness, who finally confessed to having moved boxes at Trump's request, according to 'The Washington Post'.

The witness has become a key player in the investigation into the classified documents seized from Trump, after his failed attempt to appoint a special expert to review the documents and thus delay the Justice Department's investigation.

Last August 8, a group of FBI agents broke into the luxurious mansion of former President Trump in Palm Beach, Florida, taking about twenty boxes full of folders with classified documents, some of them labeled top secret.

Among the documents collected by FBI agents during the raid on the Mar-a-Lago residence last month, some confidential files have been found that would even describe a foreign government's military defenses, including its nuclear capabilities.

MSN
 
<b>The congressional panel investigating the deadly attack on the US Capitol has voted to subpoena Donald Trump.</b>

It was a unanimous vote and the former president will now be compelled to give evidence to the committee about the events of 6 January 2021 which saw five people killed and hundreds, including many law enforcement officers, injured.

The committee said he is "required to answer for his actions".

It has been arguing in its hearings so far that Mr Trump was directly involved in the bid to overturn the 2020 US election result after inciting his supporters on the day to storm the Capitol building - the seat of US power in Washington DC.

The panel cannot bring legal charges against Mr Trump, but its series of hearings has been trying to establish his exact involvement.

It can decide to make a criminal referral to the Justice Department, should members choose.

The hearing has been told Mr Trump orchestrated a multi-part plan to nullify the election result, and had behaved in a way that was a "staggering betrayal of his oath".

The vote came as extraordinary new footage emerged of both Republican and Democrat lawmakers huddled in a secure location in the Capitol building as the riot unfolded around them.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi is seen in the video telling the group:

"There has to be some way we can maintain the sense that there is some security, some confidence, that government can function... and that you can elect the President of the United States.

"We have to get to finish the proceedings."

She is then left stunned when an aide replies: "Apparently everybody on the floor is putting on their tear gas masks to prepare for a breach."

On the morning of 6 January, thousands of his supporters - inspired by an incendiary speech he had just given near the White House in which he repeated claims he had been denied a second term due to voter fraud - marched to the Capitol.

It was in session at the time, overseeing the congressional certification of Joe Biden's presidential election win.

A large group, including armed members of far-right groups like the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and QAnon, breached barriers at pedestrian entrances to the building's grounds.

Several also entered the Capitol building itself after a mob smashed windows and forced open doors.

Having lost the electoral vote on 3 November 2020 to his Democratic opponent, Mr Trump began to insist the contest had been "rigged," triggering his opponents to claim a conspiracy against him.

His accusations of voting malpractice have been continually debunked by election authorities.

The former president, a Republican, has so far refused to appear before the committee, which is made up of seven Democrats and two Republicans.

He may reject the subpoena, although he is legally bound to respond positively to it.

Steve Bannon, his former aide, was also subpoenaed to the panel but failed to turn up and has since been convicted of contempt of congress for doing so. He will be sentenced later this month and could be jailed for up to two years.

Hundreds of witnesses have been interviewed by the panel and more than 50 subpoenaed.

More than 900 people were charged with offences relating to the 6 January insurrection.

Mr Trump has vowed to pardon them if he wins a second term as President, though he has yet to officially announce he is standing for re-election.

Earlier on Thursday, the US Supreme Court rejected Mr Trump's plea to step into the legal fight over the FBI search of his Florida estate.

He had asked the justices to overturn a lower court ruling and permit an independent arbiter to review the roughly 100 documents with classified markings that were taken in the August 8 search of Mar-a-Lago, but his request was denied.

https://t.co/9TnSB9GkKE
 
Trump ordered withdrawal from Afghanistan after he lost election, panel says


Then-president Donald Trump ordered the full and rapid withdrawal of all US forces from Afghanistan and Somalia shortly after he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden, a House committee said on Thursday.

The revelation undermines claims from Mr Trump and his Republican Party that they would have better handled the end of the Afghanistan war had they stayed in power.

Congressman Adam Kinzinger, one of two Republicans on the special panel investigating the January 6, 2021 insurrection, said Mr Trump ordered the withdrawals because he knew he had lost the election, despite his claims to the contrary.

Mr Kinzinger said the former president was rushing "to complete his unfinished business".

"President Trump issued an order for large-scale US troop withdrawals," he said.

"He disregarded concerns about the consequences for fragile governments on the front lines of the fight against ISIS and Al Qaeda terrorists.

