Subscribe
Notify of
guest
201 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Lindsay
David Lindsay
3 months ago

Hillary Clinton faked Russiagate out of thin air, and Hunter Biden’s laptop has turned out to have been real, so when are they going to be raided, and when is any client of Jeffrey Epstein’s going to be raided?

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

Well argued, but Wolff has a fine instinctive grasp of Trump and his self-aggrandizing nature. Who has seen it can ever forget the scene where Trump lunged from the crowd to bring down another self-promoting entrepreneur and pinned him to the floor at a time when both were involved in professional wrestling? Let the po-faced Left split hairs about legalisms,Trump knows politics rightly done is show business and governance for the nerds he can sweep from the board like pawns. That said, the governor of Florida is who I hope leads the ticket in 2024.

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
3 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

Trump certainly energises his base, but unfortunately he actively repels even more voters. He hasn’t won the popular vote in either of his election campaigns. Candidate Trump in 2024 would be a gift for the Democrats. De Santis would be a much more serious candidate, and a far more effective politician.

HIKER BIKER
HIKER BIKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Seriously.. this is what you believe? Review what he accomplished in 4 yrs and compare it to Brandon.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B Hayes, Benjamin Harrison and George Bush didn’t win the popular vote either but won. There’s no point to be made on this basis.

nigel roberts
nigel roberts
2 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

The popular vote is irrelevant. The President is elected by the States, with each state getting votes in proportion to its population.

Popular votes were always intended only to be for the House. (Until the seventeenth amendment.)

HIKER BIKER
HIKER BIKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

We look for 4yrs of Trump/DeSantis then 8 years DeSantis and beyond of MAGA candidates

Dustin Needle
Dustin Needle
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

Trump could have avoided the raid, and any attention from law enforcement if he just left the documents at a computer repair shop.

Charlie Walker
Charlie Walker
3 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

Very witty!

Dustin Needle
Dustin Needle
3 months ago
Reply to  Charlie Walker

Nicked off Twitter. I’m shameless.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

So are the FBI and its bosses in the deep state.

Wim de Vriend
Wim de Vriend
3 months ago
Reply to  Dustin Needle

Brilliant! It’s a proven method!

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

You are leaving out dozens of further examples of sheer hypocrisy.
It never ceases to amaze me how one man, who has spent the entirety of 4 years in public office, could have amassed such an alleged criminal record in the minds of the Left, yet the dozens of actual crooks, who have milked off so much during 30 and 40 year careers go complete uncharged. They enter “public service” with very little and leave office with enormous wealth. I’m sure 100% of them are pure saints, however. I must acknowledge, however, that if any of the myriad criminal charges that have been alleged against Trump were true, I would demand his head. But nothing has been the case so far. Perhaps if they chase the man to his death they might find that he jaywalked on Park Avenue at one point during the 1970’s and nail him for that.
I can hear the screams and cries of foul ball when the first democrat gets charged under the next republican administration.

David Lindsay
David Lindsay
3 months ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Quite. And if you did not feel safer in the knowledge that Joe Biden had one of the world’s sets of nuclear codes, then you must do so in the knowledge that, since it is a problem for a former President to take them home, those codes must never change. Bill Clinton left office as a very clever 54-year-old, and Barack Obama did so as a 55-year-old with no flies on him. George W. Bush was 62 and he was George W. Bush, but he had quite the entourage. Think on.

We are told that for a warrant to have been issued against Donald Trump under the Espionage Act, then the judge to whom application had been made would have to have been shown probable cause. But probable cause is not in itself the same thing as proof, and in any case Julian Assange has also been charged under that Act. He has been so on the “testimony” of Siggi Thordarson, a convicted fraudster and paedophile whom the FBI paid $10,000, and who has since admitted that he had made up the whole thing.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

Late breaking: the nuclear codes may have been found amongst Melania’s underwear. And that’s a fact!

elizabeth shannon
elizabeth shannon
3 months ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

The thing is this…none of the others are a nuclear threat like Trump is!

Art C
Art C
3 months ago

You’re joking of course. There is a far bigger threat that people like the hapless Joe Biden, the half-wit Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton et al inadvertently cause the West to be nuked by the likes of a trigger-happy Putin or Xi. These people have excelled thus far at inaction (except in the area of gender politics & personal pronouns), pusillanimous “diplomacy” and putting on a display of national cowardice televised live to the world. Putin would never have attacked Ukraine had Trump being in power; he’s too unpredictable.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

Well said, and spot on.

Wim de Vriend
Wim de Vriend
3 months ago

What nonsense. Trump did not start a war with anybody, although I wish he had managed the withdrawal from Afghanistan.

A Glover
A Glover
3 months ago
Reply to  Wim de Vriend

There never would have been.a complete withdrawal.
Trump would have kept Bagram et al and had situational assets critical to the national security of the US….Not to mention not one US serviceman (and, yes, that includes females) was harmed in the 18 last months of the Trump administration for the same reason Putin would never have walked into Ukraine if Trump was still in tbe WH)
All involved in that military, diplomatic, strategic and galactic national security blunder (the shoe of which is yet to drop on the upshoot I fear and predict) are at the least guilty of gross mismanagement and the fact NO ONE was fired, demoted or charged is the greatest disservice and dishonor to the nation.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Wim de Vriend

Have you had an irony by-pass may I enquire?

A Glover
A Glover
3 months ago
stephen archer
stephen archer
3 months ago

The downticks are just reflecting the mentality of the downtickers.

Last edited 3 months ago by stephen archer
Peter Scott
Peter Scott
3 months ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

On past form (I don’t say this would apply in a DeSantis presidency) the next Republican administration will charge no-one; because hitherto the GOP has been the other wing of the two-winged Washington DC Uniparty.
They collude to gratify Big Business and the Far Left who share- in the short and middle terms – paramoount goals: mass immigration and making government in the democracies unaccountable to the people.

Tina D
Tina D
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

This is why i don’t get how Trump supporters are wired. How are Hunter ( a nobody) and Hillary relevant? These people were NOT presidents of country.
They didn’t incite violence for their own gratification.
Trump is dangerous to the cohesion of your country.
He is lawless and indifferent – all for his own self gratification.

Saul D
Saul D
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

The claim is that Hunter sold access to his Dad to foreign businesses over many years, and his Dad may well have taken a cut from the proceeds. That’s straight political corruption with the laptop providing some documentary evidence. The FBI buried the evidence, and worse got word out that it was ‘disinformation’. Trump was impeached for asking a foreign country to provide information over potential Biden wrong-doing when there was smoke from a fire that state agents were trying to hush up.
Hillary destroyed subpeona’d documents and ran an illegal server with classified information on it from her home. Her team created the Russia collusion hoax from whole cloth to attack and undermine the president. The FBI knew this, but still went after Trump, while dropping the Clinton case.
So it’s clear double standards. Trump, remember, didn’t take a salary while president and actually lost money. To his supporters he is Robin Hood against the Sheriff of Nottingham. Or Roadrunner against Wily E Coyote, exposing more and more of the plots and schemes that the Government machine uses against individuals. To them, Democrats – mostly the administrative classes – look like lackeys of the Sheriff, complicit in supporting mis-use of government power, hectoring for a biased justice system where people, not crimes, are prosecuted.

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
3 months ago
Reply to  Saul D

No salary, but he had US government officials staying at Trump hotels whenever they could, thus using government to bring in profits for his business.

Martin Bollis
Martin Bollis
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

I agree with you re Trump but Hunters laptop contained details of his providing access to his father to shady Ukrainians.

Said father is now sending $bns in top spec weaponry to Ukraine. Much of this aid isn’t reaching the front lines.

That’s very relevant to a discussion on the impartiality of government enforcement agencies and the impartiality of such agencies is critical to the cohesion of a democracy.

Last edited 3 months ago by Martin Bollis
Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
3 months ago
Reply to  Martin Bollis

Any proof of any of this? I agree it is possible, but right know it is only speculation.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

Hunter was spontaneously granted a director position at $50000- per MONTH at a Ukrainian energy company back in 2015 .. within 48 hours of then vice-president Joe twisting the arm of the Ukrainian govt. This was all long before Trump came on the scene so no way to blame him for this corruption out in the open from our current president.
The female Clinton was running a personal email server at her private home, with thousand of classified documents on it. When things got hot she deleted them & destroyed some phones for good measure ( FBI director Comey later indicated this was technically illegal but no harm done so no action needed). It’s all on record.

Last edited 3 months ago by Art C
A Glover
A Glover
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

Hunter is a nobody? Clinton, she of the Russia hoax, is unimportant?

Russian trolls, of which Putin is the master, has convinced silly emo easily-fooled democrats that Trump was his preferred candidate…of course Trump was the last guy Putin wanted.

Repeat the lies Putin told you to repeat but TDS-enablers are the opposite of America First Patriots.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

For the love of heaven please don’t mention Jeffrey Epstein. Or Ghislaine. That’s the story that dare not say its name! (And one of the best kept secrets is the involvement of the other Bill, not Clinton but Gates!). Incidentally, someone at the American Spectator speculated recently that the real reason they have been gunning so hard for Trump is that HE may have a copy of Jeffrey Epstein’s list of clients (Trumpwas of course mentioned briefly in earlier trial documents).

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
3 months ago
Reply to  David Lindsay

The article seemed to be pretty fair to me, so it is pretty depressing to see your rather tribal comment, all too common on this forum, ignoring the actual substance of the article, but saying something and someone else is worse!

It ought to be fairly obvious that because possibly the Clintons did wrong (and it has been argued that they removed a lot of stuff from the White House, as well as trashing it) that doesn’t justify Trump doing so, if such he did. That doesn’t mean of course that there might not be a political aspect to this raid, as the United States seems to be descending ever more into a partisan administration worthy of the famed ‘banana republics’.

