The reason why Biden has not been charged for similar actions, it's because the boxes he possessed were always sealed, he returned them to the national archives as soon as they were requested, he did not know what documents were there and he never showed them to the improper people. If evidence comes out to challenge all this that will be a different story but of course we know a sitting president cannot be indicted.
Trump indicted in classified documents probe
- Thread starter SomeSoldier
- Start date
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
they were found in his garage next to the corvette .. in a unlocked place
and he was a senator at the time and should not have any of that ..
No he got the records while vice president. But again he returned them as soon as they were asked for, he didn't try to conspire with his lawyer and other people to hide them, none of them were related to nuclear weapons or national defense. Very different situation with Trump.
But of course we know Biden cannot be indicted until he is no longer president. That's the rule.
Jmac00
.475 A&M Magnum
Rep. Jim Jordans letter to Comrade merrick garland
Dear Attorney General Garland: The Biden Department of Justice is reportedly about to indict a former president and President Biden’s chief rival in the upcoming presidential election.1 According to reports, the Department will indict President Donald Trump, despite declining to indict former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her mishandling of classified information and failing to indict President Biden for his mishandling of classified information. The indictment creates, at the minimum, a serious appearance of a double standard and a miscarriage of justice—an impression that is only strengthened by allegations that a Biden Justice Department lawyer “inappropriately sought to pressure” a Trump-affiliated lawyer with the prospect of a judgeship.2 Additional information recently obtained by the Committee about the Department’s execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s residence only reinforces our grave concerns that your reported actions are nothing more than a politically motivated prosecution. On June 7, 2023—days before the reported indictment of former President Trump—the Committee conducted a transcribed interview of Steven D’Antuono. Mr. D’Antuono served as the former Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office (WFO) and one of the most senior FBI officials in charge of effectuating the unprecedented raid of President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago. During his testimony, Mr. D’Antuono expressed strong concerns with the Department’s pursuit of the raid and noted several unusual features in the Department’s handling of the case. Mr. D’Antuono, who had over two decades of FBI experience, noted his frustration that the FBI was going to be “left holding the bag again” with respect to the search of President Trump’s residence.3 1 Paula Reid, et al., Donald Trump indicted on 7 counts in classified documents probe, CNN (Jun. 9, 2023). 2 See Ken Dilanian, Lawyer for witness in Trump docs probe alleges prosecutorial misconduct, NBC News (Jun. 8, 2023). 3 Transcribed Interview of Steven D’Antuono at 30 (Jun. 7, 2023).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 2 During his transcribed interview, Mr. D’Antuono detailed how he disagreed with the Justice Department’s approach to the raid and described several abnormalities about the Department’s actions in pursuing its investigation of President Trump: 1. The Miami Field Office did not conduct the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that FBI headquarters made the decision to assign the execution of the search warrant to the Washington Field Office (WFO) despite the location of the search occurring in the territory of the FBI’s Miami Field Office. Mr. D’Antuono stated that he had “absolutely no idea” why this decision was made and questioned why the Miami Field Office was not taking the lead on this matter.4 Mr. D’Antuono stated that the FBI “learned a lot of stuff from [the] Crossfire Hurricane” investigation—notably “that the [FBI] Headquarters does not work the investigation, it is supposed to be the field offices working the investigations.”5 Mr. D’Antuono indicated that his “concern is that [the] DOJ was not following the same principles . . . .”6 In fact, as recently as May 2023, in response to the report of Special Counsel Durham, the FBI asserted that “investigations should be run out of the Field” and not from Washington, D.C.7 2. The Department did not assign a U.S. Attorney’s Office to the matter. According to Mr. D’Antuono, it was unusual to not have a U.S. Attorney assigned to an investigative matter, especially a matter of this magnitude. He explained that he “didn’t understand why there wasn’t a US Attorney assigned” and “raised this concern a lot with” Department officials because this was out of the ordinary. 