Safetydan
Well-Known Member
NoIt’s not wealth inequality
NoIt’s not wealth inequality
Duh, it's because the justice system favors conservatives.Great example!
Thought experiment open to everyone:
What do you think would happen if they put Trump in jail for violating a gag order?
You are probably right that you’d be prosecuted for violating a gag order. Trump has too in the form of being assessed a $10k fine, which if we’re being honest is nothing. It is unfair that you’d be prosecuted but Trump is not, but why is it so that Trump isn’t being prosecuted while you would be?
It is in Judge Engoron’s power to do that, and he hates Trump with a burning passion, so why isn’t he doing it? It is because this is a political prosecution and Engoron is getting dozens of credible death threats every day even without jailing Trump.
This is not justice being blind. This is justice being hyper-aware of political ramifications, and the political ramifications of Trump being put in jail for exercising his freedom of speech are so dire the even a true Trump-hater like Engoron won’t go there. Everything about this trial, from the charges, to the venue, to the choice of judge, to the enforcement or lack-of-enforcement of gag orders is political, and 62% of all Americans see it that way. This is a political prosecution. This is governmental corruption.
We agree it was a search, but I noticed you offered a weaker claim this time. I'm asking you to provide evidence that was a "pre-search", which would mean it was a private search before some inevitable classified document search.To be clear, the AP wrote a thing. You said the thing citing the AP claim. I said I agree with the thing. Now you want me to debunk the thing we both agree happened where Pence searched his house before the FBI got there with their own search team?
Can you provide evidence he hates Trump, specifically, as opposed the legal strategy being employed by Trump and his lawyers?It is in Judge Engoron’s power to do that, and he hates Trump with a burning passion, ...
Great postlol
Yeah, and the whole looking for evidence related to J6 is the reason he got searched. Biden voluntarily worked with his investigation out of caution, not for participating in an attempted coup.
Aaaand, Trump lied to his lawyers, paid employees to move documents to hide from his lawyers and feds, and showed classified information to others ON TAPE.
Your selective nuance is hilarious. The minute you run into your confirmation bias you lie, change your story, and continue to shill for Trump.
It’s like child running into a screen door, over and over again.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We agree it was a search, but I noticed you offered a weaker claim this time. I'm asking you to provide evidence that was a "pre-search", which would mean it was a private search before some inevitable classified document search.
Are you trying to be obtuse?"A lawyer for former Vice President Mike Pence discovered about a dozen documents marked as classified at Pence’s Indiana home last week" -CNN
"Former Vice President Mike Pence‘s lawyers discovered classified material at his private home"- Wall Street Journal
"The documents, discovered by a lawyer last week for Mr Pence at his Indiana home" -BBC
Lawyers for former VP Pence conducted a search of his Indiana home in advance of the FBI searching his home. It was a pre-search and they found documents.
Classified Documents Found at Mike Pence’s Indiana Home
Former Vice President Mike Pence’s lawyers discovered classified material at his private home, according to a letter his representative sent to the National Archives.www.wsj.comMike Pence: Classified documents found at former vice-president's home
The files were passed to the FBI following their discovery by the former US vice-president's lawyer.www.bbc.com
I'm asking for evidence that it was a pre-search, instead of a precautionary search or a private search, as Pence's lawyer said. Using the timeline is insufficient, you'll need to demonstrate that the FBI's search for classified documents was coming even if Pence conducted no private search, or it's not a search before a search, which is what "pre-search" would mean.Lawyers for former VP Pence conducted a search of his Indiana home in advance of the FBI searching his home. It was a pre-search and they found documents.
Likely, yes.Are you trying to be obtuse?
Yes, the FBI were coming no matter what. The subpoena from the FBI to Pence and his lawyers, as noted even in your AP article, used the J6 investigation as its pretext. If the FBI conducted the search because of the found documents, as many tell the story, the pretext on the subpoena would have listed the found documents. It doesn't. The subpoena was sought using the J6 investigation as a pretext. Pence's lawyers delayed the FBI by insisting on negotiating a schedule, and they used that time to have a team pre-search before the J6 subpoena search took place.I'm asking for evidence that it was a pre-search, instead of a precautionary search or a private search, as Pence's lawyer said. Using the timeline is insufficient, you'll need to demonstrate that the FBI's search for classified documents was coming even if Pence conducted no private search, or it's not a search before a search, which is what "pre-search" would mean.