Tina D
Tina D
3 months ago
Reply to  Andrew Fisher

Yes, thank you. That’s precisely my point.
If anyone does anything corrupt then all must be punished.
The laws must applied to all, without favour.
Somehow the US has to begin to regain trust in law enforcement as opposed to linking their every action to conspiratorial agendas.
Conspiracy theorists have to be called out and humiliated.
This division in the US has a ripple effect globally, not least the allies.
Trump strength is not cohesion.
He is not the leader who brings his own community together let alone other nations.
We’re all suffering from the threat of immigration and fear of losing our cultural identity but that is very complication issue and not one that can be solved by Trump.

HIKER BIKER
HIKER BIKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

You are so wrong in too many ways to explain here. Clearly educating ones self is not a priority. Let me give you a tip. Nothing you mention is at the root. Immigration is the diversion. Power is at stake. Evil is closer to demise than ever because of Trump. Question is, can educated people finally take back America?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  HIKER BIKER

No. you mean can the elites take control of the country from ordinary Americans…which they are trying to do now..

Tina D
Tina D
3 months ago
Reply to  HIKER BIKER

God, i hope you’re not one of those people that believe everyone’s a peodophile and that the Democrates are secretly communists.
If you’re so educated please direct me to all the ‘education’ i need (not FOX).
We’re critical allies and my nation does not want Trump anywhere near power. All past Prime Ministers have said as much.

Fintan Power
Fintan Power
3 months ago
Reply to  Tina D

Difficult to know who is worst: Trump or Biden. Two old men; one confused and the other ignorant of history and driven by sheer arrogance. Have they not got any other worthwhile candidates in a country of over 300 million?

Tina D
Tina D
3 months ago
Reply to  Fintan Power

Agree. The lack of intellect is blatantly obvious, One shouldn’t criticise too much since there seems to be a capability shortage across the pond and beyond.
At least other parts of the world acknowledge leadership incompetence not hero worship them.
Surely you wouldn’t select a leader who recommends injecting bleach as a Covid cure.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
3 months ago

Strikes me that this article really misses the bigger picture and that is that not only was the FBI/DOJ totally unprecedented but it represents a march into a banana republic. At the very worst one is talking about a very minor misdemeanor wrapped around nonsense such as “secret” and “super-secret” for material that you can find in all the newspapers. Does anybody really think that Trump packed those documents. Of course not. In fact they were boxed up by the GSA (General Services Administration).
The bottom line is that this is not a democrat or republican issue. It doesn’t matter whether you can’t stand Trump or you’re a Trump supporter. Rather it is an issue of whether the American experiment survives or collapses into a third world banana republic just like ancient Rome.
Incidentally, all the secret material was declassified by Trump and he has the absolute authority to do this. It doesn’t need to be approved by anybody. The president is the sole authority in this matter.

cheryl smith
cheryl smith
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Journalist are clueless. Journalism no longer exists. They try to convince and pull people to their way of thinking. That’s all. I ignore most of them now.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

Ever get dizzy up there, on your very high horse, oh omniscient one?

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Your snark doesn’t change the fact that she’s right.

HIKER BIKER
HIKER BIKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Everyone makes a stupid comment now and again. You made yours. Please refrain from talking from your lips.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

Wolff is not a journalist – he’s a tabloid runner, a hack. Egads, UnHerd could do better.

Michael Keating
Michael Keating
2 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

Where do you get your information?

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

As always, we agree and disagree. You are quite right that this situation represents the march into a banana republic. But the man doing the marching is Trump. Putting himself above the law, encouraging his supporters to storm parliament, trying to steal the election, in general claiming that his will is the supreme law. The peones adore it, much like they adored Peron and Hugo Chavez, but then, that is how banana republics work.

As for “totally unprecedented”, totally unprecedented behaviour tend to require totally unprecedented responses. If you fire at Fort Sumter you cannot complain afterwards that it is unprecedented and unconstitutional to go to war against you.

Last edited 3 months ago by Rasmus Fogh
stephen archer
stephen archer
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

It’s not very often I agree with you but this time Johan S is totally wrong. The handling of classified documents is a lot more detailed and rigourous than making arbitrary and undocumented declassification and removal of documents in the higher classes. Such documents are distributed according to a registered list of recipients, they have to be signed for, they have to be stored in safes, they have to be returned for controlled destruction when no longer used, the issuer and classifier is generally the one to decide on declassification. They cannot just be torn up or declassified without an audit trail back to the registering authority, president or no president. The staff members are undoubtedly not the intended recipients of such documents, should not have access to these without the president’s say-so and should definitely not have the authority to decide on external shipment of these. Any other official in such cases would be already sitting in custody under interrogation. Trump’s supposed management and explanation of these issues is just symptomatic of his general attitude and behaviour. He is the least suitable president in living memory, and that includes Nixon and Biden. That a large section of right wing voters believe he should give the US another 4 years of his narcissistic, irrational and downright corrupt power craving is beyond belief. Just look at his behaviour on the golf course where rules don’t mean a thing!

Last edited 3 months ago by stephen archer
Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
3 months ago
Reply to  stephen archer

Actually you are dead wrong in regard to the law. The president of the USA has the absolutely authority to declassify anything. Once he gives the order or say so to declassify something that’s it. They are declassified. The rest is bureaucratic busy work but the time of declassification is when the president gives the order, not when the bureaucrats complete their process.
It might also help to know some other facts because it has now been acknowledged by the department of defense that the documents were declassified.
As for Rasmus, you need to get out of your TDS state of mind and you also need to stop repeating stuff that is simply not true. Trump did not encourage his supporters to storm Congress (and its congress not parliament). Listen to his full speech. The mayhem started 20 min before he even finished his speech and the location where he was giving it was a 20 min walk from Congress. Go figure that timeline.

stephen archer
stephen archer
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

After the latest statements by various security officials in office during Trump’s presidency and as I expected your assertions of the declassification mandate and process are a whole load of BS. It’s almost as if you were reciting Trump’s ridiculous statements directly and taking everything at face value. If you keep making such assertions, despite the brainless upticks you’re getting from idiots who don’t know better then your status as a commenter here on Unherd will be taking a deep dive. Wise up.

George Herman
George Herman
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

The timeline? It originated 10 years prior, when Trump floated the rumor that Obama was an illegitimate president. Not a shred of evidence, of course. The theme was picked up again in 2016 during his presidential run, when he would not be pinned down about whether he’d accept the results (a conversation that never existed before Trump). 
So Obama was an illegitimate president. Clinton would have been an illegitimate president. Biden was an illegitimate president-elect. By January 2021 he had spent a decade sowing distrust in the American electoral process, and truly went into overdrive in the period leading up to the 2020 election.  What actually transpired on January 6th is of little or no consequence. This was 10 years in the making, and was never meant to end well.
To ignore the decade Trump spent shaking down the U.S. to lose its faith in the electoral system and focus on one day—let alone a 20-minute period of it—is an extreme case of not seeing the forest for the trees.  

George Herman
George Herman
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

As for the issue of the documents at Mar-a-Lago: not having informed myself of specific record-keeping details of classified documents but living in the year 2022, I have to ask why a stack of papers is the only apparent issue here. What does the existence of printed copies prove nowadays without a thorough (and probably much more challenging) search of electronic documentation?

Mr Sketerzen Bhoto
Mr Sketerzen Bhoto
3 months ago
Reply to  stephen archer

I’m not intending this as snark, because I really don’t know, but are you saying that there’s only one printed copy of any such document, or just a few, and no electronic copies?

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago

There are documents that exist in a few numbered copies where all other copies are destroyed. Some of them may have never reached the President. I can imagine that his staff might have tens of thousands of documents to account for that the President might never see. I seriously doubt any of those were packed by the GSA for delivery to Trump. He likely had some documents in his personal files that were packed and he bulk declassified them all.

stephen archer
stephen archer
3 months ago

I’m assuming the US has similar handling and procedures as other European countries. For paper copies, the distribution list should indicate the number of copies made plus one for the central registry in question. The electronic version will normally be created in a high security document management system and copies distributed in this system (generally on restricted networks) by the issuer will have audit trails. The printing of documents from such a system will be extremely restricted and export of electronic copies even more so. The alternative is stand-alone PCs using media transfer but this will also be subject to extremely restrictive measures. In response to the previous comment, he may have the authority and mandate but does that mean he can ignore or circumvent established processes for traceability and due motivation for declassification? Sounds just like Trump’s normal behaviour.

Last edited 3 months ago by stephen archer
Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
3 months ago
Reply to  stephen archer

. They cannot just be torn up or declassified without an audit trail back to the registering authority, president or no president.

Unless, of course, the president is a democrat. Loads of ex-presidents have taken boxes of documents out of the White House, but only Trump has been raided, in a deliberate attempt to stop him running in the next election. Looks like the Dimmocrats are going to have to fall back on those dead voters again.

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

Do you have any proof? Who among the former presidents did take boxes of classified material with them from the White House? I don’t claim that it is impossible, but since nobody heard of anyone doing it before, it should be backed up with more details and sources.

Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Putting himself above the law, encouraging his supporters to storm parliament, trying to steal the election,

Except he did none of those things. The opposite is true – the election was stolen from him. As for the minor skirmish that leftards call an “insurrection” only one casualty died at the scene – the others died of natual causes or by accident. The casualty? An unarmed white woman murdered in cold blood by a black cop. And what happened to the murderous black cop? Nothing. Compare and contrast the accidental death by drug overdose of that disgusting, violent career criminal George Floyd and the framing of Derick Cauvin, followed by burning, looting and murdering by BLM and Antifa thugtards all over America. Now that’s what I call an insurrection.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

If the election was stolen from Trump, point me to the proof. I have yet to see any, and you do not get to make that kind of claim without evidence.

As for the ‘unarmed white woman murdered in cold blood by a black cop’ – would it have been OK if only the cop had been white??