"Knowing he was leaving office, he acted immediately and signed this order on November 11, [2020] which would have required the immediate withdrawal of troops from Somalia and Afghanistan all to be complete before the Biden inauguration on January 20.“

The committee then played a brief excerpt of an interview with Gen Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

“It is odd. It is non-standard. It is potentially dangerous. I personally thought it was militarily not feasible nor wise," Gen Milley said.

Gen Keith Kellogg, who was the national security adviser to then-vice president Mike Pence, said in another excerpt that the immediate departure of troops would have been "catastrophic" and a "debacle", like that which transpired under Mr Biden.

According to the withdrawal agreement with the Taliban, negotiated under Mr Trump, the last US forces were supposed to leave Afghanistan by May 2021.

Mr Biden secured an extension until the end of August, but even then the botched withdrawal was a humiliating end to America's longest war, which put the lives of thousands of Afghans loyal to the West at risk.

As Mr Trump's presidency wound down, he ordered the withdrawal of hundreds of troops who were helping local forces to fight the terrorist group Al Shabab.

Mr Biden later reversed Mr Trump's Somalia order and sent troops back.

MSN
 
The 6 January committee did not conclude its ninth and possibly final public hearing by referring Donald Trump to the US justice department for criminal conduct - a move many, including some members of the panel, had urged.

Instead, it voted unanimously to subpoena the president to testify before the committee.

It was, effectively, substituting one symbolic action for another.

The decision of whether to indict the president for crimes relating to the 6 January 2021 attack on the US Capitol rests with the justice department, not Congress. And the committee's formal subpoena of the former president, while historic, is almost certain to be ignored by Mr Trump.

While the committee could vote to hold the former president in contempt of Congress, the clock is ticking towards next month's midterm elections and what could be a Republican takeover of the House of Representatives in January, when the committee would be unceremoniously shuttered.

Still, the vote to call Mr Trump to offer his defence made for a dramatic flourish at the end of what was another stinging round of accusations directed at the former president - one that included some never-before-seen footage from the Capitol attack and recently acquired documentary evidence.

The missing link

The 6 January committee has laid responsibility for the attack at Donald Trump's feet, but one of the challenges it has faced has been tying the former president directly to the violence. Investigators have said Mr Trump created an atmosphere that led to violence and that he was aware that trouble was possible, but they have yet to directly link Mr Trump to those who attacked the Capitol.

In her presentation on Thursday, congresswoman Zoe Lofgren suggested that longtime Trump confidante Roger Stone was that missing link. Mr Stone was in contact with members of the right-wing militant groups Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers - individuals who have been charged with seditious conspiracy by the justice department for their involvement in the Capitol attacks.

Ms Lofgren showed photographs of Mr Stone with leaders of the Oath Keepers the day before the Capitol attack. She also noted that Mr Stone was in touch with Mr Trump in late December and that the president wanted to talk with Mr Stone in the days leading up to 6 January.

Still, however, the committee has been unable to fully document interactions between Mr Stone and the president.

"We don't yet have all the relevant records of Roger Stone's communications," Ms Lofgren said.

If Mr Stone is the missing link, it is one that remains in the shadows.

Advance notice

Congressman Adam Schiff was tasked with presenting new evidence that the select committee had received from the Secret Service detailing their agents' communications during and before the Capitol attack.

He read one email from an anonymous tipster warning that groups were planning violence. In texts and emails on 6 January, the agents noted the large crowds lingering outside Mr Trump's morning "Stop the Steal" rally and speculated that it could be because they were armed.

Other reports, of sightings of handguns, assault rifles, riot shields and pepper spray, back this up.

All this, the congressman continued, was evidence that the White House - and its security teams - knew that violence was not only possible but probable as the crowd moved up Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol. He even suggested agents may have lied to congressional investigators.

"Despite this, certain White House and Secret Service witnesses previously testified that they had received no intelligence about violence that could potentially threaten any of the protectees on January 6, including the vice-president," Mr Schiff said. "Evidence strongly suggests that this testimony is not credible."

Congressman Pete Aguilar later added that the committee is reviewing testimony and will consider whether some witnesses were pressured not to tell the full story about what the White House and the Secret Service knew in advance.

The Committee v Donald Trump

After the hearing concluded, congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland told reporters outside the room that he thought Mr Trump ought to take the committee up on its offer to testify.