8 Mr. D’Antuono indicated that he “never got a good answer” and was told that the National Security Division would be handling this matter—with Jay Bratt, who leads the Department’s counterintelligence division, as “the lead prosecutor on the case.” 9 Mr. Bratt is the same Department lawyer who allegedly improperly pressured a lawyer representing an employee of President Trump.10 Mr. D’Antuono again noted his concern regarding lessons learned from Crossfire Hurricane, that the Justice Department was not following the principle that “Headquarters does not work the investigation . . . .”11 3. The FBI did not first seek consent to effectuate the search. Mr. D’Antuono recounted a meeting between FBI and Department officials during which the Department assertively pushed for the FBI to promptly execute the search warrant.12 Based upon his over-20-year tenure at the FBI, Mr. D’Antuono testified that he believed that the FBI, 4 Id. at 16. 5 Id. at 77. 6 Id. 7 Letter from Mr. Jason A. Jones, Gen. Counsel, Fed. Bureau of Investigation, to Mr. John H. Durham, Special Counsel, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (May 15, 2023). 8 D’Antuono Interview at 19-22. 9 Id. at 19. 10 Dilanian, supra note 2. 11 Id. at 77. 12 Cf. Paula Reid et al., Justice Department was prepared to seek warrant had Biden not consented to home search, sources say, CNN (Jan. 25, 2023) (“Federal investigators also were prepared to seek a warrant if they did not get consent to search the Wilmington property, according to multiple sources.”).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 3 prior to resorting to a search warrant, should have sought consent to search the premises. He testified that this outcome would have been “the best thing for all parties” involved— “[f]or the FBI, for former President Trump, and for the country . . . .”13 Mr. D’Antuono indicated a belief that either you or Director Christopher Wray made the decision to seek a search warrant, despite opposition from the line agents working this case in the WFO. 14 Following that meeting, Mr. D’Antuono described how Justice Department counterintelligence official George Toscas—who also reportedly worked on the “Crossfire Hurricane and Clinton email investigations”15—told him that FBI agents were ready to execute the warrant.16 Mr. D’Antuono pushed back on the Department for trying to unilaterally allocate FBI resources.17 4. The FBI refused to wait for President Trump’s attorney to be present before executing the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that the FBI sought to exclude President Trump’s attorney from the search, a move with which Mr. D’Antuono disagreed.18 Mr. D’Antuono believed that the FBI should have worked with the attorney to get consent to search the residence prior to seeking a warrant for the search. Mr. D’Antuono believes that “there was a good likelihood that [they] could have gotten consent . . . .”19 The Committee previously requested information and documents related to the FBI’s raid of President Trump’s home, which the Department has refused to provide.20 In light of this testimony and the Department’s failure to respond to our previous oversight requests, we write to renew and supplement our request for documents necessary for our oversight. Specifically, we ask that you produce the following information: 1. All documents and communications referring or relating to meetings between FBI and Justice Department officials prior to the execution of the search warrant on President Trump’s private residence; 2. All documents and communications referring or relating to the execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s private residence, including those sent or received by the following FBI and Justice Department Officials: a. Paul Abbate, b. Matthew Olsen, 13 Id. at 23. 14 Id. at 24. 15 Carol D. Leonnig, et al., Showdown before the raid: FBI agents and prosecutors argued over Trump, WASH POST (Mar. 1, 2023). 16 D’Antuono Interview at 107. 17 Id. at 107-08. 18 Id. at 108-09. 19 Id. at 30. 20 See, e.g., Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Jan. 17, 2023); Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Nov. 2, 2022); Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, et al., Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Aug. 15, 2022).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 4 c. Jay Bratt, d. George Toscas, e. Steven D’Antuono; and 3. All documents and communications between or among Washington Field Office agents and employees and the U.S. Secret Service about a potential search of President Trump’s residence. Please provide this information as soon as possible but not later than 5:00 p.m. on June 16, 2023. The Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction to oversee the activities of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation pursuant to Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. If you have any questions about this request, please have your staff contact Committee staff at (202) 225-6906. Sincerely, Jim Jordan Chairman
cc: The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member ( i hope this fat blowhard's fat head explodes all of Gotham )
