I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Or they are trying to come up with any tactic imaginable to prevent their worst nightmare from occurring again? They really fear another 2016.
There is not even anywhere near air tight evidence now or ever. If there was, they wouldn't be bringing a long dead disgruntled Media star grievance back in the picture.
Until there is charges. There is nothing.
You sound awfully sure. Except there were charges. Twice, when DJT was impeached.
Trump was charged, via 2 impeachments. He was not found guilty by the Senate, mainly along party lines. The senate voted to not even hear witnesses during the first impeachment trial.
No charges were brought after the Mueller investigation due to a DOJ policy of not charging sitting Presidents. Mueller, did however, produce 37 indictments, and secured 7 convictions/guilty pleas. He also declined to exonerate Trump. He did find multiple episodes where Trump sought to impede investigations.
How quickly they "forgot." Actually, they never knew as exemplified in their own words.
I already acknowledged that. You have been braying about charges; I pointed out they've been brought, twice.
Perhaps you don't understand the difference.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Yet you believe Trump is the most corrupt law breaking POTUS in history without a single charge. Then whine about mean chants about Hillary. Did he "lock her up"? Dud he try? No. Again your freedom of speech fascism is showing.
The amount and the extent of these investigations for years and no charges suggest they are frivolous. Or in the very least, have not provided enough evidence to charge him with anything. Where are the charges? Of incitement? Insurrection? American citizens are also protected from constant persecution from the law. Even Trump. Did you yourself not know this about the American justice system
How do you explain the fact that many different legal entities have determined that there was nothing substantial in regards to the stormy scandal? But now they do? I wonder why?.....
If you want to get all emotional about something he said that is protected under the first amendment "lock her up" then have at it. See if you can change the constitution. And that's just it. He said " lock her up". He did not use the justice system for constant investigations against Hillary. They investigated Bengazi. Found nothing.
They have just started investigations into possible corruptions of US government institutions. They have been investigating Trump for years. Do you bestow a time limit on investigations by Republicans but not democrats? Probably.
Perhaps there is corruption on many levels by different political motivations. That is a problem. There for it should be investigated. Or only when you feel Republicans do it?
Trust in our government institutions should not be a partisan topic.
Whine? Pointing out the Clinton propaganda and chants for imprisonment while Republicans project that behavior onto democrats today is far from whining. Whining is what Trump continues to do about his repeated electoral losses. I'm mean... liberals weren't even the members to bring Clinton into the discussion... Trump apologists did that... isn't that interesting? LOL
Really, time suggests that the investigation into an attempted insurrection is frivolous? Time? Not the gravity of the matter or the historical importance?
Republicans investigated Bengazi for 2 years BEFORE the Trump presidency. The 7 million dollars of tax payer money did what Republicans wanted it to do... it damaged Clinton as a presidential candidate for Fox News viewers.
You are the one with time limits and time related interpretation of events... don't project that onto me. Clearly Republicans were only concerned about timing of the Bengazi hearings as related to Clinton's candidacy but somehow you are now projecting that onto liberals.
You should link to that expert discussion of the Daniels case because that very specific matter already sent one co-conspirator to prison. Do the laws only apply to him?
Sure, perhaps there is widespread corruption on both sides... but right now the corruption of the GOP (Santos for instance) and Trump take all of the oxygen out of the room. I mean how do you compare when one side is telling dangerous lies about our elections, making excuses for those who stopped the peaceful transfer of power and talk about civil war and political violence? One side is going to white supremacy rallies and telling proud boys to stand back and standby. But sure, both sides blah blah blah.
Did you notice the Republicans at CPAC talking about getting rid of a bunch of institutions and that it was Republicans commenting distrust of public health institutions? Maybe you should talk to conservatives about trust in our democratic institutions in this current era.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
MaybeeRN said:
Trump isn't being charged for federal election law violations by NY State. So your Cohen comparison is meaningless. Hilary sent classified emails through an unsecured server at her home in Chappaqua. She also destroyed hard drives and cell phones. Again you won't get that from the view or Don Lemon. James Comey even admitted she committed a crime. You seriously live in fantasy land with some of your posts. Next you'll tell us how you beat up a guy named Corn Pop.
It's curious that you don't seem to know how that case is related to election laws or Michael Cohen. Well, not really. I think there's a very straightforward explanation for your confused and incomplete understanding of these matters.
You believe and repeat so much propaganda about Clinton that it's almost amusing.
The Clinton matter was investigated by the FBI and, as you know, the director at that time made an unprecedented public comment on the matter in the final 4 months of that election. Comey said she was reckless, not a criminal.