"I would consider it a great honour and a privilege to testify if somebody accused me of trying to overthrow a presidential election and subvert the government of the United States," he said.

Wry comments aside, the committee offered a concise summary of what it views as its case against the former president - that he had the means, motive and opportunity to attempt to undermine the peaceful transition of power to the presidential candidate who defeated him at the ballot box.

It was a case, committee chairman Bennie Thompson said, that was made not by the testimony of Democrats or Mr Trump's political opponents, but by the former president's own loyal staff members, senior advisers, executive appointees and Republican state politicians.

Republican congressman Adam Kinzinger reviewed the evidence the committee acquired indicating that the president knew he had been defeated but refused to cede power.

He presented testimony by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchison, who said she witnessed Mr Trump telling White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows: "I don't want people to know we lost, Mark. This is embarrassing. Figure it out."

Congresswoman Elaine Luria of Virginia asserted that Mr Trump knew that the claims he was making about election fraud were false, but he persisted anyway.

Mr Raskin spoke of the president's actions on 6 January and how he watched the violence unfold, was urged to intervene by friends, advisers and members of Congress, and refused.

In one powerful segment, he played new video footage of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and then-Senate Majority leader Chuck Schumer pleading with the secretary of defence to send troops to quell the violence at the Capitol.

At the end of the hearing, Mr Thompson again addressed the room and announced the decision to subpoena the former president.

"We want to hear from him," he said. "This is a question about accountability to the American people. He must be accountable. He is required to answer for his actions."

Within the hour, the former president had issued his reply, accusing the committee of being a "bust" and promising that his endorsed candidates would win in next month's elections.

BBC
 
Former President Donald Trump on Sunday attacked Jews in the U.S. on his Truth Social platform, writing that that they need to “get their act together” and “appreciate” Israel “before it is too late.”

“No President has done more for Israel than I have. Somewhat surprisingly, however, our wonderful Evangelicals are far more appreciative of this than the people of the Jewish faith, especially those living in the U.S.,” Trump wrote in his post.

“Those living in Israel, though, are a different story — Highest approval rating in the World, could easily be P.M.!” the former president continued.

It is unclear what prompted the former president’s social media post. However, Trump has issued similar remarks in the past about American Jews, a majority of which typically vote Democrat.

In an interview last year, Trump said “the Jewish people in the United States either don’t like Israel or don’t care about Israel," adding that “there’s people in this country that are Jewish no longer love Israel."

“I’ll tell you, the evangelical Christians love Israel more than the Jews in this country,” said the former president, who garnered strong support from white evangelical voters in 2016 and 2020, according to Pew Research Center.

Trump also told Ami Magazine, an Orthodox Jewish news publication, last year that “Jewish people who live in the United States don’t love Israel enough” and that he believes it is “strange” that he does not have stronger Jewish support.

During his time in office, Trump drew criticism for referring to Israel as “your country” while addressing American Jews at a Hanukkah event at the White House in 2018.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/poli...sedgntp&cvid=14684a8c2157471f841569a83a20441e
 
Trump questioned under oath over rape accuser's defamation case

Former US President Donald Trump has answered questions under oath in a lawsuit brought against him by an advice columnist who says he raped her.

E Jean Carroll alleges the attack took place in a New York luxury department store dressing room in the mid-1990s.

Mr Trump denied the claim and said Ms Carroll was lying, prompting her to sue him for defamation.

Ms Carroll's attorney did not release details of the deposition, but said it took place on Wednesday.

A civil trial in the case is scheduled for 6 February.

"We're pleased that on behalf of our client, E Jean Carroll, we were able to take Donald Trump's deposition today," a spokesperson for law firm Kaplan Hecker & Fink said.

"We are not able to comment further."

Mr Trump's attorney, Alina Habba, said in a statement: "As we have said all along, my client was pleased to set the record straight today.

"This case is nothing more than a political ploy like many others in the long list of witch hunts against Donald Trump."

It is unclear what Mr Trump said during the deposition, or whether he spoke in person or remotely. According to CNN, he participated from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

In a 2019 article for New York magazine, Ms Carroll - a longtime Elle advice columnist - said she had a chance encounter with Mr Trump in late 1995 or early 1996 at the department store Bergdorf Goodman.

She said she was helping him pick out a gift and the two of them ended up in a dressing room, where she alleges that he raped her. She says she was 52 and he was around 50, and Mr Trump was married to Marla Maples.

