Trump Raid Demonstrates We Live in a Banana Republic

Why was the home of former President Trump raided on August 8? Of course, we all want to believe justice is applied equally and nobody is above the law–not even the president. Nonetheless, some are still above the law. It is also clear the former president himself has been investigated more than anyone else in history, and despite all those investigations they still have nothing criminal to pin on him.

If we seek justice for all, the current president should also be under investigation:

Can we investigate any of this or do we only investigate certain individuals? Trump was investigated while still in office, so why not Biden?

The FBI actually investigated former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. In July 2016, FBI Director James Comey made a remarkable statement outlining dozens of “problems”, gross mismanagement of classified information and the use of unauthorized private servers (located in a bathroom in the Clinton’s home no less). The FBI concluded much classified information was likely leaked to adversarial foreign intelligence agencies through this mismanagement, yet Director Comey declined to prosecute. He didn’t want to unduly influence an election (although he likely did have an impact in a very close election). Clinton’s gross mishandling of classified information (crimes in and of themselves, regardless of her intent), were clearly stated, yet her records were never searched and her home was never searched. (James Comey’s full 15 minute statement).

Why is it only Trump gets this special treatment of having his home and private records searched so unceremoniously? Do we have equal justice under the law or is this about embarrassing the former president (and probably much more)?

Trump is the Most Investigated Man ever

Special Counsel Robert Mueller was going to deliver the goods on Trump, but his report was a dud. Despite the steady stream of news to the contrary and despite two years time and a seemingly unlimited investigation budget, there was no evidence Trump had conspired with the Russians to steal the 2016 election. Nothing regarding collusion with Russia or interference in the 2016 election, was used in an impeachment–ever. That line of inquiry dried up despite two years of investigation.

After Mueller disappointed, focus suddenly switched to a phone call with the Ukrainian president. Yes, a phone call. There was something about trying Rudy Giuliani poking into the affairs of a potential political rival, but then I think that was more about trying to determine what happened in the 2016 election.

Has Katy Tur, or any of her other colleagues in the liberal media asked the following question today: why is the Biden administration taking steps to poke into the affairs of the man who has openly said he is going to run in 2024? Is the charge of investigating opponents only relevant when applied to President Trump? Furthermore, why can’t Trump challenge the 2016 election shenanigans (FISA warrants obtained on false premises, a “fake” dossier fed to the FBI by the Clinton campaign, and all the rest)? Stacey Abrams and Hillary Clinton, among others, have been challenging elections for just as long as Donald Trump.

If it wasn’t a phone call, it would have been another pretext. In 2019, Grabien compiled a list of 101 things Democrats publicly called for impeaching Trump over. This has been their goal even before Trump entered office.

The second impeachment, when Trump was all but gone from office, was going to deliver the evidence on the so-called insurrection. The articles of impeachment are fairly short and mention the following:

  • making false statements,
  • asserting results were fraudulent,
  • inciting the crowd to seditious acts,
  • obstructing the certification of the election,
  • imperiling a coequal branch of government,
  • making a threatening phone call to the Secretary of State of Georgia.

We are going to impeach public officials for false statements? We won’t have any left in office.

Many public officials have challenged election results and questioned their integrity, beginning with Al Gore in 2000 (charges went on for the 8 years of the Bush administration) and a slough of dissenters in 2016, including Hillary Clinton and many in Congress on January 6, 2017. Why is such action impeachable?

Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to #ProtectOurDemocracy & #FollowTheFacts.— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) May 16, 2017

“And they tell us we tried to overturn the election. Guess who the second objector was in 2017? The individual managing the impeachment for the Democrats,” Jordan said, referring to Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.). – Rep. Jim Jordan, January 13, 2021.

Did Trump incite the crowd? His speech is public record and has been parsed endlessly. The words “protest patriotically and peacefully” have been ignored by those who want to interpret it another way. How about the words of Senator Chuck Schumer on the steps of the Supreme Court? Was he leading an insurrection? Was he imperiling a coequal branch of government?

“I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price. You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions,” 

How about these comments from Representative Maxine Watters? Was she leading an insurrection? Was she imperiling a coequal branch of government?

“Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere. We’ve got to get the children connected to their parents,”

The phone call to the Georgia Secretary of State was ambiguous; the Georgia presidential election was very close and Trump wanted to throw out illegal ballots if found. That’s a reasonable, legal, and civil response from someone who believes he has been wronged. His words were twisted to mean something else.