Some activities are inherently dangerous, so you have to put up with the consequences. Free-climbing is one. Resisting arrest while armed is another – that covers a number of recent police shootings both in the US and UK (though not George Floyd). And forcing entry into the Capitol while Congress is in session is another. Is the US not the place where they believe in the right to stand your ground? Armed self-defense if you believe yourself to be in danger? Surely the police should have that right if anyone does.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

If you watch the video of Ms Ashli Babbitt being shot by Lieutenant Michael Byrd you will see it is murder. He should have been hanged, black or white it makes no difference, murder is murder.
I’m disappointed that you made such a facile commitment about the colour of the policeman, you normally do better.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

Why did Katy Hibbert chose to emphasize the colour of the policeman and the victim when (IMHO) it makes no difference whatsoever? I thought that was worth a comment.

For the rest the police is being sent out on the street, armed, with the job to arrest violent people and protect, in this case congress against violent attack. In purely abstract terms, yes, they should shoot less, take more risks and kill fewer people, but you have to cut them some slack. When things go pear-shaped and they have good reason to fear for their safety it is too much to expect that they will risk letting themselves be overwhelmed without firing. That goes for Michael Brown, Jr. in Ferguson, and it goes for Ashli Babbitt in Washington

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

You surprise me! I thought you had some ‘experience’ in this particular field, from a previous life?

“For the rest the police is being sent out on the street, armed, with the job to arrest…..”.
That should off course be ARE not IS! That aside the training of the Capitol Police is obviously completely inadequate, as are the ‘rules of engagement’. So Michael Byrd was scared? So totally lacking in any moral fibre or courage that he decided to kill a semi hysterical woman? And you, yes you, condone this wretch? God’s teeth is this what the USA has come to?
That terrible slaughter of innocent children in Texas the other day, which could have been prevented if only one, yes one policeman had had the guts to tackle/kill the assailant, was bad enough, but to exculpate Byrd really does “take the biscuit”.
If this an example of Biden’s USA it is a cesspit of epic proportions, and is unlikely ever to be drained in the foreseeable future, do you not agree?
Consummatum est!

Last edited 3 months ago by stanhopecharles344
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

Inadequate training? Could have done better? Maybe. It would have been better to manage without shooting? Sure. But you are hard to figure out. You blame the police for not shooting in Texas (as do I). You think killing George Floyd was perfectly all right – indeed that he deserved to be shot down directly – even though he was unarmed, lying still and the situation completely under control while it took nine minutes for him to die. I presume you would side with the police in the case of Michael Brown, Jr (as would I). So I honestly wonder why you are you so upset by Ashli Babbitt? Is it because she is white, and a woman? Would it have been OK to kill her if she had had criminal record? Or is it just because she is on your side? Do you think it should have been obvious to the police that she was harmless and one of the good guys, and should have been protected, invasion of Congress or not? Here I would disagree. If you are tasked with protecting the members of Congress, and a mob comes swarming in, pushing through the barricades, boasting that they are going to force congress to do their bidding as well as hang the vice president, they are collectively a direct threat to the lives of yourself and the people you are protecting. It would be not only stupid but dereliction of duty to decide they were harmless and just let them in to do their worst.

Can you enlighten me?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Babbitt was in a room already crowed with police, so heavily armed they looked like members of the Waffen-SS. They calmly watched her as she hammered against a laminated glass door, and did not impede her.
Unfortunately on the other side of that door, in a darkened corridor, lurked DC’s finest, Lt Byrd, no doubt petrified at the sight of this approaching Valkyrie! Gripping his .45 automatic with both paws, he took very careful aim, up, down, up, and FIRE! perhaps 3-4 seconds in all, and no doubt, in true Clint Eastwood fashion uttering an expletive such as “make my day b***h”!
The aforementioned Waffen-SS police seemed just as startled as
everyone else by this piece of gratuitous killing, for which there can be no excuse. I’m surprised you condone it, but it does serve to illustrate how toxic things are in DC at present, does it not?

(Incidentally we are just ten days short of the two hundredth an eighth anniversary of the burning of the place by the British Army in 1814.)
More tea Vicar?
.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

In the video I saw, the crowd was filling up the space before the doors. The heavily armed police were not apparent until later, and they certainly were not in control even then, let alone crowding the room.

I cannot match your purple prose, but the following seems to me to be facts:
There are a couple of glass doors with an improvised barricade behind it, and a single policeman pointing a gun. I understand that after this barricade there are no more obstacles before you get to the congress chamber, where congressmen are cowering. The crowd is filling the space before the barricade telling each other to ‘bust it down’ and working on doing it. At that point Babbitt climbs up and goes through the barricade though a smashed-up window – and Byrd shoots.

So, what was the alternative? If Byrd lets Babbitt go through, all the others will follow. Then the crowd is through the barricade and into the congress chamber, free to work off their frustrations on the congressmen, if they are so inclined. You may be certain that they would have done nothing bad – or very bad – if they had been given the chance, but how can you, or Byrd, know? Even if they had all been unarmed and rock-solid pacifists – in a country awash with guns with a crowd full of aggrieved militia members – all it would take is one man with a pocket knife and anger management issues and – goodbye Nancy Pelosi.

Do you really think that Capitol police should have let a hostile crowd in, free to do its worst? How can you be so certain that they would behave like gentlemen throughout? Or do you think they deserved the chance to rough up their congressmen a bit? Also, which other groups should enjoy the same access privileges? Antifa? BLM? Muslim Americans? Illegal immigrants? Or how do you draw the distinction?

As for Ms Babbitt I am sorry for her; she did not deserve to die. But if you are part of an invading crowd, in Congress, situation out of control, busting through a barricade in the face of a policeman pointing a gun and shouting ‘back, or I’ll shoot’, are you really entitled to assume that he does not mean it?

Last edited 3 months ago by Rasmus Fogh
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Better late than never, although well past my bedtime! When I should be tucked up with my Ovaltine!
Babbitt was very obviously a harmless, unarmed semi-hysterical nutter, and NO threat to man nor beast. No doubt the heavily armed police (the Waffen-SS) in the same room, correctly thought the same, as they made no attempt to stop her jumping through the broken door.
Byrd, probably due to lack of moral fibre, thought differently, panicked and killed her. Given his previous bovine record with Capitol Police I was astonished he was still employed.
That he was ‘the last line of defence’ between the ‘nutters’ and the wretched Pelosi creature is also astonishing, but does NOT excuse Byrd’s homicidal behaviour in any way.
In a previous life, many moons ago, I had a modicum of experience in many such situations, and believe me Byrd’s behaviour was completely OTT (as we know say).
The fact that he has avoided prosecution is terrible indictment of what is now happening to the USA.
We shall obviously have to differ on this vexed issue, but I have enjoyed the conversation, and I thank you.

Last edited 3 months ago by stanhopecharles344
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

It would seem the solution should have been to avoid this situation in the first place – which would mean stopping the crowd with a solid police presence and barricades long before they got this far.

But, anyway, I too agree to differ and thank you for the conversation.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

It seems my reply has been censored! Perhaps it will appear later?

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

Hopefully, they sometimes do. I look forward to it.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

“Heaven be praised” The Censor has relented and it is just above. I was beginning to think I had forgotten to ‘post’ it. Must be the heat!

Spoke too soon! As of 16.02hrs BST…withdrawn again!
Back again at 16.17hrs BST. How long will this yo yo go on?

Last edited 3 months ago by stanhopecharles344
Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago

Quite well said. The Uvalde issue was one of common “you go first” stalemate – too many cops, leaderless. Byrd has been a loser for a long time – recall leaving a loaded weapon in a loo stall! Careless fool.

Michael Askew
Michael Askew
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

George Floyd died by asphyxiation, even if he was weakened by his drug taking. The policeman who was filmed kneeling on the man’s neck for 9 minutes can hardly be described as “framed”.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Michael Askew

Floyd was a mountain of man, 250 lbs+, 6’ 4” high, a veritable ‘King Kong’, and “ high as a kite” on God knows what, and had an extensive record of violent criminal behaviour.
I’m rather surprised he wasn’t ‘shot on sight’ as he richly deserved.
The destruction of the life of the arresting Officer is an abomination, equivalent to the infamous Salem Witch Trials.

Last edited 3 months ago by stanhopecharles344
nigel roberts
nigel roberts
2 months ago
Reply to  Michael Askew

Hmm. According to the coroner he died from cardiopulmonary arrest.

Perhaps you have information the coroner didn’t have.

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

Stolen from him? His own attorney general laimed that was bullshit, and it was tried in many courts (many with Trump appointed judges), without any finding any proof. Do you seriously believe something is true just because Trump says so?

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I stopped reading at “encouraging his supporters to storm parliament…” Nothing less than a high colonic can clean up that impacted slug of misinformation that guides you. Oh, and it’s called Congress over there.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

I was trying to find a form of words that applies equally to all three: Peron, Chavez, and Trump. If you have nothing better to offer than nitpicking and shit-talking, why do you bother?

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Jerry Carroll

You can’t blame poor old Rasmus; except for NOT knowing that censorship of this topic is well known. Video which shows protesters walking peacefully through the building respecting the guide ropes was taken down by YouTube immediately after the event. Likewise, videos/podcasts containing the perfectly reasonable request for the Capitol security camera footage to be made available for all to see for themselves.
And of course there is the damning evidence of prime provocateur Ray Epps and his team, caught on video cajoling protesters to “Go into the capitol”. Epps was placed on the FBI’s Jan 6 ‘most wanted’ list (number 17) but quietly removed 6 months after the event. Since then he has been effectively memory-holed by the MSM and law enforcement. Because of course he was never meant to be discovered.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

There are also videos of people busting down barricades. I’ll ask you as I asked Charles Stanhope: Just why are you so sure that nobody in the crowd would feel like beating up, or killing, a few congressmen once they were in the chamber with free access? Whose life and health would you gamble on that judgement – your own? Which groups should have free access to barge into congress? Would Antifa qualify?

As for Epps, informers are generally rather murky people. If you are claiming that the whole thing was an FBI false-flag operation, and that the poor people were tricked into entering congress, how about saying it directly – and providing some evidence?