But since you brought it up, an example of criminal mishandling of classified government documents and information is Trump's case. Another criminal investigation. Do you think that he will end up being indicted for that crime too? Did you hear that some of those classified documents were on a laptop? A laptop of an aide? Even Fox published that. Do you think that was reckless or intentional mishandling of classified government documents?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Except I did not refer to TDS. Yes, if Republicans can do something then democrats can do it too. But but its worse when republican do it.
Yeah. I tend not to come to conclusion until all the facts are known. Or until charges are placed and then even until it is proven in a court of law. Must be my right etreem FOX propaganda brainwashing that demands facts and evidence.
I must be really brainwashed because I expect investigations to produce charges. Especially ones that are so clean cut!
My apologies, you did not reference TDS.
Is it your opinion that "it's worse when Republicans do it"?
Your opinion is that Trump is innocent because he hasn't been charged, right?
Are you suggesting that Fox News might employ ethics or some commitment to facts and truth when reporting (especially) about Trump?
Most of us expect charges to result from obvious crimes.
Do you think that that any of the Trump criminal investigations have clean cut aspects? The pressure on Raffensperger to find votes was pretty clear cut, right? Do you think that there are patterns of dishonest behavior evident in Trump's public life?
Whine? Pointing out the Clinton propaganda and chants for imprisonment while Republicans project that behavior onto democrats today is far from whining. Whining is what Trump continues to do about his repeated electoral losses. I'm mean... liberals weren't even the members to bring Clinton into the discussion... Trump apologists did that... isn't that interesting? LOL
Really, time suggests that the investigation into an attempted insurrection is frivolous? Time? Not the gravity of the matter or the historical importance?
Republicans investigated Bengazi for 2 years BEFORE the Trump presidency. The 7 million dollars of tax payer money did what Republicans wanted it to do... it damaged Clinton as a presidential candidate for Fox News viewers.
You are the one with time limits and time related interpretation of events... don't project that onto me. Clearly Republicans were only concerned about timing of the Bengazi hearings as related to Clinton's candidacy but somehow you are now projecting that onto liberals.
You should link to that expert discussion of the Daniels case because that very specific matter already sent one co-conspirator to prison. Do the laws only apply to him?
Sure, perhaps there is widespread corruption on both sides... but right now the corruption of the GOP (Santos for instance) and Trump take all of the oxygen out of the room. I mean how do you compare when one side is telling dangerous lies about our elections, making excuses for those who stopped the peaceful transfer of power and talk about civil war and political violence? One side is going to white supremacy rallies and telling proud boys to stand back and standby. But sure, both sides blah blah blah.
Did you notice the Republicans at CPAC talking about getting rid of a bunch of institutions and that it was Republicans commenting distrust of public health institutions? Maybe you should talk to conservatives about trust in our democratic institutions in this current era.
Again. CPAC is a pep rally. Nothing different than democrats calling for the defending of police and their other far left ideas. Hyping the crowd. And again, it is freedom of speech. They can say whatever they want. You seem to have allot of issues with our first amendment.
Corruption is corruption. Doesn't matter who's doing it. So I will not participate in "republican do it worser" non sense.
You are the only one bringing up Bengazi hearings. No one cares. Old news. If Republicans used that at a specific time around a election, that's unfortunate. Democrats doing it now, it's unfortunate. Again, who did it worse is ridiculous.
However, a probe into the slight chance a legal institution is politically corrupted, it a good thing. Mccarthy seems to be taking his role seriously.
If Jan.6 was anything the democrats have attempted to inflated it with or, if there was a shred of actual evidence Trump incited it, they would have charged him. They can't, now they are dredging up a long old port star grievance that has already been investigated. All in a pathetic attempt to prevent Trump from becoming president again.
Get real. It's played out. Charge him or shut up. Talk about embarrassing?
Is it your opinion that "it's worse when Republicans do it"?
Your opinion is that Trump is innocent because he hasn't been charged, right?
Are you suggesting that Fox News might employ ethics or some commitment to facts and truth when reporting (especially) about Trump?
Most of us expect charges to result from obvious crimes.
Do you think that that any of the Trump criminal investigations have clean cut aspects? The pressure on Raffensperger to find votes was pretty clear cut, right? Do you think that there are patterns of dishonest behavior evident in Trump's public life?
No. I'm saying its wrong when anyone does it. You seem to have angst for everything except democrats. Somethings are 9kay if democrats do it. I say it's wrong no matter who does it.
I'm not saying Trump is innocent or guilty. I'm saying if he he so corrupt and such a criminal, charge him. Let a jury decide. However we all know, including you would not accept he is innocent even if he went to trial and was found not guilty. Just like the attempted inpeachment. So it's all meaning less theatrics. All designed to prevent him from becoming POTUS again. By any means necessary.