Nothing of substance was found during the second impeachment; most of the charges were ridiculous, not items that should have been criminalized.

Finally, the January 6 committee, formed earlier this year, was going to deliver the goods. They made big promises. Well, where are the deliverables afterwards? Why has it been so hard to find evidence against Trump? Why did they need this warrant after the January 6 committee completed its most excellent investigation? Why did they need dozens of agents combing over Trump’s estate for nine hours? Could it be because all the prior investigations yielded nothing criminal that could be pinned to Trump?

What Did We Learn from the January 6 Committee?

During the January 6 investigation, we were told sensational things, like Trump tried to grab the limo steering wheel to steer it back to the Congress. This is not believable and was not corroborated. We were told he threw his lunch against the wall. This is irrelevant. Nothing relevant stuck after all these hearings.

An insurrection with no firearms, no institutional support, and nobody killed by the insurrectionists was a piss poor insurrection.   It was a protest which got out of control.  Those who lost control should be held accountable, but why was Trump held responsible for something he never advocated, and by extension all of his supporters, most of whom condemned the violence?

Senator Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer was initially coy about the raid, but then gave away the game with this statement:

“Republicans are going to pay a price for this in the election, and I think Democrats should use it as an issue – that the rule of law, that the protection of democracy is a key issue. And we better watch out if we give Republicans power in either the House of Senate.” 

Yes, that is it. The very fact that the former president was the target of a warrant is enough to convince many people of his guilt. Pile this fact on top of all the other phony evidence and endless investigations and it implies there must be something fishy going on. I’ve looked and I still can’t find the pony buried in all the BS. Nevertheless, the strategy still has a chance to work and influence many.

Planting Evidence?

Some folks doubt the sincerity of the magistrate issuing the warrant and also propose that perhaps evidence will be planted during (or perhaps after) the raid itself.

The allegation of planted evidence is being pushed by Trump to fire up “deep state” conspiracy theorists who make up a significant portion of his supporters, says Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor in San Diego. 

“It’s purely a PR statement with no legal ramifications whatsoever,” Rahmani said. “No jury would ever accept that argument.”

I also would like to believe this is far-fetched. In another day and time, not too many years ago, I would be doubtful. But after two years of investigations based on a fake dossier–including a tape of Russian hookers peeing on a bed supposedly at the behest of President Trump–planting evidence is not out of the realm. The Russian dossier was created by a law firm employed by the Clinton campaign, then fed to the FBI and national media. It was all fake, but it came alive in media for years. A FISA warrant was also obtained on Trump campaign staffer Carter Page who was then wiretapped (and once the foot was in the door, it was spread to others), again based on false statements from those making the application. Evidence was planted before. What is to stop them from doing something similar all over again?

The fact that so many simply do not trust the FBI in this instance is a problem in itself. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. It is not a stretch in the least to believe we could be lied to again. We should be able to trust our institutions, but we judge by the fruit they are bearing these days.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-15.png

Trump’s lawyers were present shortly after the raid began. They wanted some deference given to a former president. They wanted to observe the search themselves. They wanted the security cameras left on. Nevertheless, Trump lawyers were shunned to the parking lot outside the residence instead. How nice. All suspicion should have been removed and full transparency allowed. Without it, there will be doubt–and there is good reason to doubt.

President Biden said he learned of raids through public reports. This is not believable.

The White House said Tuesday that President Biden and White House staff learned of the FBI’s unprecedented raid on former President Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago through public reports “just like the American people did,” and stressed Biden’s commitment to Justice Department investigations “free of political influence.” 

The Attorney General said the same thing initially but on August 12 recanted: “I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant.”

Yes, these are the people we trust to handle this fairly and to not use it to their political advantage, even if it means altering facts. Somebody has poisoned the well, and we are not going to drink from it.

Delivering Records

The warrant itself does not explain why this was done or what specifically they were looking for:


The claim from those defending the raid (indeed many were gleeful over it) was that Trump was holding on to critical national security records, records that needed to be returned to the National Archives. A subpoena was issued earlier this year and Trump and his lawyers were in negotiation to deliver records. Investigators were freely allowed access via the subpoena earlier this year. Why the switch in tactics in August?

It wasn’t until 2013, 39 years after Richard Nixon left office that all the Watergate tapes were fully released:

The New York Post reported the following this week as well:

The Lyndon B. Johnson Library had delayed in releasing the final batch of his secret tapes until 2016. This came 47 years after he left office.