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

You know there are videos of people busting down barricades because they are freely available. The videos I describe are not. Why take down videos of peaceful protesters? In short, why censor at all? It always leaves a bad smell: like what is somebody trying to cover up? (and what does any of this have to do with Google/YouTube, FaceBook etc. anyway?!) In any case, surely, if one wanted the closest approximation of what really happened on Jan 6, the security cameras are the best source. But nope! Not allowed! Censored! Of course the kangaroo “Jan committee” (no cross examination permitted) is baulking at releasing them too. The lesson is simple: if you want to be taken seriously don’t censor.
As for your glib dismissal of Ray Epps as an “informer”, does it not strike you as highly unusual that he was removed from the FBI’s ‘MOST WANTED’ list of “dangerous insurrectionists” after a full SIX months. Are the FBI really that incompetent? No-one is claiming that the “whole thing was an FBI false-flag operation“. But it seems pretty clear there was some level of organized provocation on Jan 6, implemented by Ray Epps and his team and almost certainly other teams. Clear too is that this was a “super covert” operation which was only brought to the attention of wider FBI management when the damning video of Epps emerged; at which point our friend Ray disappeared into a (black) memory-hole.
Epps represents one of those unpleasant contradictions which emerge from time to time out of a bungled covert operation. He was never meant to be discovered. Epps IS the evidence that there was some kind of covert operation in play. The most obvious question for the FBI is: why was Epps removed from their ‘MOST WANTED’ list? But the FBI, & virtually all the MSM and political class pretend he was never there & any attempt at discussion is ruthlessly censored. So we shall probably have to wait until after the US mid-terms for democracy to take its course in the form of a proper investigation which can inform the public about what role the FBI or other government agencies had in the Jan 6 disturbances.
The message in all this is clear: if you want to be taken seriously, provide the public with ALL the information on a topic & let them make up their own minds. In short: don’t censor. 

Last edited 3 months ago by Art C
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

You did not answer any of my questions. Instead you provided a fog of conspiracy theory stuff about media management. I am not joining you down the rabbit hole. If you think there is anything we are both interested in talking about, please feel free to come back.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Nice try! You already ARE down a rabbit hole. Your flowery “questions” about “just who .. ” etc. etc. are completely irrelevant to the point I made that the public has simply been denied access to all the facts about Jan 6 because of blanket censorship on anything contradicting the current regime’s narrative. (As a wag pointed out during the recent covid drama: “of course all the experts agree .. when you censor those that don’t”.) In the same vein, demanding “evidence” of provocation by agencies of the state is like asking someone whose identity card you have destroyed to “prove” his identity. Censorship of this topic has been exceptionally thorough and those brave souls who have attempted to dig out the facts have been instantly smeared and scapegoated.
However, we HAVE had a brief a peep behind the curtains. We KNOW Epps & his team were present and inciting demonstrators. We KNOW that many videos now removed from mainstream platforms show large crowds of peaceful participants inside the capitol. We know, too, that the only government death was a guard who died of a stroke 24 hours after the event, not beaten to death with a fire extinguisher by “violent insurrectionists” as MSM outlets tried to tell us; the first of many outright lies which have slowly bubbled to the surface over the past year.
For heavens sakes let’s be honest and adult. To get a clear picture of who did what and why on Jan 6 the best evidence is the capitol security camera footage. Let’s see it! And … a man spotted vigorously inciting the crowd & communicating with accomplices was (rightly) identified as a major troublemaker, placed high up on an FBI MOST WANTED list, and then … mysteriously removed months later! And not a word was offered as explanation by the Bureau! 
Why all the lies, the subterfuge, the censoring, the scapegoating and the refusal to answer perfectly reasonably questions? I’m afraid if the powers that be want the public to believe their “violent armed insurrection” and “coup attempt” narrative then they’ll have to get rid of the bad smell first.

Last edited 3 months ago by Art C
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

Well, you are right about one thing: What I say is completely irrelevant to what you say, and vice versa. I am talking about what happened, and what might have happened instead. You are talking about media management, taking down videos, and vague hints about FBI provocateurs. Not interested.

Just for the record, it would be stupid to deny that the anti-Trump side is also doing media manipulation etc. The Democratic party was not formed of angels, last time I heard. It just does not prove anything by itself. But judging from your posts, releasing all the information you want would make no difference. If there were bits that pointed in the direction you want, you would grab them. If there were not, you would take that as proof that the real truth had been suppressed. You invoke an FBI operation that was so ‘super-covert’ that whoever made it (the Illuminati?) had not even informed FBI management, for G*ds sake!

But I am still game, if you want to talk about what happened, based on the available evidence, instead of what you guess might have happened, based on the lack of evidence that ‘proves’ someone has hidden the real truth.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

I am talking about censorship full stop! 
But to give you credit, perhaps there ARE arguments for it being necessary occasionally. I understand there are conspiracy theorists out there who actually believe Trump is a “Russian asset”, the Hunter Biden laptop was “Russian disinformation” and Ray Epps was not working for a government agency on Jan 6. Unbelievable!
God knows where all these fantasies originated? Perhaps with your background you can assist with this?

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

I think facts are important, and censorship is a secondary issue. But since you ask:

Trump being a Russian asset was always unlikely, but it had some plausibility at the start as a hypothesis even if that dossier was never reliable enough to trust. Now it is very unlikely and can be disregarded since no reliable information has come out to support it.

The laptop being somebody’s disinformation, quite likely Russian, was a bit more plausible at the start – after all that information came out exactly at the moment when it would help Trump most, and he had form in managing to bring Hilary’s emails up again just a couple of weeks before that election. Now there is clear evidence hat the laptop was genuine (even if there is no way to determine if some of the contents may have been manipulated a bit). But since no one has brought up anything particularly earthshattering that was on that laptop it does not matter all that much.

As for Ray Epps, it makes no difference to me whether he was working for the FBI, the Proud Boys, or the Sarajevo dogs home on January the 6th, unless there is evidence that he had a crucial impact on what happened that day. Should it?

Last edited 3 months ago by Rasmus Fogh
Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

You missed the tongue-in-cheek irony completely. Censorship is THE most potent weapon in the armory of any authoritarian or totalitarian regime. By not permitting access to all the facts the authorities effectively control what is “fact”. And then, of course, anyone who raises doubts about a narrative based on facts not widely known (i.e. censored) can be dismissed easily as a purveyor of “misinformation”, theories “unsupported by the facts”, information which is “demonstrably false” and so on. And then labelled a “conspiracy theorist”. Sound familiar?
As for the Russia collusion fraud and the Biden laptop, apparently having “a bit or plausibility at the start” is sufficient “evidence” to peddle preposterous conspiracy theories about a president, and to deny the public the right to the true facts about material which might incriminate someone running against him for the same job. But in the case of Ray Epps, hard “evidence” is needed that he had a “crucial impact”. What nonsense: ordinary, peaceful protesters were arrested and are still being appallingly treated in solitary confinement for no greater crime than wandering uninvited around the Capitol thanks to Epp’s incitement.
Let’s not play silly word games: you fail your own “evidence” test. The Russia collusion story was manufactured out of thin air, with the help of the FBI, which subsequently lied repeatedly on FISA applications necessary to keep the BS going. And the Biden laptop was deliberately blocked from the broad public because the FBI and other law enforcement agencies provided the “intelligence” cover to allow the MSM to declare the laptop to be “Russian disinformation” & subsequently ignore it completely. Blanket censorship applied by Big Tech (at the behest of guess who?) ensured the story never saw daylight until long after the election, which was the intention all along. The Russian disinformation story was just fake evidence to justify the original censorship of unwanted facts.
It’s worth noting that both of the above operations were deliberately designed to (a) smear a sitting president and (b) protect his opponent for as long as possible but at least until a specific event (i.e. an election) had occurred. This was deliberate interference by law enforcement (primarily the FBI) to achieve a specific political goal, which is a criminal offence. Heads in the Agency need to roll when democracy is restored.
The laptop censorship ruse effectively amounts to lying by omission, one of the oldest tricks of state-controlled media in undemocratic countries. And the same tactic was applied to Ray Epps: the entire MSM barely mentioned Epps when he was first exposed before he was quickly consigned to the darkest of memory-holes; the FBI stonewalled and deflected anything coming from the odd ‘dissident’ politician (independent journalists don’t have access to the FBI); and of course any mention of Epps was discreetly but very effectively censored on the big social media platforms. So most people don’t even know who Epps is, let alone that he and other provocateurs were present on Jan 6. The reason for all this censorship is obvious: Epps, like the censored peaceful capitol protester videos, puts a huge dent in the regime’s “armed insurrection” narrative. Because if Epps was not an insurrectionist” what might he have been doing, haranguing protesters & communicating with accomplices some of whom removed security fencing around the capitol? Or more to the point, what (and who) turned Jan 6 from a peaceful protest into an “assault on democracy”?

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Buying into to the propaganda doesn’t make it true. Your points have be repeated often and are simply fluff. Certainly Trump is a blowhard but try as they might not a criminal. May even be more honest than his attackers.

Dustin Needle
Dustin Needle
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

A revealing article in that it demonstrates how Trump is living a rent-free existence in these folks’ heads.
I had to chuckle at the definition of nothing-burger. Just in case us proles had other ideas of what it really meant. Because some of us do remember Gary Hart’s campaign for the Democratic nomination (1984?) torpedoed by Mondale’s “where’s the beef?” jibe. A reminder of better days when dealing with matters of substance meant something to Democrats.

HIKER BIKER
HIKER BIKER
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Thanks for putting a period on this story. Obviously Mr Trump expected this and will play the political opposition with panache.

Micael Gustavsson
Micael Gustavsson
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Trump had the authority to declassify, but the one who has that authority now is Biden. There should be documentation about the declassification if he did declassify the the documents when he still was President.
And the President do not have absolute authority to declassify nuclear secrets; there is a specific procedure for that.