At the time, Ms Carroll also said she told two friends about the incident. One advised her to go to the police, but the other warned her to keep quiet, saying: "Forget it! He has 200 lawyers. He'll bury you."

Mr Trump quickly dismissed the allegation, accusing Ms Carroll of lying to sell her book.

She then filed a defamation lawsuit against Mr Trump while he was US president, saying his comments had harmed her reputation.

Mr Trump's lawyers tried to delay the deposition, but Judge Lewis A Kaplan of the federal court in Manhattan last week denied the request.

Mr Trump had responded to that legal setback by taking to social media to say "this 'Ms Bergdorf Goodman' case is a complete con job".

More than a dozen women have previously made sexual misconduct allegations against Mr Trump, which he has denied.

Last month, Ms Carroll's lawyers said she intends to sue Mr Trump a second time under a new law that gives adult sexual assault victims a one-time opportunity to file civil lawsuits even if the statute of limitations has expired.

She plans to file the new lawsuit on 24 November, her attorney said.

This is the latest in a string of legal challenges facing Mr Trump.

Among other cases, he is facing allegations of fraud by New York prosecutors, who filed a lawsuit against him in September, and is being investigated by the Department of Justice for removing allegedly classified government documents from the White House and storing them at Mar-a-Lago.

Mr Trump has denied wrongdoing in all cases.

BBC
 
Elon Musk has said Twitter will form a moderation council "with widely diverse viewpoints" and that "no major content decisions or account reinstatements" will be made before it meets.

Musk's $44bn deal to buy Twitter completed on Thursday and he reportedly sacked the company's chief executive and two other top bosses.

The world's richest man tweeted "the bird is freed" and "let the good times roll", before a tweet on Friday announced the setting up of the content moderation council.

He's previously promised to overhaul the service by getting rid of fake accounts and ensuring it's a place where a "range of beliefs can be debated in a healthy manner".

Donald Trump - arguably once Twitter's most famous user - is one of those whose account could be reinstated.

The former president was banned after the siege on the US Capitol in January 2021 for allegedly inciting violence with two of his posts.

However, Musk said earlier this year that the ban was a "mistake" and "morally wrong".

Trump celebrated the takeover on TruthSocial, a conservative social media platform he created, by posting that Twitter was "now in sane hands" and would "no longer be run by Radical Left Lunatics and Maniacs that truly hate our country".

Many on the right of the political spectrum have long argued that Twitter and other social media sites are biased against their views and quick to 'deplatform' them.

Musk's approach to Twitter could allay some of those accusations as he's described himself as a "free speech absolutist".

However, he also assured advertisers Twitter would not become a "free-for-all hellscape, where anything can be said with no consequences".

Donald Trump said in his post that the service would become "smaller but better" and that it must "work hard to rid itself of all the bots and fake accounts".

He also claimed his own TruthSocial had become a "phenomena" which last week had "bigger numbers" than TikTok, Twitter and Facebook.

It's unclear what figures he's referring to, but the claim is likely to be false given the huge user base of those services.

Musk's purchase of Twitter completed a day before the 28 October deadline to avoid the deal going to court. The company had taken legal action to force the deal through after Musk backed out in July over the number of fake and spam accounts.

Earlier this week, Musk posted a bizarre video of himself entering Twitter's San Francisco headquarters carrying a sink alongside the message: "Entering Twitter HQ - let that sink in".

He's also now updated his Twitter bio to "Chief Twit".

According to reports, Musk told staff during his visit it was not true he was planning on cutting up to 75% of Twitter staff after acquiring the company.

It was previously reported that Musk told investors he was hoping to cut around three-quarters of the firm's 7,500 employees.

He has told investors he plans to sell users premium subscriptions to reduce reliance on ads, allow content creators to make money and enable payments, according to Reuters news agency.

SKY
 
I cannot wait for Trump to back on Twitter.

There is an entire BBC documentary on Trump and his tweets! Such is the appeal of the great Trump!

I am sure Liberals and Democrats are in panic mode!

Trump 2024 here we come!

:)))
 
Trump sues NY Attorney General Letitia James for 'intimidation'

Donald Trump has sued New York Attorney General Letitia James, accusing her of conducting a "war of intimidation and harassment" against him.

It follows a lawsuit that Ms James launched against Mr Trump and three of his children last September, accusing them of fraud committed over a decade.