In 2001, then-President George W. Bush issued an executive order that changed the act from guaranteeing public access to the documents to one that blocks it, though Congress overturned parts of the order in 2014, according to Bovard.

Politico reported in 2014 that Obama administration lawyers had repeatedly invoked the Presidential Records Act to “delay the release of thousands of pages of records from President Bill Clinton’s White House.”

At the end of Obama’s two-term presidency, he reportedly trucked 30 million pages of administration records gathered during his time in office to Chicago, where he promised to digitize them and put them online.

The claim regarding the 30 million pages of Obama records has been disputed, but it should be clear past presidents have held on to many records after leaving office, and it takes considerable time and negotiation to retrieve them. Trump’s behavior in this instance is not anything out of the ordinary.

Never before has the FBI taken the step of issuing a warrant to retrieve personal presidential records. This is a fishing expedition; they don’t have the evidence on Trump, so they are hoping to sweep up something in the raid, something that will implicate him in some crime–or perhaps they are looking too for intel on the next campaign?

Pray tell, where is the smoking gun on Trump? So many are so sure Trump is guilty of something, but they just can’t seem to prove anything specific. How frustrating for them. If they had the smoking gun, we would have all seen it by now. We’ve been told thousands of times the walls are closing in around Trump, but they still haven’t found what they are looking for. They have their target, and they keep looking for the crime to fit him with.

Bannana Republic

Maybe if both sides got the same attention, the political weaponization would be pared back to a reasonable level. Hillary Clinton was tired of being asked about Ben-Ghazi and said to Senator Ron Johnson: “What difference does it make?”

“With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night who decide to kill some Americans, what difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”

The truth always matters, whether about Ben-Ghazi, January 6, or phone calls to Ukrainian leaders. We want to believe we are getting the truth, but it seems a different game is being played today. The New York state Attorney General told us she would get Trump; she made it part of her campaign and has followed through:

Letitia James openly campaigned on the promise of destroying a sitting President if New Yorkers would vote for her. She made no secret about her desire to destroy President Trump if she was elected as New York’s next attorney general.

These are the tactics used by corrupt regimes. Furthermore, Trump has been investigated thoroughly, several times over.

I said initially we all want to believe justice is applied equally and nobody is above the law–not even the president. However, why do so many others not receive the same scrutiny, especially when we believe his political opponents are the source of much of the sketchy information regarding Trump? This warrant served on President Trump is about something other than justice. This is done to damage the Republicans in the upcoming election and to hurt Donald Trump in the one after, or perhaps to prevent him from running at all. Again, this is what corrupt regimes do. They have sham elections. They target their political opponents before an election. The US is unfortunately on this slippery slope now. We need to call it out and demand better from elected leaders.

We don’t fully trust institutions like the FBI any longer. Their leaders have proven corrupt and are influenced by corrupt political leaders. We want to trust them. We want to fix these institutions.

We also want America to be a great nation, but is it any longer? The border is open. More drugs are pouring across than ever before. Crime is rampant in big cities. Our enemies are on the march. Afghanistan showed our weakness, and perhaps Ukraine and Taiwan will as well. Our energy policy is a disaster, and it is harming our national security. Our president is already half-dead, and is clearly just a figurehead. He tells us inflation is temporary and then admits it is not. He redefines recession and inflation and tells us in the midst of our economic woes that all is going to plan.

Again this month, our government is spending massive amounts of money we don’t have ($739 billion to be exact). More inflation is to come as the demand for money is ratcheted up. Stagflation is next the thing to worry about. Peace talks have stalled in the Middle East while Iran is on its way to obtaining nuclear weapons. Iran attempts to execute former and current government officials while we negotiate with them ( . COVID policy continues to make little sense, and mistakes are covered up. Our government tells us children must be allowed to determine their own fate when it comes to their gender (and potentially life changing operations), but not with anything else: 16 for driver’s licenses (and only then with parental consent), 18 for voting or to legally engage in sex, 18 to buy a gun (they want to change it to 21), 21 for drinking.

Does any of this make sense? Most of these were not problems or were far less significant problems two years ago, but you shouldn’t notice that. Look instead at what a danger Trump and the Republicans are instead. Forgot about all those other problems.

4 thoughts on “Trump Raid Demonstrates We Live in a Banana Republic

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: