No, he didn’t. He rose as far as lieutenant colonel, but he was never its leader. I think you’re mixing him up with Andropov.
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
It’s not a court case until they get an indictment. Right now it’s just investigations. Three of them, at least, probably more.
Yes but the feds don’t investigate lightly, and they are super thorough.
That turns out not to be the case; Trump isn’t even facing a warming oven over this. Despite how piss-poor his legal team is, it does not matter because they are going to succeed in getting the judge they want – and then all bets are off. This will be a repeat of the Kyle Rittenhouse case where any potentially damning evidence is barred from being presented but any minor misstep by those on the other side of the case are exaggerated and considered monumental.
For example; “He had already turned over several boxes and was planning to turn over more - - - and then when he was away from home on business the DOJ jackbooted their way into his bedroom and fondled the first lady’s undergarments!!”
The fix is in. The Federal Court is no longer an impartial arbiter of jurisprudence-- it is a partisan arm of enforcement for those it favors. Also, the Federal Court has always been at war with Eastasia.
People, don’t waste any effort on this matter. I will summarize exactly what the results will be. There either will, or will not be charges brought against Trump but either way the results of this investigation and possible trial will be:
Hey, Trump mishandled some documents, and a few of them were Doozies! But the jackbooted FBI also overstepped their bounds and really - - - - - - everything is behind us now. The documents are back in the archives, the FBI has been trained to not overstep when investigation a political rival. So we are just going to call the matter closed- no harm, no foul.
Personally, I am not sure why I ever believed that unimpeachable evidence, laws, and facts would be enough to convict Trump. In reality, that is an absurd assertion that has never proven to be true with this prey. This hunt is over, you can let your dogs keep looking for scent but the game has fled the hunting preserve-- there is no win ahead for the hunters. I am calling in my dogs and putting out my fire.
Yes, just as he did each time he went to court over election fraud, right?
You do realize that a preliminary statement of intent by a lone federal judge in a matter where the government hasn’t presented its case yet is not irreversible and beyond appeal, right?
I do realize that, and you are free to make your bets as you see fit… But I am pretty sure that I have sensed the way the winds are blowing and my stand at this time is back to where I started – this sounds like a great opportunity to rid the nation of a dangerous plague, but it will never amount to anything.
I believe the justification will end up being-- "Mistakes were made on both sides, yadda, yadda, this does not rise to a serious criminal act and it will be best for everyone to just forget about this and put it behind us. (Just like all of his previous criminal behavior). I wish I was wrong about this . . . but I am not. This investigation will be about ten or twenty different specifics in the future before it is about nothing at all and that is where it will end- nothing at all.
Election Fraud cases are different in many ways. First of all, there are ballots and records and sworn testimony from life long professionals against a heap of nothing. They made a point of holding press events and talking about marching into the courtroom with this briefcase full of proof the election was fraudulent - - and then filing papers that specifically state this is no way a case about fraud.
That is very different from what is going on in the Documents case. The judges (and most of America) have decided what really happened. They reasoned that he has had access to this shit for four years and the world did not end. We got them back, he was probably using them for personal gain one way or another ---- so effing what!!!
They have decided upon the outcome they want-- now they just have to make it happen. And they will.
On a very tangentially related matter- In a business seminar, I was flat out told: "Don’t write an effing agenda for your meeting!! This is YOUR meeting right? Write the minutes you want to file after the meeting and then use that document to crib an agenda to those clueless bastards attending YOUR meeting. Don’t let your meeting be dragged off the ‘agenda’ (isn’t that term quaint?). Ten minutes after the meeting breaks up publish your minutes-- your recording of what happened in the meeting - - - that was written days before the meeting took place. Donald Trump had documents he should not have had – the resolution has been decided, now they just have make it official by refusing to hear this penny-ante suit or by hearing it and being sure the other side has no hope of success.
That is such a bizarre take… They are investigating him for criminal activity. None of what you said seems supported by facts.
According to WABC, they brought them back for Biden to… Ahem!
Perhaps we should call it NAR-A-Lago?
Gifted link to a Washington Post article. Seems the DOJ has already gone through the material seized from Mar-a-Lago, making the appointment of a Special Master pointless.
FBI agents have already finished their examination of possibly privileged documents seized in an Aug. 8 search of Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, according to a Justice Department court filing Monday that could undercut the former president’s efforts to have a special master appointed to review the files.
Given how long TFG and his goons waited, it’s no surprise that they’re too late.
For anyone who enjoys LegalEagle videos (I absolutely do), he has a new video from 2 days ago talking about the latest (really awful) political maneuvers from Trump’s (barely) legal team, and other developments for this case.
As an aside - my Latin is rusty, but isn’t the construction quid pro quo the other way around? The quid is payback for the quo. In other words,
“once Trump has his quo, you’re never going to see your quid”
No, it’s right: They give Trump something (“quid” [something]) with the expectation of getting something else (“pro quo” [for something]).
I mean, technically, it all becomes quid when put into the accusative case as the object of a verb like “has” or “see,” but it’s hard to mix languages.
Are you saying “pro” means something more like “for the purpose of getting” rather than “in return for”?
Quid [in return for] quo.
Quid [for the purpose of getting] quo.
I guess it hinges on how “pro” is used, but I think it’s the former.
In theory, this could allow Trump and Co. to shout about “transparency” even more, but I get that it’s a no-win situation.
I think it’s both: “in exchange for.” Lewis & Short say “So of price, penalty, etc., in exchange , in return for”. https://logeion.uchicago.edu/pro has a few dictionaries: Gaffiot gives both “pour, en faveur de” (for, in favour of) and “pour, à la place de, au lieu de” (for, in the place of, instead of).
To me, all of the examples in your link support the “A in return for B” construction. I’m not seeing any that parallel “A for the purpose of getting B”.