DOJ to unseal Mar-A-Lago warrant

[Warrior]

42 minutes ago, DBP66 said:

"nuclear bomb codes"??...LOL...that's not what was ever claimed....it was reported as info. related to nuclear secrets...you threw the word "codes" in there for effect I guess??

To make long story short the Washington Post ran the story...but you don't believe it because they are a liberal newspaper?...so you can't lose the "bet" you want to win so bad...you lost the bet...face it and move on Champ...you LOST...😉

Read GBB post with the bet dingleberry, it’s copied in my post. Where you always the 3rd wheel? GBB’s a big boy (it’s in his handle) he can fight his own fights.

[GoBigBlack]

1 hour ago, Warrior said:

Not sure if you saw the article from the WaPo yet, some clips from it for your review of this hit job. Here's why the story went to away so quickly. 

Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.

 

Not only did the FBI not find any nuclear bomb codes, but they also found no evidence that Trump was looking to “leverage, sell or use the government secrets.”

So Trump wasn’t selling nuclear secrets on Craigslist after all. Who knew? Everyone. And that likely includes the Department of Justice and the FBI but definitely not GBB, Willie to DP. 

Oh and GBB don't go running come 12/31/22. 

 

So the WaPo says Trump had nuclear docs and they’re a full-of-shit partisan rag. Then the WaPo says Trump wasn’t going to profit from the documents, so now not only are they a beacon of truth, but you make the leap to “they couldn’t have contained nuclear info because… I don’t know but that’s my conclusion!” 
 

That’s a completely logical take from a totally reasonable person.

[Warrior]

12 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

So the WaPo says Trump had nuclear docs and they’re a full-of-shit partisan rag. Then the WaPo says Trump wasn’t going to profit from the documents, so now not only are they a beacon of truth, but you make the leap to “they couldn’t have contained nuclear info because… I don’t know but that’s my conclusion!” 
 

That’s a completely logical take from a totally reasonable person.

 

WaPo never said they had nuclear docs - they said "Sources Say" there were nuclear docs found. Now the article most recently is "citing sources" that say it was all more memorabilia type stuff and not nefarious or intent to sell. They reported the BS giving to them.

The story has gone cold because it was BS and now they are attempting to save face. If there was any nuclear docs or codes or Trump was up to something as far as sharing or attempting to sell info it would be blasted everywhere Like I said from the beginning. 

You lost.

[GoBigBlack]

14 minutes ago, Warrior said:

 

WaPo never said they had nuclear docs - they said "Sources Say" there were nuclear docs found. Now the article most recently is "citing sources" that say it was all more memorabilia type stuff and not nefarious or intent to sell. They reported the BS giving to them.

The story has gone cold because it was BS and now they are attempting to save face. If there was any nuclear docs or codes or Trump was up to something as far as sharing or attempting to sell info it would be blasted everywhere Like I said from the beginning. 

You lost.

Then why did you attack and not believe the WaPo for something a source said? And why are you now touting and believing them for something a source said? 

[DBP66]

16 minutes ago, Warrior said:

 

WaPo never said they had nuclear docs - they said "Sources Say" there were nuclear docs found. Now the article most recently is "citing sources" that say it was all more memorabilia type stuff and not nefarious or intent to sell. They reported the BS giving to them.

The story has gone cold because it was BS and now they are attempting to save face. If there was any nuclear docs or codes or Trump was up to something as far as sharing or attempting to sell info it would be blasted everywhere Like I said from the beginning. 

You lost.

newsflash.....every newspaper article written has "sources" champ...you choose to not believe a newspaper most Americans consider one of most respected newspapers....such is life as a brain washed Trumper....yea you "won" just like Trump did!!!....🤡

[Warrior]

14 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Then why did you attack and not believe the WaPo for something a source said? And why are you now touting and believing them for something a source said? 

They are a mouthpiece reporting what they are told to report. This isn't difficult people. It was BS and now someone is attempting to clear the slate. 

You Lost. 

[GoBigBlack]

Just now, Warrior said:

They are a mouthpiece reporting why they are told to report. This isn't difficult people. It was BS and now someone is attempting to clear the slate. 

You Lost. 

🤣

[Warrior]

Just now, DBP66 said:

newsflash.....every newspaper article written has "sources" champ...you choose to not believe a newspaper most Americans consider one of most respected newspapers....such is life as a brain washed Trumper....yea you "won" just like Trump did!!!....🤡

Broken record - GBB lost the bet. 

[DBP66]

Just now, Warrior said:

They are a mouthpiece reporting why they are told to report. This isn't difficult people. It was BS and now someone is attempting to clear the slate. 

You Lost. 

and let me guess...who tells them what to report??....the "deep state"???.....🤡

[Warrior]

Just now, GoBigBlack said:

🤣

 

Show me anything that is verified that nuclear info was found? Anything. You won't because it's not there. But I expected this response Libs are never wrong.

[Nolebull813]

1 minute ago, DBP66 said:

and let me guess...who tells them what to report??....the "deep state"???.....🤡

If you think WaPo and NYT are unbiased down the middle journalists then you are either a pathological liar or mentally retarded or both 

[Warrior]

1 minute ago, DBP66 said:

and let me guess...who tells them what to report??....the "deep state"???.....🤡

 

Leaks mainly, I'll guess from the FBI - where do you believe their "Sources" come from? Air

[GoBigBlack]

5 minutes ago, Warrior said:

 

Show me anything that is verified that nuclear info was found? Anything. You won't because it's not there. But I expected this response Libs are never wrong.