No. I genuinely don't understand what One Brow is getting at. The AP said a thing. One Brow said the thing citing the AP article. I agreed the thing happened. Now One Brow is trying to imply some sort of difference between a 'pre-search' and a 'search conducted by Pence's legal team prior to a subsequent FBI search'. If you see something I'm clearly missing then please spell it out.Are you trying to be obtuse?
Yes, the FBI were coming not matter what. The subpoena from the FBI to Pence and his lawyers, as noted even in your AP article, used the J6 investigation as its pretext. If the FBI conducted the search because of the found documents, as many tell the story, the pretext on the subpoena would have listed the found documents. It doesn't. The subpoena was sought using the J6 investigation as a pretext. Pence's lawyers delayed the FBI by insisting on negotiating a schedule, and they used that time to have a team pre-search before the J6 subpoena search took place.
The J6 pretext used in the subpoena, the negotiation of schedule conducted by Pence's legal council, the search conducted by Pence's lawyers before the FBI got there, and the subsequent search conducted by the FBI is all in the AP article. I don't understand what you are taking issue with.
The January 6th insurrection is a pretext (meaning not worthy of being investigated)? That's pretty far off the deep end.Yes, the FBI were coming no matter what. The subpoena from the FBI to Pence and his lawyers, as noted even in your AP article, used the J6 investigation as its pretext.
The events of January 6th are worthy of being investigated, but it is not probable cause for searching Mike Pence’s house for classified documents. Has anyone even alleged that Mike Pence had any role in fomenting the January 6th insurrection other than by doing his job of presiding over the ceremonial recognition of the Electoral College vote that happened a month earlier?The January 6th insurrection is a pretext (meaning not worthy of being investigated)? That's pretty far off the deep end.
I've been waiting for you to get around to this. What you are saying amounts to is Pence was being investigated for what role he might have played (as he considered playing one) in the insurrection, whereas four years earlier there was no insurrection for Biden to have played a part in, and that led to the Biden and Pence being treated differently. I am comfortable with people who considered participating in an insurrection being treated differently than people who did not. It in no way supports your position that their is some sort of bias in favor of liberals/Democrats (which sounds ridiculous on its face because the FBI is one of the most conservative sections of government).
You said the subpoena did not mention classified documents. Further, from what I can construct of the timeline:The events of January 6th are worthy of being investigated, but it is not probable cause for searching Mike Pence’s house for classified documents.
It has been acknowledged that he considered playing a role, and sought the advice of counsel to see if he had other choices.Has anyone even alleged that Mike Pence had any role in fomenting the January 6th insurrection other than by doing his job of presiding over the ceremonial recognition of the Electoral College vote that happened a month earlier?
February 9 was only the day Pence's lawyers received the actual subpoena. They knew long before then that the FBI were going to search Pence's home.You said the subpoena did not mention classified documents. Further, from what I can construct of the timeline:
Pence conducts his search on or shortly before January 24
Pence is subpoenaed on or shortly before February 9
The FBI search is Feb 10
I am having trouble seeing how you fit your narrative into this timeline.
How does this reconcile with Pence's motion to quash the subpoena in March, and only agreed to cooperate in April? He attempted to quash a subpoena he had already submitted to?February 9 was only the day Pence's lawyers received the actual subpoena. They knew long before then that the FBI were going to search Pence's home.
"The subpoena follows months of negotiations between federal prosecutors and Pence's legal team."
Mike Pence subpoenaed by special counsel overseeing Trump probes: Sources
Former Vice President Mike Pence has been subpoenaed by the special counsel overseeing probes into former President Donald Trump, according to multiple sources.abcnews.go.com
Interesting that you didn't ask that of the original AP article you agreed with and cited as your source of information.Why should I think the subpoena and the search are connected?
The AP article did not claim the FBI search and subpoena were connected. Their only mention of the subpoena refers to it as a "separate investigation".Interesting that you didn't ask that of the original AP article you agreed with and cited as your source of information.
You're using many suppositions that you have not given evidence for.The reason for attempting to get the subpoena quashed after the search is because the subpoena was purposely broad. It wasn't limited to only searching his house but extended to gathering of pertinent information. Pence's lawyers had agreed to the FBI search because they had already conducted their own search and had a good idea of what the FBI would find. When the same pertinent information subpoena was later used to compel Pence to give information in the form of testimony, his lawyers balked. Negotiations happened, compromises were made, and the testimony happened.