Dear Attorney General Garland: The Biden Department of Justice is reportedly about to indict a former president and President Biden’s chief rival in the upcoming presidential election.1 According to reports, the Department will indict President Donald Trump, despite declining to indict former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her mishandling of classified information and failing to indict President Biden for his mishandling of classified information. The indictment creates, at the minimum, a serious appearance of a double standard and a miscarriage of justice—an impression that is only strengthened by allegations that a Biden Justice Department lawyer “inappropriately sought to pressure” a Trump-affiliated lawyer with the prospect of a judgeship.2 Additional information recently obtained by the Committee about the Department’s execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s residence only reinforces our grave concerns that your reported actions are nothing more than a politically motivated prosecution. On June 7, 2023—days before the reported indictment of former President Trump—the Committee conducted a transcribed interview of Steven D’Antuono. Mr. D’Antuono served as the former Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Washington Field Office (WFO) and one of the most senior FBI officials in charge of effectuating the unprecedented raid of President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago. During his testimony, Mr. D’Antuono expressed strong concerns with the Department’s pursuit of the raid and noted several unusual features in the Department’s handling of the case. Mr. D’Antuono, who had over two decades of FBI experience, noted his frustration that the FBI was going to be “left holding the bag again” with respect to the search of President Trump’s residence.3 1 Paula Reid, et al., Donald Trump indicted on 7 counts in classified documents probe, CNN (Jun. 9, 2023). 2 See Ken Dilanian, Lawyer for witness in Trump docs probe alleges prosecutorial misconduct, NBC News (Jun. 8, 2023). 3 Transcribed Interview of Steven D’Antuono at 30 (Jun. 7, 2023).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 2 During his transcribed interview, Mr. D’Antuono detailed how he disagreed with the Justice Department’s approach to the raid and described several abnormalities about the Department’s actions in pursuing its investigation of President Trump: 1. The Miami Field Office did not conduct the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that FBI headquarters made the decision to assign the execution of the search warrant to the Washington Field Office (WFO) despite the location of the search occurring in the territory of the FBI’s Miami Field Office. Mr. D’Antuono stated that he had “absolutely no idea” why this decision was made and questioned why the Miami Field Office was not taking the lead on this matter.4 Mr. D’Antuono stated that the FBI “learned a lot of stuff from [the] Crossfire Hurricane” investigation—notably “that the [FBI] Headquarters does not work the investigation, it is supposed to be the field offices working the investigations.”5 Mr. D’Antuono indicated that his “concern is that [the] DOJ was not following the same principles . . . .”6 In fact, as recently as May 2023, in response to the report of Special Counsel Durham, the FBI asserted that “investigations should be run out of the Field” and not from Washington, D.C.7 2. The Department did not assign a U.S. Attorney’s Office to the matter. According to Mr. D’Antuono, it was unusual to not have a U.S. Attorney assigned to an investigative matter, especially a matter of this magnitude. He explained that he “didn’t understand why there wasn’t a US Attorney assigned” and “raised this concern a lot with” Department officials because this was out of the ordinary. 8 Mr. D’Antuono indicated that he “never got a good answer” and was told that the National Security Division would be handling this matter—with Jay Bratt, who leads the Department’s counterintelligence division, as “the lead prosecutor on the case.” 9 Mr. Bratt is the same Department lawyer who allegedly improperly pressured a lawyer representing an employee of President Trump.10 Mr. D’Antuono again noted his concern regarding lessons learned from Crossfire Hurricane, that the Justice Department was not following the principle that “Headquarters does not work the investigation . . . .”11 3. The FBI did not first seek consent to effectuate the search. Mr. D’Antuono recounted a meeting between FBI and Department officials during which the Department assertively pushed for the FBI to promptly execute the search warrant.12 Based upon his over-20-year tenure at the FBI, Mr. D’Antuono testified that he believed that the FBI, 4 Id. at 16. 5 Id. at 77. 6 Id. 7 Letter from Mr. Jason A. Jones, Gen. Counsel, Fed. Bureau of Investigation, to Mr. John H. Durham, Special Counsel, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (May 15, 2023). 8 D’Antuono Interview at 19-22. 9 Id. at 19. 10 Dilanian, supra note 2. 