Trump Derangement Syndrome

The FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate earlier this month uncovered “a limited set of materials” that are potentially subject to attorney-client privilege, federal prosecutors said in a Monday court filing.

The Justice Department’s new disclosure comes after Trump’s legal team had requested a special master — an independent third party — be appointed to review items seized during the Aug. 8 raid to ensure that any that might be protected by claims of legal privilege is set aside.

When two dozen or more FBI agents searched former President Trump’s residence three weeks ago, most Americans initially were left wondering what in the world must Trump have done. After all, a prodigious FBI search logically indicates an equally prodigious violation of some federal statute; therefore, it must be really serious. One former Department of Justice (DOJ) official told Politico that the evidence sought “was likely so pulverizing in its force” that it would “eviscerate” the possibility of the optics for such an invasive law enforcement action not being good.

Well, it’s now pretty official: The optics aren’t good.

When Facebook/Meta honcho Mark Zuckerberg went on the Joe Rogan show recently, he created some waves by confirming something most of us were pretty sure of already. In the weeks before the 2020 election, the FBI directly contacted Facebook and told them that the Hunter Biden laptop story was going to drop and that it was “probably Russian disinformation.” Of course, the story was 100% real and not disinformation of any sort, but Facebook went ahead and suppressed the New York Post story about it anyway until Joe Biden was safely past the general election.

I don’t believe either of them.

Four days after the raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, The Washington Post ran interference for the Biden Administration’s politicized FBI and DOJ by disseminating a whopper in an obvious attempt to tamp down the outrage.

Not that they probably care, but the four reporters bylined on the story were punked. And Americans were deceived.

Though it does raise a question: was the FBI sent after a presidential candidate?

At first read, the newly released Mar-a-Lago search warrant reveals little, with about half its pages redacted. It does suggest two possible narratives going forward, one of which has severe political implications: the National Archives sicced the FBI on Candidate Trump.

House Republicans want to haul Mark Zuckerberg in front of Congress to explain himself after the Meta chief admitted Facebook throttled the Hunter Biden laptop story.

In a surprise appearance Thursday on the Joe Rogan Experience, Zuckerberg revealed that the company’s decision to clamp down on the dissemination of the laptop story came after the FBI warned the company that Russia-backed campaigns may dump misinformation ahead of the 2020 election. The remarks have sparked outrage among many Republicans.

This isn’t just insane, it’s election interference.

The Oversight Committee must immediately invite Mark Zuckerberg to testify—under oath—about the FBI’s attempts to circumvent the First Amendment. The American people deserve answers and accountability. https://t.co/iKlxnNmcAg

— Rep. Andrew Clyde (@Rep_Clyde) August 26, 2022

The affidavit justifying the FBI’s unprecedented raid of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was publicly released by the Justice Department on Friday, but only after it was heavily redacted.

“The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records,” the newly unsealed affidavit dated Aug. 5 said, revealing that the investigation “began as a result of a referral” from the National Archives and Records Administration to the Justice Department on Feb. 9.

Not all liberal writers sip the Kool-Aid, and Matt Taibbi is one of them. The former contributing editor for Rolling Stone ditched the publication to write exclusively on Substack for obvious reasons; many of his pieces wouldn’t pass the quasi-politburo system established at most liberal publications. The only rule is don’t make the Democrats look bad.

There is a movement afoot to “Get Trump,” at any cost. The goal is to prevent him from running in 2024. Many in this movement are willing to use any means to attain what they believe to be a necessary and admirable goal. “Democracy is at stake,” they claim. They are prepared to sacrifice constitutional rights, civil liberties, principles and the rule of law to stop former President Donald Trump.