Matt Hindman
Matt Hindman
3 months ago

Garland and Mueller were never the most upstanding law enforcement officials. Merrick Garland was a controversial pick for a Supreme Court justice because of his previous record of always siding with law enforcement on cases involving the abuse of police power. Muller likes to conduct investigations by arresting people on questionable charges and then sweating them with threats until they give him something he can use in a prosecution against someone else or his is forced to let them go. I remember reading he was once involved in the FBI’s “Whitey” Bulger scandal.
As I am writing this a thought has occurred to me. Maybe this is Trump’s greatest strength. His enemies are usually as shady as they accuse him of being. They also lack the self-awareness to see this as a problem. The Bush’s and the Clinton’s have been saturated in controversy in for longer than I have been alive. Hillary methods of handling classified material last time involved bleach and hammers. The Central Intelligence Agency has been mired in controversy. Brennan now has a job on cable news despite what the law says should have happened to him for lying under oath to Congress about an illegal surveillance program. Characters in the Biden orbit get sucked into federal custody with surprising regularity. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has a reputation for abuse and lawless since its founding. Not too mention, they already invented a fake investigation into Russia and failed to take him down. The news media gets caught regularly telling obvious lies to the point where it has become a joke. Trump knows this. He throws it back in their faces with glee. Just look at his recent tweet about what the FBI has already tried against him, “Crooked” Hillary, or his spats with the media. He knows how much of the country outside of coastal elite or Washington sees these people and he plays it up. They keep inadvertently tarnishing their image further trying to destroy him through hypocritical means while Trump loves the dirty mudslinging, and their crusade gives him more attention than a narcissist like him could ever want. 

Last edited 3 months ago by Matt Hindman
Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 months ago
Reply to  Matt Hindman

Good assessment of Trump’s power source. He has long played with many of the power brokers in the DC bubble, but always as an outsider. His knowledge of where the bodies are buried makes him highly dangerous. On the contrary, his absence from the DC corruption means they don’t have the dope on him. And this why they have tried endlessly to make it up.

Matt Hindman
Matt Hindman
3 months ago

Establishment Elite: “Trump is a shady and dishonest person always mired in controversy with low morals, crooked acquaintances, and a questionable business history.
The Public: “You know you are also shady and dishonest people always mired in controversy with low morals, crooked acquaintances, and a questionable business history.”
Establishment Elite: “So what is your point? He is an unprecedented threat to this country!”
The Public: “Unprecedented, you keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.”

Last edited 3 months ago by Matt Hindman
Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
3 months ago
Reply to  Matt Hindman

“Trump knows this. He throws it back in their faces with glee.”
That’s why we ‘plorables love him. He stands up to the woke left wing B.S. dished out and force fed to the country bumpkin heartland people who are despised by the progressive establishment elite. He calls it like it is. How refreshing!.

Last edited 3 months ago by betsyarehart
Darwin K Godwin
Darwin K Godwin
3 months ago

What always seems to be missing in these character studies is the reason Trump wields the loyalty that enables him to accrue power. Millions of US citizens are expressing their voices through his ability to land hard punches in the ring with the Establishment.

Last edited 3 months ago by Kerry Godwin
Billy Bob
Billy Bob
3 months ago

Trumps base had been let down and looked down upon for so long by both parties that they would have latched on to anything or anyone that promised something different. Unfortunately it was an imperfect vessel in Trump that finally offered to listen to their needs

Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
3 months ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

Not unfortunately. Trump is the only one who could break the logjam. It is a pity that so few seem capable of following through the broken log jam. Ron deSantis seems the only conservative leader one who is willing to be combative with the left.

Last edited 3 months ago by betsyarehart
Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  Betsy Arehart

A lot of so-called Republicans (there is a reason RINO was coined) are very comfortable in a co-governing road as junior partners.to the Democrats.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago

Yes, and the left wing elite deserve every single punch. Trump is the only President who has even addressed what ordinary people care about – lower inflation & jobs & security. Biden has been an abysmal failure by those standards.

AC Harper
AC Harper
3 months ago

Trump may well be an unpleasant individual but you could make an argument that he was a better President than Obama or Biden.
The Republicans can field Trump or DeSantis as big hitting candidates for the next Presidential election – who have the Democrats got?

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
3 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

Oh come off it. If he was merely “unpleasant”, that’d be a cause for celebration. But the guy is a clueless, self-serving bell-end, and you know it. OK, make your argument then – we’re waiting to see your point-by-point exegesis of how Trump improved America’s standing in the world lol. Personally, I’ve no idea what you’re talking about. The shallow, narcissistic, draft-dodging Trump led the US into international ridicule and catalysed an irreversible split in US society (his loons are openly talking about civil war, see: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-supporters-want-a-civil-war-after-fbi-raid-of-mar-a-lago-2022-8?r=US&IR=T) that will, in my view, over time lead to the break-up of the US and its inevitable decline into a rag-bag of squabbling little countries, divided and weak. Trump is the man whom history will recognise as the man who finished off the US as a world power. But yeah, off you go, “make your argument”.

Michael Askew
Michael Askew
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

One sympathisers with anyone engaging ina spot of Trump-bashing. Goodness knows there is enough appalling material to go on. However, he did avoid foreign war entanglements and brokered several Middle East peace deals.

Mr Sketerzen Bhoto
Mr Sketerzen Bhoto
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

What’s the obsession with draft dodging. Seems like a criteria for office to me?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

Mr Trump is in good company as a ‘draft Dodger’ is he not? The wretched Clinton did the same and did not Bush Jnr join the Texas National Guard Airforce to avoid Vietnam?
All in all not a good report that the world’s greatest power keeps being being led by natural born cowards.
However no doubt the Chinese are encouraged.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker

This message deserves to be put on a sign board and walked around downtown. Slowly, so people have time to read every precious word. Be sure to wear pants.

AC Harper
AC Harper
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank McCusker
Last edited 3 months ago by AC Harper
Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
3 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

At the moment they’ve got a demented, hair-sniffing kiddy-fondler and an asinine, cackling diversity hire.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

The Democrats are going to back California golden boy Gov. Newsom – the dude who single-handedly drove CA into the ground with defunding the police, not doing anything about homelessness, drug abuse and the quality of life, not managing the countryside to prevent fires and not changing zoning to create more housing and not reducing the crazy high CA taxes.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

All irrelevant points. Newsom gives good virtue signal. That’s all they care about.

Joe Wein
Joe Wein
3 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

Trump was all the awful things we believed him to be from a personal point of view. A vile, malignant narcissist. On the other hand, with all of his awfulness, his policies were mostly sound and strong. As a human being, he was a 1/10. But as a policy-maker, he was an 8/10.
Contrast Trump with the genuinely charming Obama and the harmless Biden, who would both be welcome at my dinner table, but whose policies were deeply destructive.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Joe Wein

Honest question: Could you list those sound and strong policies you like? What has he actually done that you think is good, as opposed to just talked about?
From overseas the things you mainly notice is that he toadies up to Putin and Kim Young Un’ without getting anything in return. That he is unpredictable and unreliable and likely to do just about anything without apparent reason – which are not good traits in an ally. That he talks the most ridiculous lies as if he believes them. And that he seems driven mainly by satisfying his ego, like a toddler. In a man like that it seems impossible that any good policies could come up, except by coincidence.
But OK, it took me a couple of decades to understand why Reagan was pretty much a success, even though I had expected the opposite. Maybe you can explain something to me.

Andrew M
Andrew M
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Still with the Russia collusion thing? Putin invaded Crimea when Obama was President, the rest of Ukraine in progress under Biden. I’m also guessing Trump’s plan for leaving Afghanistan didn’t involve donating 10s of billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the Taliban.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Andrew M

Not that, actually – it has been judged that whatever he did and whatever help he asked for or got fell within the limits of normal US politics, so no point in whipping that dead donkey any more. But Trump gave a tremendous propaganda boost to Young Un’ by visiting him, without asking or getting anything in return, and he has openly expressed his admiration for Putin. He clearly admires proper, powerful dictators, and that is a matter of public record. Not particularly reassuring to any country who would like to deal with the US for protection against said dictators.

TERRY JESSOP
TERRY JESSOP
3 months ago
Reply to  Joe Wein

Have to agree with you Joe Wein. Trump is a most unlikeable character. But his Presidential actions bear good comparison with recent Democrat Presidents. To criticise Trump’s “stolen election plot line” minimises the readily apparent defects in the last Presidential election – whether they would have amounted to sufficient to tilt the balance in favour of either candidate we shall never know. But they were enough to convince me that the U.S. needs a root and branch reform of electoral rules along the lines of: voter i.d. required (and voting booth attendance recorded on security camera, like in most supermarkets, to assist subsequent prosecution of imposters); printed ballot papers only; postal ballots only available to those who physically cannot attend a polling place (and provable by e.g. medical certificate); real-time “tick-off” of voters from an electronic electoral roll to ensure proper identity and to prevent multiple voting. Heck, if the banks can reasonably ensure that imposters cannot simultaneously charge multiple items at different stores to my credit card, or make multiple withdrawals from different bank branches or cash machines, then surely it is not beyond the wit of electoral authorities to adopt similar precautions!

Art C
Art C
3 months ago
Reply to  AC Harper

You may have a point. But let’s give the current regime full marks for being truly exceptional. After all, isn’t it the sign of a mature administration to protect the president’s son & their own former presidential candidate from prosecution? And for a vice-president to state her pronouns before important speaking engagements? And to portray a president who frequently wanders about the podium like a lost molecule in a gas factory & shakes hands with thin air as “transformational”.

Malcolm Knott
Malcolm Knott
3 months ago

If the Dems wanted Trump to run again this was not a bad move. Unfortunately for them, if he runs, he’ll win.

Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
3 months ago
Reply to  Malcolm Knott

Unless they fiddle the election again.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

No doubt this will occur – but already the Democrats scream regularly when republicans want to ensure saner & more credible voting processes.

Kerry Davie
Kerry Davie
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

Friedrich Nietzsche said: “That which does not kill us makes us stronger”. Everything the Dems throw at Trump seems to make him stronger; I wouldn’t be surprised if some people are now considering the option implicit in Nietzsche’s aphorism.