11 Id. at 77. 12 Cf. Paula Reid et al., Justice Department was prepared to seek warrant had Biden not consented to home search, sources say, CNN (Jan. 25, 2023) (“Federal investigators also were prepared to seek a warrant if they did not get consent to search the Wilmington property, according to multiple sources.”).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 3 prior to resorting to a search warrant, should have sought consent to search the premises. He testified that this outcome would have been “the best thing for all parties” involved— “[f]or the FBI, for former President Trump, and for the country . . . .”13 Mr. D’Antuono indicated a belief that either you or Director Christopher Wray made the decision to seek a search warrant, despite opposition from the line agents working this case in the WFO. 14 Following that meeting, Mr. D’Antuono described how Justice Department counterintelligence official George Toscas—who also reportedly worked on the “Crossfire Hurricane and Clinton email investigations”15—told him that FBI agents were ready to execute the warrant.16 Mr. D’Antuono pushed back on the Department for trying to unilaterally allocate FBI resources.17 4. The FBI refused to wait for President Trump’s attorney to be present before executing the search. Mr. D’Antuono testified that the FBI sought to exclude President Trump’s attorney from the search, a move with which Mr. D’Antuono disagreed.18 Mr. D’Antuono believed that the FBI should have worked with the attorney to get consent to search the residence prior to seeking a warrant for the search. Mr. D’Antuono believes that “there was a good likelihood that [they] could have gotten consent . . . .”19 The Committee previously requested information and documents related to the FBI’s raid of President Trump’s home, which the Department has refused to provide.20 In light of this testimony and the Department’s failure to respond to our previous oversight requests, we write to renew and supplement our request for documents necessary for our oversight. Specifically, we ask that you produce the following information: 1. All documents and communications referring or relating to meetings between FBI and Justice Department officials prior to the execution of the search warrant on President Trump’s private residence; 2. All documents and communications referring or relating to the execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s private residence, including those sent or received by the following FBI and Justice Department Officials: a. Paul Abbate, b. Matthew Olsen, 13 Id. at 23. 14 Id. at 24. 15 Carol D. Leonnig, et al., Showdown before the raid: FBI agents and prosecutors argued over Trump, WASH POST (Mar. 1, 2023). 16 D’Antuono Interview at 107. 17 Id. at 107-08. 18 Id. at 108-09. 19 Id. at 30. 20 See, e.g., Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Jan. 17, 2023); Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Nov. 2, 2022); Letter from Rep. Jim Jordan, et al., Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Hon. Merrick B. Garland, Atty Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Aug. 15, 2022).
The Honorable Merrick B. Garland June 9, 2023 Page 4 c. Jay Bratt, d. George Toscas, e. Steven D’Antuono; and 3. All documents and communications between or among Washington Field Office agents and employees and the U.S. Secret Service about a potential search of President Trump’s residence. Please provide this information as soon as possible but not later than 5:00 p.m. on June 16, 2023. The Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction to oversee the activities of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation pursuant to Rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives. If you have any questions about this request, please have your staff contact Committee staff at (202) 225-6906. Sincerely, Jim Jordan Chairman
cc: The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member ( i hope this fat blowhard's fat head explodes all of Gotham )
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
ok Vice prez .. still had no privilege to have them ..
and if he gave them up .. then how were they found in the garage
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
GOYABEAN
.950 JDJ
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Remember that long thread in the other section, the covid thread? Remember the small group of naysayers? Remember how WE were the stupid ones? Remember how WE were going to be proved wrong? Remember how WE were the conspiracy theorists?
Well, that small group of naysayers haven't said a fucking word in a long time on that thread. Meanwhile, WE were right all along.
Well, that small group of naysayers haven't said a fucking word in a long time on that thread. Meanwhile, WE were right all along.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
i got my medical doctorate degree in that thread ..
nope ..
i got it in high school
lol
nope ..
i got it in high school
lol
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Just a reminder lol...