Mr Trump, a Republican, has long accused the Democrat of abusing her position for political gain.

The former president has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

In the latest lawsuit - which was filed to the Florida State Circuit Court - Mr Trump accused Ms James of "a relentless, pernicious, public and unapologetic crusade" against him and the Trump Organization.

He also alleges that the attorney general's own case against him is a "plot" to obtain control of his business that began as a "cartoonish, thinly-veiled effort to publicly malign" the former president.

On his Truth Social social media account, he added that, if he were "not leading in the polls by substantial margins against both Democrats and Republicans, this would not be happening".

In a statement, a spokesman for Ms James's office said that "no number of lawsuits will deter" New York's case against Mr Trump.

"We sued Donald Trump because he committed extensive financial fraud," the statement said. "That fact hasn't changed, and neither will our resolve to ensure that no mater how powerful or political one might be, no one is above the law."

Mr Trump's lawsuit is the latest twist in a long-running feud between Mr Trump and Ms James, who - on the night she was elected in 2018 - vowed to shine "a bright light" on his real estate dealings.

Mr Trump, for his part, has accused her of conducting a "witch hunt" and branded Ms James - the first black woman to be New York's attorney general - a "racist".

BBC
 
Trump drops strong hint about 2024 White House run

US President Donald Trump has dropped one of his strongest hints yet that he may run for the White House again.

He told a crowd in Sioux City, Iowa, that he will "very, very, very probably do it again" in 2024.

Mr Trump was speaking at the first of four rallies in five days as he campaigns for Republican candidates in next week's midterm elections.

US President Joe Biden is also travelling across the country to get out the vote.

Neither Mr Biden nor Mr Trump is on the ballot next Tuesday when American voters will decide the balance of power in the US Congress and key state governorships.

But the midterms will set the US political landscape ahead of the presidential election in two years' time.

On Thursday night, Mr Trump, a Republican, repeated his unfounded claim that he lost in 2020 because of widespread election fraud.

"I ran twice," he said. "I won twice, and did much better the second time than I did the first, getting millions more votes in 2020 than I got in 2016.

"And likewise, getting more votes than any sitting president in the history of our country by far.

"And now in order to make our country successful, and safe and glorious. I will very, very, very probably do it again."

"Very soon," he told the cheering crowd. "Get ready."

Mr Trump did win the most votes ever - 72 million - for a sitting president in 2020, but still lost to the challenger, Mr Biden, a Democrat, who pulled in 81 million.

Mr Biden - who campaigned on Thursday in New Mexico and California - has reportedly been meeting senior advisers to plan his potential 2024 re-election campaign, setting up a possible rematch with Mr Trump.

For his part, Mr Trump has teased for months about a potential third campaign for the White House.

In October, he told a rally in Texas: "I will probably have to do it again." In Pennsylvania in September, he said: "I may just have to do it again."

Mr Trump's former senior counsellor, Kellyanne Conway, said earlier on Thursday at an event in Washington DC that her former boss would "announce soon" about his possible presidential plans.

She said she gave Mr Trump credit for resisting the temptation to declare a White House run already this year, as it would have distracted from Republican candidates in the midterms.

If he does run in 2024, he may not go unchallenged within his party.

Potential Republican rivals include Mr Trump's former Vice-President Mike Pence and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, among others.

BBC
 
If USA elects that man again, I will lose all faith in it.

I honestly think a second civil war is coming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cricket Warrior
  • Poll Poll
Donald Trump announces Israel-Iran ceasefire
2
Replies
146
Views
3K
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
Cricket Warrior
  • Poll Poll
Should Donald Trump be awarded a Nobel Prize for peace for his role in world tranquility?
2 3
Replies
162
Views
4K
JaDed
JaDed
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
[VIDEOS] Donald Trump blasts Volodymyr Zelensky as 'disrespectful' in public blow-up at White House
3 4 5
Replies
365
Views
8K
Ball Blazer
Ball Blazer
FearlessRoar
  • Poll Poll
Donald Trump as the 47th President of the United States - Performance Watch
2 3 4
Replies
300
Views
7K
rpant_gabba
rpant_gabba
The Bald Eagle
  • Poll Poll
[PICTURES] Donald Trump and Elon Musk enter bitter feud after the exit of latter from the Trump administration
Replies
69
Views
2K
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
Back
Top