Trump is an egotistical mouth piece. But those 2 things are not illegal. If you don't like him, don't vote for him. Simple. Or play games, weaponize institutions and set status quo for every presidential elections. Where opponents create endless investigations and impeachment are a monthy occurrence.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Again. You are demonstrating a pathological issue with what people believe or say. You can not control that. People have the freedom to say and believe what they want. Under the constitution of the US. If you take issue with that then perhaps a communist country might better suit your feelings.
There is zero evidence. Which equaled to zero charges.
Countless investigations of Trump and no charges. You at some point have to acknowledge the same. No charges for Hillary, no charges for Trump. Why? No evidence, that's why.
"Stop the steel" saying or believing to this day has seen no charges. There for unprecedented or dangerous is opinion.
Another tangent? Or are you just being silly? When did you learn that people have the right to believe BS artists, conmen or propagandists?
Zero evidence of what? Zero evidence that Trump kept and concealed government documents? Zero evidence that Trump pressured Raffensberger to find votes that didn't exist? Zero evidence that Trump assembled a crowd, lied to them and then sent them to the Capitol to STOP the STEAL?
That language and behavior from Trump IS unprecedented and intentional lying about our elections IS dangerous. That's not an outlier opinion.
Another tangent? Or are you just being silly? When did you learn that people have the right to believe BS artists, conmen or propagandists?
Zero evidence of what? Zero evidence that Trump kept and concealed government documents? Zero evidence that Trump pressured Raffensberger to find votes that didn't exist? Zero evidence that Trump assembled a crowd, lied to them and then sent them to the Capitol to STOP the STEAL?
That language and behavior from Trump IS unprecedented and intentional lying about our elections IS dangerous. That's not an outlier opinion.
I learned that people have the right to believe BS or anything else when I had the capacity to understand that I live in a FREE country. When did you forget you did? What media do you consume that suggest we need to punish people for their thoughts? Or speech?
Where did you learn that the 1st amendment only applied to some. And what propaganda are you consuming that makes it sound as though you wish to control people's beliefs and speech? And how exactly would you hold people accountable for these thoughts, beliefs or their speech? That you seem to take isdue with? A re-education concentration camp?
And what charges have been brought from this evidence? None. The answer is none.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
Again. CPAC is a pep rally. Nothing different than democrats calling for the defending of police and their other far left ideas. Hyping the crowd. And again, it is freedom of speech. They can say whatever they want. You seem to have allot of issues with our first amendment.
Corruption is corruption. Doesn't matter who's doing it. So I will not participate in "republican do it worser" non sense.
You are the only one bringing up Bengazi hearings. No one cares. Old news. If Republicans used that at a specific time around a election, that's unfortunate. Democrats doing it now, it's unfortunate. Again, who did it worse is ridiculous.
However, a probe into the slight chance a legal institution is politically corrupted, it a good thing. Mccarthy seems to be taking his role seriously.
If Jan.6 was anything the democrats have attempted to inflated it with or, if there was a shred of actual evidence Trump incited it, they would have charged him. They can't, now they are dredging up a long old port star grievance that has already been investigated. All in a pathetic attempt to prevent Trump from becoming president again.
Get real. It's played out. Charge him or shut up. Talk about embarrassing?
What is the democratic equivalent to CPAC? Answer: There isn't one. That alone is a difference. Republicans have CPAC where they rant and talk about getting rid of the CDC or FBI or FBI... or whine and lie about past election losses and that's not mirrored by democrats. So where are democrats campaigning on or rallying crowds by talking about defunding police? I think we already established that it's not happening... that evidence couldn't be found.
You were the one who said something to the effect that it's "worse when Republicans do it" relative to law breaking or corruption. I didn't say that. Never have. Just because there's lots and lots of republican dishonesty and corruption in the news right now doesn't mean that republican corruption or crimes are worse, just that there's more of it in the era of Trump. The Nixon administration wasa healthy source of corruption too.
When conservatives bring Clinton into a discussion about corruption it would be silly not to point out the corrupt political agenda that drove the 6 congressional investigations into Bengazi for the purpose of damaging the Clinton presidential campaign. That history gave us insight into how Jim Jordan and other republicans were going to treat these new investigations.
The January 6th committee referred Trump to DOJ for charges. The DOJ assigned a special prosecutor (Jack Smith) who is still working his grand jury. Upon what are you basing the opinion that they can't charge Trump? What evidence that they can't? Is it time again?
nursej22, MSN, RN
4,954 Posts
You sound awfully sure. Except there were charges. Twice, when DJT was impeached.