Orlando Buffalo Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 38 minutes ago, Andy1 said: For myself, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, I feel reasonably comfortable calling it a duck. I don’t need a DNA test to tell me it’s a duck. What standard of proof is needed? Does Trump need to go on trial to determine guilt or innocence for you? Similar situation right now- do you think Araiza is a rapist? There is no evidence beyond the accusation but many are calling him a rapist
Andy1 Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 10 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said: Similar situation right now- do you think Araiza is a rapist? There is no evidence beyond the accusation but many are calling him a rapist I have considered this. With Trump, there is evidence. The FBI removed dozens of boxes of classified docs. There are court records of why they searched and what they found. For me, that is credible evidence. With Araiza, we don’t have any such evidence that has been publicly released. It certainly appears that an underage girl was raped, she filed a police report and got a rape test the next day, Araiza may have admitted to having sex with the victim, there may be phone recordings, there are probably witnesses, the others listed in the lawsuit might be friends of Araiza, it might have happened at a place where he lived. There is likely evidence about the events that day that we are not yet aware of. Given all of that, it doesn’t look good for him. The Bills will be forced to make a decision with incomplete knowledge of the events that day. I would probably cut him, but I can’t say he is guilty and I can’t say he is completely innocent.
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 1 minute ago, Andy1 said: I have considered this. With Trump, there is evidence. The FBI removed dozens of boxes of classified docs. There are court records of why they searched and what they found. For me, that is credible evidence. You consider the FBI raid as evidence when the search warrant states it was looking for evidence? By that thought process Brianna Taylor was guilty because they searched her house. What did the FBI find? That evidence is not presented yet and if it is presented I will decide the likelihood he is guilt then. I don't love Trump but the FBI has not looked good when dealing with him.
SoCal Deek Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 1 hour ago, nedboy7 said: Is that what you got out of that? Unreal. Like Jan 6 was too? Yes, that’s what I got. So in a nutshell, the all knowing and infallible US Government lets a bunch of its employees pack up the President’s office and ship the boxes to his house. Then that same government decides they packed up the wrong stuff, wait until the homeowner is out of town, and then raid his home with weapons drawn to retrieve those documents (plus more for good measure) just to return them to the place they say they shouldn’t have been taken from in the first place. Yes…this is utterly STUPID story. 2 1 1
Andy1 Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 19 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said: You consider the FBI raid as evidence when the search warrant states it was looking for evidence? By that thought process Brianna Taylor was guilty because they searched her house. What did the FBI find? That evidence is not presented yet and if it is presented I will decide the likelihood he is guilt then. I don't love Trump but the FBI has not looked good when dealing with him. Tim, read the affidavit. It is damning evidence. We are talking about thousands and thousands of pages of classified documents. These include the most sensitive information that could cause tremendous harm to national security.
BillsFanNC Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 18 minutes ago, Andy1 said: Tim, read the affidavit. It is damning evidence. We are talking about thousands and thousands of pages of classified documents. These include the most sensitive information that could cause tremendous harm to national security. All of this ignores, as per usual, that Donald Trump was POTUS. 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 1 hour ago, Andy1 said: Tim, read the affidavit. It is damning evidence. We are talking about thousands and thousands of pages of classified documents. These include the most sensitive information that could cause tremendous harm to national security. The president had access to top secret documents? SHOCKING! He removed them from DC when he was president and he has the legal right to do that. If the FBI show us he was being inappropriate with the information then I will join the call to arrest him but this article for people who have TDS and don't understand that while president he could do whatever he wanted with ALL of the data you are fretting over. You do realize that Biden could tell Russia our entire military plan for Ukraine and it would be legal so long as he did not profit from it personally? 1 1
sherpa Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 52 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said: The president had access to top secret documents? SHOCKING! He removed them from DC when he was president and he has the legal right to do that. If the FBI show us he was being inappropriate with the information then I will join the call to arrest him but this article for people wh I strongly disagree with the focus of this post. The President has access to what he needs to do his job. There is absolutely no reason to have anything beyond that information, and I'm not sure why anyone would want to. He is not an analyst. He has absolutely no background in these things. Methods, sources and tech data/capability are not part of that reasonable request for data, and Trump wasn't that much interested in that stuff anyway. I have absolutely no idea what they found, so for now, I'll not condemn him. But if they found unprotected, important information at his home that has any significance to capability, sources or other compartmentalized intel that does not involve the president, we should be appalled. I'll wait for more info, but if any of this is true, it is a stunning development, and we have to clean this up. If this happened in the services, the firings/court martials would be instantaneous. 2
Albwan Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 leftie stooges clutching at their pearls is so amusing. 1 1
SoCal Deek Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 4 hours ago, nedboy7 said: Your take is utterly Stupid. But typical. The facts of the case are undisputed. Deal with it.
TSOL Posted August 27, 2022 Posted August 27, 2022 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Wait, was Ms. Lavarello a former president? That's comparing apples to *ucking bowling balls.