Douglas McNeish
Douglas McNeish
3 months ago

The Democrats, the writer says, have failed to understand that the “language, assumptions and honour of politics may have changed” in the last eight years since Trump began his campaign.

Arguably, it is they who have driven that change, shamelessly concocting false allegations with paid for fraudulent “evidence”, always with the prior “assumption” of guilt, and without “honour” as they conduct sham trials – all the while failing to act on the wildly incriminating evidence contained Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Democrats have cheapened the integrity of the institutions they have commandeered for this assault, and squandered reputational capital built up over decades.

Nestor Diaz
Nestor Diaz
3 months ago

“Now, to be clear: this search, on the face of it, represented a relatively unimportant scuffle between a minor government agency, the National Archives, trying to enforce a point of principle, and the Trump team in Florida, likely more disorganised than it was intransigent.”

If you believe this, sir, you are an imbecile. But you don’t, which makes you one of those dishonest operatives Trump so eloquently complains about. Ultimately, it’s not about Trump, it’s about us, 70 million voters.

Katy Hibbert
Katy Hibbert
3 months ago

this search, on the face of it, represented a relatively unimportant scuffle between a minor government agency, the National Archives, trying to enforce a point of principle, and the Trump team in Florida, likely more disorganised than it was intransigent. 

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

An ‘unimportant scuffle’ doesn’t involve 30 FBI agents wielding carbines & machine guns…the writer, Wolff is a hack.

Peter Joy
Peter Joy
3 months ago
Reply to  Katy Hibbert

I think you missed the clause ‘on the face of it’.

cheryl smith
cheryl smith
3 months ago

It never ceases to amaze me how clueless you “journalist” are.

Jerry Carroll
Jerry Carroll
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

They are people who should be in social work but somehow drifted into journalism, an allied trade.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

What is it specifically in the article that you disagree with?

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
3 months ago
Reply to  Billy Bob

She can’t say. She’s merely polishing her halo.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

Michael Wolff is a known hack in New York media- the rest of the world might think he can actually parse a situation.

Peter Joy
Peter Joy
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

It wasn’t that bad a piece. Better, more perceptive and more balanced than one might have expected from someone of his background and better than almost anything I’ve seen in the corporate MSM.

Billy Bob
Billy Bob
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

You need to play the ball, not the man. Just because you dislike the author doesn’t mean what he’s wrote is automatically incorrect. What specifically in the article do you disagree with?

Brian Villanueva
Brian Villanueva
3 months ago

This is actually a pretty good article. The author dislikes Trump, but I think calls the shots fairly. I do think he misses the mark on the raid somewhat though.

The real question about the raid is this: is DOJ such an echo chamber that no one stood up on Monday morning and said, “Is sending a platoon of armed FBI agents to raid the house of a former President, current party kingmaker, and likely future candidate just to get some papers the National Archives wants… really a good idea?”

Either DOJ didn’t realize how this would be seen by 30% of the country (unlikely since Garland says he personally approved the raid)…
Or Garland didn’t care how it would be perceived because Trump is a Nazi who must be destroyed. (And if Trump is a Nazi, his deplorable voters are little Eichmans, so look out)…
Or Garland was counting on the response galvanizing Republicans to Trump because the Democrats think they can beat him more easily than DeSantis.

So the choices are: echo chamber incompetence, ideological hatred, or blatant political calculation. I’m not sure which of those is least scary, but none bode well.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

There could be a fourth alternative: Someone thought that the information clearly justified a raid for anyone else, and asked “Do we let him get away with this one, and the next, and the next, because he has a big political following? Or do we enforce the law?” I mean, it is at least possible, no?

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

The immediacy implies he was about to abscond with the cookies. Utter nonsense. My guess he can actually hide little and depends on others to keep track of his stuff.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Hardee Hodges

Can’t see the immediacy implies anything of the sort. If they have probable cause and a current tip, why should they wait? Would they wait for an ordinary bloke? Unlikely. Not to mention that if they want ot do it, they had better do it before he declares as a presidential candidate.

V T C
V T C
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

No, it’s not possible. Unless those who decided on this at the FBI, DOJ, and WH are a bunch of idealistic high school students. Same for those who believe that’s what happened here.

Bryan Dale
Bryan Dale
3 months ago

The Democrats get nowhere because there is nothing to back up their smears against Trump. In the present case, Trump had the authority to declassify anything, and this happened implicitly upon removal of documents from the White House. He also had the authority to decide what is and isn’t a presidential record. The Democrats keep trying to claim that Trump thinks he’s “above the law” while forgetting that the laws often exempt the president.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
3 months ago

I suppose that in a perverse way Trump is an ideal President as he very much mirrors and represents the majority of Americans in education, vocabulary, world knowledge, and general view and attitude. In Britain a far more intelligent and educated version would be Jeremy Clarkson, who would be elected in a landslide, and in my view would be superb.

Charlie Walker
Charlie Walker
3 months ago

Well that’s a first! Never heard of that comparison… but I get your point… Clarkson would a good deal funnier too.
the campaign starts here!

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
3 months ago
Reply to  Charlie Walker

wise conservatives would put him in The Lords.. but he does not support any political party, so that wont happen.. He is a mate of Camerons, who tried!

Phil Rees
Phil Rees
3 months ago

Would that we had a system where anyone can stand. We don’t; instead one or other of the big parties gets to choose MPs and party leader/PM, thus ensuring the sameness that we get.

Peter Joy
Peter Joy
3 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

Well, in point of fact anyone can stand and several independent candidates have registered many millions of votes. Remember Ross Perot and Ralph Nader?

Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
3 months ago
Reply to  Peter Joy

Yes, and remember when Nader syphoned off Democrat votes to enable the election of George W? That’s what happens with third parties.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago

An excellent idea!

James Anthony Seyforth
James Anthony Seyforth
3 months ago

Lol your assumptions about American and British people I find very wanting. I continually hear British people making terrible assumptions about Americans, which of course reflects wonderfully on how intelligent and educated they are… And so, My hypothesis is there is a liberty shaped hole in every British persons heart, and it’s just dying to be filled and when it isn’t – since we have very little Liberty here in this post liberal nation – the first people to get a whack on the head are the land of the free folk. Also, Trump is much smarter than you think, his holding of probably ‘nothing burger’ documents for investigation from the demos will fire up his voting base like nothing else. He may have fabricated this situation just to ensure his victory in 2024, so long as he runs. Don’t you see it’s fairly routine for Trump to run these kinds of voter starter events.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago

What about N S-T’s idea about Clarkson? Surely he is better than the ‘spastics’ currently on offer?

Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
3 months ago

Intelligent and educated—OMG. They are the ones who got us into this civilizational mess.

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago

Our idea leaders ought never to be lawyers. We often need a bit of truth.

Andy Griffiths
Andy Griffiths
3 months ago

Haha… Clarkson would be the greatest PM… in the world

Peter Joy
Peter Joy
3 months ago

‘The law prevents anyone, even with security clearance, from removing classified material from its proscribed place.’
I think you mean ‘prescribed place’, Michael. If material is in a ‘proscribed place’, then surely the sooner it is removed from there the better.

polidori redux
polidori redux
3 months ago

The trouble with culture wars is that no one is allowed to have innocent motives for anything that they do – Every move is an assault on an opponent. This, as the saying goes, will not end well

Military Parent
Military Parent
3 months ago

My guess is “We the People”, roughly 70% of us in the middle, are losing this game of back and forth.
I wish Andrew Yang was more compelling as a Third Party… He is not, so we continue – onward!

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago

I work in party politics in my very small New England town. People who keep saying they want a third party aren’t willing to do the drudge work that it takes to get a candidate known, never mind creating a new party. Put your money where your mouth is…

Military Parent
Military Parent
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

In 6 years from now when my family is finished defending the country and protecting the rights and freedoms that are taken for granted by many citizens from “small New England towns”, I will take this under consideration!!
Thanks for your service in the 30%!!

Hardee Hodges
Hardee Hodges
3 months ago

Yang and Gabbard bring forth the defects in the system. We are captured by “more of the same” that has failed the public but helped themselves.

Art C
Art C
3 months ago

The powers that be will never permit a serious “3rd party” candidate to run. Witness the way the “Unity 2020” movement was impeded before the last election until the moving spirits finally gave up. These were decent people of many political persuasions, who simply wanted to accommodate the “70% of us in the middle” with practical, intelligent policies approved by people from both the main political parties.

Military Parent
Military Parent
3 months ago
Reply to  Art C

This is a very thoughtful and insightful response. Intellectually, I agree. Emotionally, I will “keep the faith”, and pray our kids can do better. Thanks

Art C
Art C
3 months ago

I have always been turned off by Trump’s personality failings. But after this raid, although I’d prefer DeSantis, I would vote for Trump any day of the week over whoever the DP puts up. Because it’s clear now that the people who pontificate ceaselessly about “saving democracy” are the ones actually intent on systematically destroying it.

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
3 months ago

Rather surprised that UnHerd would publish Wolff – he’s a tabloid writer, a hack. We deserve to read better writers for our subscription fee.

William Shaw
William Shaw
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

Oh I don’t know. He produced an entertaining read.
Makes a change from all the trans stuff.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  William Shaw

Hear hear!

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
3 months ago
Reply to  Cathy Carron

He whipped-up a storm did he not? Sometimes it’s these secondary disagreements that give the best enlightenment and entertainment.

Joe Wein
Joe Wein
3 months ago

I cannot accuse you of having too much regard or giving too much credit to Donald Trump. But you are way too naive and solicitous of the DOJ, FBI and Merrick Garland. How many deceits, lies and frauds must be revealed before you are as scornful and skeptical of the DOJ as you are of Trump? I think they are both lying sacks of **** and I don’t trust a thing coming out of either side.

steve nola
steve nola
3 months ago

I am so sick of the two-party monopoly on power in this country. Please vote in another party.

John Croteau
John Croteau
3 months ago
Reply to  steve nola

Trump IS the other party.