Jmac00
.475 A&M Magnum
better than average
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
Why do they fear him? Back in 2019 he already told us what we are just getting evidence of now.
IrishMick
.44 mag
The first part of the article actually is the reason he should be acquitted of any charges. These agencies work for the Chief Executive, not the other way around. Chuckles Schumer said the quiet part out loud when he said the intelligence community had 9 ways to Sunday to get him. These fucks don’t get to call the shots, the President does.
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
"What was established now? You can go after those individuals that are running for president. Everything is off the table now. You can go after that person. Think about that for a second. Let's say Michelle gets thrown into the ring for candidate. You know, Joe has too much baggage. They don't want RFK. Do you think that's a possibility they throw Michelle in? Obama has always said they never had any corruption in his administration. Maybe Trump knew he was going to go up against her. Now Trump just established you can go after those running for president. You can go after that person. Who is she attached to. Obama in the basement. Then think presidential records act."
Again, nothing and I mean NOTHING would surprise me anymore. "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes."
Again, nothing and I mean NOTHING would surprise me anymore. "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes."
Steal2B
.700 Nitro Express
A short article. Says it all...
American Icon KitchenAid Pulls Its Products From Target: "We Have Different Values"
In another serious blow to the Target Corporation, KitchenAid Appliances has decided to pull its stock from the shelves and discontinue doing business there. “We have different values,” said CEO Joe Barron, “We can’t be associated
dailynewsintime.net
A short article. Says it all...
American Icon KitchenAid Pulls Its Products From Target: "We Have Different Values"
In another serious blow to the Target Corporation, KitchenAid Appliances has decided to pull its stock from the shelves and discontinue doing business there. “We have different values,” said CEO Joe Barron, “We can’t be associateddailynewsintime.net
Something more modern of an article.
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/XOL7EBHPOJKBXMEQDQITGVZZ5U.jpg)
Donald Trump, the Presidential Records Act and ‘Clinton's sock drawer’ defense
If you believe the most ardent defenders of newly indicted former president Donald Trump, there’s a silver bullet hiding in Bill Clinton’s sock drawer.
www.reuters.com
GOYABEAN
.950 JDJ
They're coming out of the woodwork
spat
.700 Nitro Express
And a couple agent provocateurs mixed in causing trouble, than the MSM can immediately attribute to everyone present.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
If the law *isn’t* applied uniformly and fairly (which it clearly isn't being) then the entire system is illegitimate.
Once that is off the table, then it is simply a case of might makes right, and fairness has left the building. You do not fight fair against an opponent who has completely abandoned all pretense of following the rules.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
What I want to know is *when* and *how* did he supposedly steal these documents.
My understanding is that they were delivered to mar-a-lago by appropriately credentialed government employees during the course of their normal duties.
So, he "stole" them by, what, not ordering them removed when Biden was sworn in ?
The way you guys talk you make it sound like he smuggled them out or the white house in the trunk of his car.
I am pretty sure Trump never lugged boxes of documents around personally, ever. He's not the type to engage in that sort of manual labor.
spat
.700 Nitro Express
This makes Watergate look like passing notes during an elementary school math test.
GOYABEAN
.950 JDJ
It's kinda sad how the playing field will look like in another 10 years from now full Venezuelan! 
Some pretty interesting polling data in this video from Rasmussen highlights the shift in public opinion over 2020 election fraud along with a bunch of other related polling data.
It seems that the opinions of more Independents are beginning to align with Republicans over voting issues. That makes the proposition of continued cheating riskier (not saying it wouldn't happen tho). Obviously, democrats can't attack Independents, that would be political suicide. Even continued attacks on Republicans for their position on election fraud risks driving sympathetic Independents further into the Republican camp. This BS is the only way for them to deal with Trump.
I think the polls also display the intellectual dishonesty of democrats.
I know some here don't care for videos. The video is almost 27 minutes but it is indexed in the description box if you open it in YT to make it easier.
Last edited:
Arjuna
.338 Win Mag
Modean
.223 Rem
Turns out you can be impeached for holding up aid to convince countries to investigate corrupt people.