SoCal Deek Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 19 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Maybe when you read the garbage you read. I watch Fox. I know your weird reality. And you believe what exactly? Let me guess….Trump was keeping the nuclear codes in his basement amidst his personal mementos just in case the border was opened, crime and inflation got out of hand, and war broke out in Eastern Europe? Oh wait….
nedboy7 Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: And you believe what exactly? Let me guess….Trump was keeping the nuclear codes in his basement amidst his personal mementos just in case the border was opened, crime and inflation got out of hand, and war broke out in Eastern Europe? Oh wait…. It is hard to think he is that smart. We can argue forever. I always thought your posts were intelligent and reasonable over the years. So I am going with that and we dont agree at some level in politics. Much respect.
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 8 hours ago, sherpa said: I strongly disagree with the focus of this post. The President has access to what he needs to do his job. There is absolutely no reason to have anything beyond that information, and I'm not sure why anyone would want to. He is not an analyst. He has absolutely no background in these things. Methods, sources and tech data/capability are not part of that reasonable request for data, and Trump wasn't that much interested in that stuff anyway. I have absolutely no idea what they found, so for now, I'll not condemn him. But if they found unprotected, important information at his home that has any significance to capability, sources or other compartmentalized intel that does not involve the president, we should be appalled. I'll wait for more info, but if any of this is true, it is a stunning development, and we have to clean this up. If this happened in the services, the firings/court martials would be instantaneous. the president had access to all info that government is aware of at all times. Anything that is kept from him would be considered treason if he asked for it directly. He is not kept in the loop for what he needs, he has free reign so long as no personal benefit is being realized. What the heck are you quoting when you are writing? Is this how your company works or are you simply unaware of how our Republic works?
sherpa Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 (edited) 8 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said: the president had access to all info that government is aware of at all times. Anything that is kept from him would be considered treason if he asked for it directly. He is not kept in the loop for what he needs, he has free reign so long as no personal benefit is being realized. What the heck are you quoting when you are writing? Is this how your company works or are you simply unaware of how our Republic works? I'm not sure what your question about "quoting" relates to. I am quite aware how our Republic works, and have a good deal of experience in dealing with US intel data, how it is handled and the protocols involved in accessing it, studying it and eventually teaching it up to the Top Secret Noforn level in areas I was involved in. Higher levels of data, so called "compartmentalized" information, was not accessible unless there was a need to know. When the need was perceived, the info was available, but only to the level necessary. Of course the President has access to whatever he wants. However, he has no need to know the very detailed information that would include names, specifics on technical capability and a host of other information. He is not an analyst and has no technical capability. He is briefed on a daily basis, and those briefs are tailored to his wants. The President trusts capable analysts to present the data that is important, and requests what he wants if he wants more info. These daily briefs have bee n very different for each Pres. Again, I have no information on what was at his Florida place, but there is no justifiable reason to have items there that contain sensitive information on ongoing programs, sources, methods, or technology after his term, and certainly not in an unsecure setting. If that occurred, it is gross negligence and the gov agencies have a responsibility to fix the issue as soon as they are aware of it. Ex presidents get basic intel info as a courtesy and are often consulted to offer views because of their experience in certain situations and knowledge of personalities, but are, essentially, regular citizens with secrets service protection. Edited August 28, 2022 by sherpa 2
Matt_In_NH Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 8 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said: The President has access to what he needs to do his job What about a former president?
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 1 hour ago, sherpa said: I'm not sure what your question about "quoting" relates to. I am quite aware how our Republic works, and have a good deal of experience in dealing with US intel data, how it is handled and the protocols involved in accessing it, studying it and eventually teaching it up to the Top Secret Noforn level in areas I was involved in. Higher levels of data, so called "compartmentalized" information, was not accessible unless there was a need to know. When the need was perceived, the info was available, but only to the level necessary. Of course the President has access to whatever he wants. However, he has no need to know the very detailed information that would include names, specifics on technical capability and a host of other information. He is not an analyst and has no technical capability. He is briefed on a daily basis, and those briefs are tailored to his wants. The President trusts capable analysts to present the data that is important, and requests what he wants if he wants more info. These daily briefs have bee n very different for each Pres. Again, I have no information on what was at his Florida place, but there is no justifiable reason to have items there that contain sensitive information on ongoing programs, sources, methods, or technology after his term, and certainly not in an unsecure setting. If that occurred, it is gross negligence and the gov agencies have a responsibility to fix the issue as soon as they are aware of it. Ex presidents get basic intel info as a courtesy and are often consulted to offer views because of their experience in certain situations and knowledge of personalities, but are, essentially, regular citizens with secrets service protection. Everything you are saying is true but you are missing the large point of the president has access to everything he wants while president- if a former CIA director had this stuff it would be different but as long as Trump brought it to Mar a largo while president and it has been kept secure then it is impossible for him to be in violation of any law. If they have evidence he was going to make it public maybe we have an issue but there is no evidence of that.
Orlando Buffalo Posted August 28, 2022 Posted August 28, 2022 57 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said: What about a former president? If he brought to Mar a Largo while president and it has been kept secure he is clearly legally safe. No evidence has been shown these two things are untrue. All the labels of top secret mean nothing to this case without much more info
Recommended Posts