Peter Scott
Peter Scott
3 months ago

The psychological portrait of Donald Trump here is entirely credible; and is one of the reasons why I, a populist, hope he does not run for election again.
But the account of senior lawyers and Democrat establishment figures playing things by the lawful rule-book is beyond preposterous.
Hillary’s crimes (the emails, the fraudulent charitable Foundation, her launching of the Russia collusion hoax) have all been excused or ignored ;by the totally partisan DOJ, FBI, NSA.
The many legal and ethical offences of James Comey (quondam DOJ director) and his major subordinates likewise.
The Establishment is running an entirely two-tier system of law. If you have ever so much as expressed support for Mr Trump you are fair game and can be hounded in any and every way they feel inclined to persecute you. The list of such victims is now long, beginning with Michael Flynn, wholly innocent, completely framed, in December 2016.
If on the other hand you sing from the DC Swamp hymn-sheet, you are above the law.
In April 2020, an American lady (I think her name was Witts), commenting on Twitter about the Queen’s speech concerning Covid, wrote ‘Now that we are no longer a democracy nor a constitutional country, perhaps it would be a good idea to ask if she will take us back. After all, it has only been 244 years’.
At the time I supposed she was exaggerating for rhetorical comic effect.
I now see that she was merely being accurate.

Last edited 3 months ago by Peter Scott
rob clark
rob clark
3 months ago

More than a few Democrats and their media sycophants are glad to give Trump a bump to dampen any momentum coming from a certain FL governor who I hope is the 2024 nominee. A mere few weeks ago, Trump as a candidate was fading, and Republicans seemed to be moving on.
I wonder if they really expected to find much of anything at the raid. Nevertheless, Trump is playing right into it, and it sure did rile up his base.

Last edited 3 months ago by rob clark
Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
3 months ago

He has to, doesn’t he? It’ll help keep the Feds off his back. It’s all about the Don.

Paige M
Paige M
3 months ago

The simple fact of the matter remains, if the Democrats, and more broadly The Left, had any successful policies or even ideas at this stage Trump’s hold over half of the US would be a non-issue. The Left has become a non-sensical, chaotic movement courting identity politics as it’s main agenda and it taints every aspect of their platform. It’s ruinous and yet they double down over and over again. I loathe everything about what they represent now. They have forced America into an impossible situation because the unthinkable happened in 2016 and they can’t get past it. It’s entirely about power now and has nothing to do with The People. This always existed to certain degrees but it is ALL that exists now. It’s frightening beyond words.

Frank McCusker
Frank McCusker
3 months ago

Wasn’t this FBI guy a Trump appointee? Who benefited from this search? Go figure.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago

As at 0900hrs BST, 14.8.22 all comments concerning the predilection of former US President to ‘avoid the draft’, have been censored!
Why is this? Perhaps so many of the then self-styled elite did the same. So many in fact that they achieved ‘ critical mass’, thus making cowardice perfectly acceptable behaviour?

NB: Comments restored by 11.15hrs BST.

Last edited 3 months ago by stanhopecharles344
Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

Now our other discussion has gone again. I’ll answer you if it ever comes back up. For now just that I have watched that video, and I still do not understand you.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Yes I saw that, the whole dammed thing just vaporised! What did we say that was so offensive?
Anyway I look forward to discussing this further, if we ever get the chance, but in short, it is the triumph of professionalism over passion.

Michael Kearney
Michael Kearney
3 months ago

Whatever ultimately happens to Trump, the years since 2016 when he emerged on the national political scene as a presidential candidate have forever revealed the Washington political caste as a bunch of narcissistic, vicious dim bulbs whose ravenous hunger for undeserved privilege knows no bounds. All the glittering degrees — Harvard, Yale & etc. — that festoon many of these oafs are salutary proof that being clever on exams and academic rigmarole is no guarantee of rectitude, common sense, or imagination.

Case in point, the present Mar-a-Lago escapade. It’s head scratchingly dumbfounding that it appears that no one in the Department of Justice from Garland on down thought through the “optics” (we’re gonna embarrass him but good) to the vaporous legality (uh, espionage act, that’s the ticket) of the heist. Then, Garland’s sad-sack pronouncement about the “investigation” (raid is verboten) where he looked like a prairie dog furtively sticking his head above his hole hoping a hawk wouldn’t strike.

Really, the ineptitude and mendacity evidenced once again in this most recent mess has confirmed that not only is careerist Washington venal but stupid. They made Trump a martyr, despite MSM’s belated recognition of it and clumsy denial (most comically on CNN). No wonder the average voter outside the bubble, where people actually do things, is increasingly ready to give the Dems an ass-kicking. The Repubs will be next if they follow suit, so no reason for complacency there. Middle America, in my Scottish wife’s inimitable slang, is “fed up to the back teeth” and wants a government that is focused on more than political vendettas, enacting bogus legislation that only serves the sketchy fantasies of a small group of ideological nimrods while screwing over the middle class (e.g. the Orwellian “Inflation Reduction Act”), and has a capacity only for bungling (most of the Biden cabinet). That’s behind the Trump phenomenon, and the anger that feeds his supporters. You’d think this would plain enough.

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
3 months ago

Stormy Daniels?… Liz Truss but with brains and looks? Make a good president?

Bob Hardy
Bob Hardy
3 months ago

I can’t get past the ‘paper’ archive I’m afraid.. Still, it’s better than stone tablets or hieroglyphics carved in stone I suppose..
Perhaps the opposition would be better served by mounting a campaign to protest against the felling of trees in order to construct this archive.. You know, a real political issue ..

Last edited 3 months ago by Bob Hardy
V T C
V T C
3 months ago

In the audio version of this article this line: “When it did happen, earlier this week, the first word came from Trump himself…” is read as: “…the first word, about what was in fact quite a restrained search by the FBI, came from Trump himself…”
I wonder what changed?

Tony Sandy
Tony Sandy
3 months ago

So everybody around Trump is encouraging him to run? Me too but in the opposite direction (get lost somewhere else)

John Pade
John Pade
2 months ago

Trump’s supporters will wind up to be his greatest enemies. Whatever good he did will be undone by them. Whatever evil was done to him will go uninvestigated and unpunished because of them. Whatever they missed in either case will be mopped up by Trump himself (but as he is his own greatest cheerleader, I’m double counting).

Trump lost the popular vote both times he ran. He won the 2016 election because of voters in four states, who went for him by a tally that, taken together, could find good seats in one college football stadium.

Both outcomes were predicted by VA. In 2016, VA wasn’t called for Clinton until the wee hours. In 2020, it was called as soon as its polls were closed. It was obvious then that Trump was done. The narrow path Trump had to re-election would not remain open.

Worse, his antics handed the Senate to the Democrats. Seizing on his petulance, they poured hundreds of millions of $ into the GA runoff races for Senate and elected both of their guys.

Not learning from this, Trump has all but ensured the Senate will remain Democrat after the midterms. (The overturning of Roe vs. Wade is also a big reason for this, which seemingly has surprised the Republicans. It’s a b***h when voters hold you to account for your policies.) The candidates he endorsed in GA, PA, and OH are behind. Democrats have such an advantage in money it is likely to stay that way once they begin spending it in earnest. Even losing Portman in WI, winning these three contests would had secured a Republican majority.)

The House might still go Republican but it is a much closer call than appeared in May. Democrats are painting Republican candidates as Trump acolytes and in many cases that will be the difference in defeating them.

The more the race is about Trump, the better for Democrats. The media is more that willing to write Trump stories than report on crime, drugs, no borders, inflation; Trump and his supporters are making it easy for them to do it.

As for 2024, any Democrat who runs against Trump will be elected easily unless the Republicans regain control of one house this year. All those illegal aliens, and all the ones arriving over the next two years, will see to it.

Democrats ensure that, if you can breathe (or even if you can’t), your vote will count. And even if you don’t want to vote, you will. If you need persuading, they’ll be there.

Barry Werner
Barry Werner
3 months ago

Next move for Trump. Alcatraz.

Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
3 months ago

It is always a pity when someone as clever as Trump lacks intelligence.

Brian Q M
Brian Q M
3 months ago

Remarkable article and situation. This whole thing is not quite the “nothingburger” that Trump’s supporters would like it to be. However, I hope the outcome of this is *not* played out in court, but instead in the voting booth. Will the great American electorate ever tire of Trumps injured personality? We will see, I guess.

I think Trump took the material as some kind of “trophy”, just so he could boast, just so he could brag about what he saw as President. Because he still had the material, he could tell himself he was still important – that it wasn’t over for him, after all. This would fit very nicely with what we know of Trump, and with the picture that Wolfe paints in his article.

Paige M
Paige M
3 months ago
Reply to  Brian Q M

The people who dislike Trump are so blind by the emotion that they cannot see the utter absurdity of The Left’s reaction to him. They have created the Cult of a Trump by their deranged obsession to take him down at any costs. You’re all so stupid and what comes next falls at your feet. It’s reached mythical proportions – keep wallowing in your hate while America is destroyed. You will blame it on him but the truth is you ran out of feasible ideas decades ago and gave rise to him in the first place. Failed policies create demagogues. Both sides own this but The Left threw the gasoline on the fire.

Ludwig van Earwig
Ludwig van Earwig
3 months ago

The Republicans need to go with de Santis in 2024, not with a man who announced “hey there’s something going on with vaccines and autism!”, falsely claimed the last election was stolen, and encouraged his supporters to storm the Capitol.

Trump had his moments, and some of his barbs made me laugh. But he’s a fraud, and conservatives deserve better.

cheryl smith
cheryl smith
3 months ago

I absolutely agree. Trump can accomplish more outside of the WH. I’ll vote for Desantis. Desantis in the WH, Trump working unfettered outside the WH. Perfect!

polidori redux
polidori redux
3 months ago
Reply to  cheryl smith

Perhaps things are different in the US, but over here the old joke that however you vote the government always gets in, is no longer funny.
I emailed my MP to tell him that, as I have an electricity bill to pay, my vote is for sale to the highest bidder – cash only.