Show me where I said it was.

[Warrior]

5 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Show me where I said it was.

It was a leak because the docs weren't there. Your bet was that it wasn't a leak. It was leaked to the WaPo and now they are backing off the story. Take the L like a man - we've all been there. 

[GoBigBlack]

2 minutes ago, Warrior said:

It was a leak because the docs weren't there. Your bet was that it wasn't a leak. It was leaked to the WaPo and now they are backing off the story. Take the L like a man - we've all been there. 

Show me where I said it was.

[GoBigBlack]

4 minutes ago, Warrior said:

It was a leak because the docs weren't there. Your bet was that it wasn't a leak. It was leaked to the WaPo and now they are backing off the story. Take the L like a man - we've all been there. 

Show me where it was confirmed the docs weren’t there.

[Warrior]

6 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Show me where it was confirmed the docs weren’t there.

 

 

Umm you can't show/prove a negative. The benefit of the doubt goes to the person accused until Proven otherwise. But for one second you believe if they were there it wouldn't be front page you're foolish. 

I knew this would happen - it was expected. 

[GoBigBlack]

1 minute ago, Warrior said:

 

 

Umm you can't show a negative. The benefit of the doubt goes to the person accused until Proven otherwise. But for one second you believe if they were there it wouldn't be front page you're foolish. 

I knew this would happen - it was expected. 

I didn’t say “show me they weren’t there.” I said to show me where it was confirmed they weren’t found there. There’s no “negative.” They were found or they weren’t, it was confirmed or it wasn’t.

[Warrior]

4 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

I didn’t say “show me they weren’t there.” I said to show me where it was confirmed they weren’t found there. There’s no “negative.” They were found or they weren’t, it was confirmed or it wasn’t.

The bet is on the nuclear docs you’re doubting. If it turns out the leak was made up, you win. If it wasn’t then I win. $1,000 is fine unless you want to bump it up. I’m on board with the deadline, but we don’t need to go that far out. Let’s call it 12/31. You in?

Here's your bet - - the leak was MADE UP. I win.

[GoBigBlack]

5 minutes ago, Warrior said:

The bet is on the nuclear docs you’re doubting. If it turns out the leak was made up, you win. If it wasn’t then I win. $1,000 is fine unless you want to bump it up. I’m on board with the deadline, but we don’t need to go that far out. Let’s call it 12/31. You in?

Here's your bet - - the leak was MADE UP. I win.

Your inability to understand what a deadline is aside… show me confirmation the leak was made up. 

[Warrior]

4 minutes ago, GoBigBlack said:

Your inability to understand what a deadline is aside… show me confirmation the leak was made up. 

Was it reported to WaPo DJT had NuClear docs in his possession? Yes - from "sources" that's called a leak. Now that same WaPo is saying DJT had nothing of the sort in his possession. The Leak was made up BS which wins me YOUR bet. You can choose to dodge or not accept this which I expected. 

[DBP66]

48 minutes ago, Warrior said:

 

Leaks mainly, I'll guess from the FBI - where do you believe their "Sources" come from? Air

so the FBI tells the newspaper what articles to write....that's there job as part of the "deep state"?....got ya!.....🤡

[GoBigBlack]

5 minutes ago, Warrior said:

Was it reported to WaPo DJT had NuClear docs in his possession? Yes - from "sources" that's called a leak. Now that same WaPo is saying DJT had nothing of the sort in his possession. The Leak was made up BS which wins me YOUR bet. You can choose to dodge or not accept this which I expected. 

Ok. Highlight the part where it says “none of the documents had nuclear information and the leak was made up” and you win. Here you go —
 

Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.

[DBP66]

36 minutes ago, Warrior said:

It was a leak because the docs weren't there. Your bet was that it wasn't a leak. It was leaked to the WaPo and now they are backing off the story. Take the L like a man - we've all been there. 

LOL...and who said "the docs weren't there"??.....you?...Tucker?...Hannity?...why do you say they're backing off the story...Trump got caught with the documents...the story is real....you need to prove the story is a lie...just because they didn't name their source the story can't be true?...LOL..silly Trumper...🤡

[Warrior]

Just now, GoBigBlack said:

Ok. Highlight the part where it says “none of the documents had nuclear information and the leak was made up” and you win. Here you go —
 

 

Federal agents and prosecutors have come to believe former president Donald Trump’s motive for allegedly taking and keeping classified documents was largely his ego and a desire to hold on to the materials as trophies or mementos, according to people familiar with the matter.

That review has not found any apparent business advantage to the types of classified information in Trump’s possession, these people said. FBI interviews with witnesses so far, they said, also do not point to any nefarious effort by Trump to leverage, sell or use the government secrets. Instead, the former president seemed motivated by a more basic desire not to give up what he believed was his property, these people said.

The people familiar with the matter cautioned that the investigation is ongoing, that no final determinations have been made, and that it is possible additional information could emerge that changes investigators’ understanding of Trump’s motivations. But they said the evidence collected over a period of months indicates the primary explanation for potentially criminal conduct was Trump’s ego and intransigence.

 

I know this is difficult - show me anywhere that it says they found "NuClear Docs" in the article? The've already posted prior "Sources say" DJT has NuClear docs. Now they wrote a soft piece and don't mention NuClear docs found anywhere? Because they didn't find anything to report. 

You Lost - it's fine I knew the outcome before it started.