Dave Weeden
Dave Weeden
3 months ago

It seems at least possible that the reason for the raid may have been to bounce Trump into running again. The Biden presidency seems troubled at best, and doesn’t look like it’ll have much of a record to run on. All they can hope for is a terrible opponent. Maybe they fear “anyone but Trump” more than Trump.
Every commenter seems to think the raid was stupid. When clever people do ostensibly stupid things, it’s worth considering whether they actually wanted something different to what they appeared to want. Of course, clever people do do stupid things, and this may be an example. (Surely all the documents were computer generated and copies exist on hard drives somewhere. And what’s the point of a document of which there is only one copy and it’s in somebody’s basement?)

Dave Weeden
Dave Weeden
3 months ago
Reply to  rob clark

Thanks. Yes, that’s my take exactly. I don’t know if it were really planned that way (and I think that’s got a touch of the tinfoil about it), but I agree that Trump running is a good thing for the Democrats. For one thing, he’s very old (I assume they’ll replace Biden).

Phil Rees
Phil Rees
3 months ago
Reply to  Dave Weeden

Who are the ‘clever people’ in this case? Since you’re referring to Biden et al I must assume you mean him or the crowd who pull his strings? In which case your argument is deeply implausible as I would bet on Trump defeating Biden every day of the week!

Last edited 3 months ago by Phil Rees
Laura Creighton
Laura Creighton
3 months ago
Reply to  Phil Rees

If this theory is correct, then it is the effect on Democrat voters that will be the whole point. If Trump runs, the Trump supporters will vote for Trump. If Trump instead gets up and says: “I’m too old. Draining the swamp requires the energies of a younger man. I support X for President.” the Trump supporters will all go out and vote for X. They won’t all decide to stay home in disappointment, even if they do find it disappointing.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are having a hard time finding anybody to field that the Democratic voter base has any enthusiasm for. ‘Hold your nose and vote against Trump, because the fate of civilization depends on it.’ may be the best pitch they think they have.

Last edited 3 months ago by Laura Creighton
Betsy Arehart
Betsy Arehart
3 months ago
Reply to  Dave Weeden

Except these aren’t clever people.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago

Excellent article. Particularly this point:

Despite massive evidence to the contrary, [the Democrats] have continued to act with the conceit that this is a country of laws not of men, no matter how many times this approach has disappointed them

To those claiming this is just a mean overreaction to some innocent muddle, this article makes an interesting point. It is the Guardian, and you can legitimately disagree with quite a lot of what it says, but see this:

Nuclear or not, that is an awful lot of classified stuff, especially in view of the fact that 15 boxes of documents had already been removed in January after discussions between the National Archives and Trump’s representatives, and then again in June under a grand jury subpoena.

The papers removed on Monday were held back even after that subpoena, and their continuing presence at Mar-a-Lago was confirmed to the FBI by an informant. In the wake of all that focus on the documents, the possibility that they were retained by accident is extremely small.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

Unfortunately the Guardian only reports selective facts and leaves out the full facts. (1) Prior to the raid there was an amicable relationship between the Trump lawyers and the FBI. (2) The FBI were given full access to the rooms before and didn’t take what they took a couple of days back. (3) All they needed to do was ask and they would have gotten them. (4) NONE of the material was classified as it had all been declassified by Trump in the WH – once the President issues the declassification order the documents are immediately considered declassified well before any bureaucratic stuff is done. (5) The appearance of going in with 30 agents armed to the hilt with high powered rifles is not a good one and is totally over the top. (6) Trump didn’t pack any of documents; the GSA, an arm of the federal government, did that. (7) Other than memorabilia Trump probably has no clue what was taken and what’s in those documents, and nor does he probably even care.
The only reasonable conclusion is that this was political. And all it’s done is fire up the Trump base and the republicans. It will simply backfire. Further, always recall that for “every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction” (Newton). Translated: what goes around comes around, and not just that there is likely to be further escalation.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Not sure I agree with any of that, but you remain interesting to argue with.
1) Says who?
2) You mean they could have walked around and grabbed any document that took their fancy? Does not sound legal – or the kind of thing a wise FBI agent would do.
3) They have asked – several times.
4) If there is a declassification document journalised while Trump was still president and archived correctly that would hold – you just need to present that document. If you are saying that any ex-president can retain whatever he wants and just say ‘Oh, I decided to declassify that two years ago, just never told anyone’ that would mean the President is above the law. Do you think he is, or should be?
5) That is how they do raids, apparently. As a European I would agree it looks over the top, but why should an uncooperative ex-president refusing to hand over documents expect to be immune to raids?
6), 7) Trump has been asked repeatedly to hand over those documents, as he is bound by law to do. He could easily have done that – if he had wanted to. Either he is wilfully refusing to comply because he wants to keep those documents, or he refuses to spend the time to comply because he does not give a sh*t about the law and wants to show it does not apply to him. In either case a raid would seem to be in order.

You are quite right that for every action there is an opposite reaction. That does leave anybody who wants the US to have a functioning political system in a bit of a bind, though. Fight back and you escalate the situation. Do nothing while Trump keeps pushing, and you end up where El Caudillo is solidly entrenched and no one can stop him anyway.

The obvious conclusion is that people who believe in the rule of law at some, point cannot let Trump get away with flagrantly breaking it, while trying to undermine the integrity of US elections (not denying that people who simply believe the Democrats ought to rule have other motivations as well).

Last edited 3 months ago by Rasmus Fogh
Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
3 months ago
Reply to  Rasmus Fogh

As I said let go of your TDS. There was a long-standing order to declassify all documents that Trump took to to his personal residence: https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/breaking-trump-describes-process-how-he-declassified-documents. Further, nobody is disagreeing that Trump’s lawyers and the FBI were cooperating. The FBI were there in June, they removed 15 boxes at that time and requested that an additional lock be placed on the door to the Mar a Lago storage room. At that time Trump even dropped in as the FBI were looking at things and wished them well (this is documented fact so don’t dispute it). And finally, what do you think the FBI was looking for when riffling through Melania’s lingerie. A bit over the top don’t you think.
What you have missed and consistently missed, largely because you seem to always accept the MSM narrative (which in the case of Trump has been working to bring him down since he first declared his run for the presidency in 2015 while coming down the escalator at Trump tower), is that one simply doesn’t do this to a past president and potential future president. There is no question this whole business is political and was aimed at taking Trump down so that he could never run again. The silly thing is that I doubt whether he was even going to run again in the first place. Far easier to act as kingmaker than actually have to be president.
Incidentally Hilary also had secret documents on her personal servers, and she and her lawyers had the chutzpah to destroy those servers with bleach bit and smash all their mobile phones to smithereens. But she was treated with kid gloves by the FBI.
When a branch of the government, in this instance the DOJ and FBI, has been consistently used to target political opponents (and largely republicans), it is time to realize that they are corrupt and are leading the country into a very very dangerous space that might well end up very very badly. Sort of like the Fall of the Roman Empire.
So I’ll say this again: this is not a democrat or republican issue. It’s an issue of whether the US remains a representative republic or disintegrates. And incidentally, there are democrats who happen to have at least some principles who have noted exactly the same; e.g. Andrew Cuomo, Andrew Wang and Tulsi Gabard. And it’s not like Andrew Cuomo is a buddy of Trump’s; they are enemies.

Rasmus Fogh
Rasmus Fogh
3 months ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

What you have missed and are consistently missing, largely because you seem to unthinkingly accept the Trump narrative, is that past and future presidents simply do not behave the way Trump has been behaving. If you want to be treated like a president, behave like one.

As for your ‘long-standing order’ 1) there is no evidence for it except Trumps word. 2) The whole idea is ridiculous. Having things automatically declassified by virtue of moving them to Mar-a-Lago?? Next time some traitor is accused of handing classified documents to the Russians, he could claim in his defence that the documents had been at Mar-a-Lago and so were unclassified, and demand the government prove the contrary. This is just another variant of ‘the law is whatever I say it is’.

Last edited 3 months ago by Rasmus Fogh
Fred Paul
Fred Paul
3 months ago

As funny as this may seem to outsiders (non-Americans), it is an especially disturbing continuing development of American democracy, pushing the country to the right. In recent history, Nazi, Fascist, and militaristic Japan have pushed countries to war. Today, Russia, once feared because it was “communist,” is now on the far right of the political spectrum. And with certainty, so is China, even though its title professes communism. Russia proved the theory. It’s not if but when for China. Perhaps, a union of sorts, such as CANZUK, is the only option for countries that can force their leaders to resign on opinion.
Trump is not the disease, he is the symptom. The disease and its fate are far more serious, with disastrous results if the cure fails, to itself and the rest of us.

polidori redux
polidori redux
3 months ago
Reply to  Fred Paul

The terms, right, and left, have lost all meaning.

V T C
V T C
3 months ago
Reply to  Fred Paul

Communist China is far right? Obviously we need an Operation Warp Speed targeting TDS ASAP. The derangement symptoms are taking on new and dangerous dimensions.

Fred Paul
Fred Paul
3 months ago
Reply to  V T C

You can say that VTC. On the other hand, read this article. https://hbr.org/2021/05/what-the-west-gets-wrong-about-china
Communism works on sustainability economics. It only produces what it needs. Capitalism overproduces for profit. And companies must grow. That looks a lot like China today. And the wealth is supposed to be spread around. There are supper rich and a lot of poor.
Another scary thing is this: “China is a one-party state led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The National People’s Congress in 2018 altered the country’s constitution to remove the two-term limit on holding the Presidency of China, permitting the current leader, Xi Jinping, to remain president of China (and general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party) for an unlimited time…”
What we have here is the makings of a king.
So, a single party, like Nazi Germany and Italy. A leader in it for life, like Nazi Germany and Italy. A capitalistic that manufacturers for-profit economy that rewards a small segment of the population…. like Germany and Italy. Military growing leaps and bounds to support the economy and bolster its influence around the world…. like Nazi Germany, Italy and the United States.
If it smells like shit, looks like shit, feels like shit. Most likely, it is shit.