FBI Insider on Mar-A-Lago raid

Retired Agent John Nantz insights on the raid

The retired agent’s disgust is palpable.

67 thoughts on “FBI Insider on Mar-A-Lago raid

  1. “The retired agent’s disgust is palpable.”

    As is yours. So what?

    He obviously shares your view that Donald Trump is above the law and any attempt to hold him to account is politically motivated.

    Liked by 3 people

      1. Didn’t read it, did you?

        I got as far as . . .

        “The troglodyte, ham-fisted buffoonery perpetrated at Mar-a-Lago would have resulted in an FBI HQ bloodbath . . .”

        near the beginning and realized what a waste of time it would be to continue. So I stopped. But, after your chiding I have gone on to the rest. Yep. I was right the first time.

        That you think this kind of garbage is insightful tells me more about you than it does Christopher Wray.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. I read a bit further.

        “As a tangental note, former President Barack Obama absconded with approximately 33 million pages of government documents with not so much as a twitch from NARA.”

        The opinion was written by a liar.

        In addition he was in love with Hoover, one of the most nefarious, corrupt leaders of law enforcement ever. The man was literally trying to create an American Stasi. He blackmailed politicians and spied on Civil Rights leaders. Just what an American fascist would do. You know, the ones who wrap themselves in the flag, holding a Bible.

        Can’t you get someone credible anymore? There must be some on the right who is not a conspiracy nut, a liar, a gang member or hyper-partisan.

        Liz Cheney?

        Liked by 2 people

  2. Excellent piece.

    Until we have a reliable explanation for why the raid occurred, outrage — or at least distrustful skepticism — is absolutely appropriate.


        1. RE: “I should have added ‘particularly the truth.'”

          The truth in this story is that there is no reason to believe Trump did something wrong. NARA’s ownership of records at Mar-a-Lago is not in dispute. Trump’s custody of records at Mar-a-Lago is not at issue. National security does not appear to have been at risk. Where’s the beef?


          1. You told three lies in a row. And with a straight face.

            A retired FBI agent, who appears to be a Trump-loving, old man with a grudge (HAD to retire?).

            Don’t believe everything you read.


          2. Just a career at the FBI of 20 years, after 12 years in the Greenville County, NC Sheriff’s office.

            What is the basis for your claim he was forced out?


          3. Norfolk just had an ex-sheriff sentenced to prison. He had decades in law enforcement.

            Plus you have accused the FBI of corruption from top to bottom. Why is the author exempt?

            When he lied about Obama, I could tell the rest of his story was less than credible.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. Don, there are 13-14,000 agents. Did you meet them all? Half? A third? 100?

            Your author may have been honest or not. What he wrote was not.

            Liked by 2 people

          5. As I wrote, I had 2 as patients and one Asst US Attorney, and I wrote that they seemed sincere and professional, and I assume that the other rank and file are the same.

            But the bureaucracy and the leadership are partisan hacks defending the deep state.

            They are a disgrace to those honest agents.


          6. “But the bureaucracy and the leadership are partisan hacks defending the deep state.”

            Do you have evidence?

            Wray is Trump’s hand picked director.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Trump made a number of bad choices.

            Evidence? Wray put the same group who lied to the FISA court in their zeal to get Trump in 2016 on this “investigation.” An honest leader would not let any of them near anything to do with Trump.


          8. Ok. I reread the article. I saw no names other than Wray’s, and his gushing love of Hoover. Hoover, who was the most corrupt bureaucrat in recent history using blackmail like a fashion statement (to go along with his dress collection, I suppose).

            He even crapped all over NARA.

            Nantz seems to a bitter man who lies a lot.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. “Evidence? Wray put the same group who lied to the FISA court in their zeal to get Trump in 2016 on this “investigation.”

            Uh, one person fudged a FISA request. He was replaced and prosecuted. Meanwhile the “same group” has

            The same group? Yes, the experts at catching spies and traitors – the Counterintelligence Division. You bet your sweet bippy.



          10. “One was convicted, but the whole group was supporting the effort.”

            Laughable nonsense.

            Of course they “supported” tracking down Russian interference in our election. That was and is their mission. The interference and collusion were real and the threat is ongoing.

            You have no knowledge that anyone other than the agent convicted was aware that he had fudged that FISA request. If they did have such knowledge, why would Durham have given them a pass when he is so desperate for a win?

            You really ought to refrain from trashing honorable people without evidence. IMHO. But yeah, I know. This claim of a biased counterintelligence division is all over Trumpish media, so a parrot’s gotta do what a parrot’s gotta do. Just can’t seem to help it.


          11. “Ad hominum with no basis”

            How about the basis being the egregious lie he told that “President Obama absconded with approximately 33 million pages of government documents?” Is him being a bald-faced liar not a good reason to ignore anything he says?

            Liked by 1 person

          12. NARA’s ownership of records at Mar-a-Lago is not in dispute. – If that were the case why did NARA contact DOJ to retrieve them?
            Trump’s custody of records at Mar-a-Lago is not at issue. It absolutely is “at issues” for the same reason noted in 1.
            National security does not appear to have been at risk. – Yes it is. Anytime classified information is compromised, or potentially compromised, National Security is AT RISK. For one who claimed superior knowledge concerning classification, you sure do seem to forget things when they don’t fit your defense of TFG narrative.

            Liked by 1 person

          13. “ The truth in this story is that there is no reason to believe Trump…”

            That is true.

            I know, I left out the rest. But the documents were ours to keep and store. Trump had a history of babbling secrets. So national security was most certainly at risk.

            Liked by 2 people

          14. RE: “But the documents were ours to keep and store.”

            As I said elsewhere, that was not the basis for the search warrant.

            RE: “Trump had a history of babbling secrets. So national security was most certainly at risk.”

            Your suspicion may be valid, but there is no allegation that the facilities — either physically or by procedure — placed national security at risk, and there is no allegation that Trump mishandled secrets since leaving office. Quite the contrary, in fact.


          15. RE: “How about the basis being the egregious lie he told that ‘President Obama absconded with approximately 33 million pages of government documents?'”

            Where is the lie in that statement?

            According to “fact checkers” Obama left office with about 30 million pages of government documents. They were stored in a NARA facility in Illinois where NARA has been digitizing and otherwise releasing them to the Obama presidential library.

            Maybe you object to the word “absconded,” but that doesn’t make the writer’s comment a lie. At least the writer didn’t (wrongly perhaps) accuse Obama of leaving office in physical possession of classified materials.


          16. Obama did not leave office with 30 million documents.

            NARA took possession before he left office. Classified were stored in Maryland and non-classified stored in A NARA facility in Chicago with NARA personnel.


            BTW, abscond:

            To leave quickly and secretly and hide oneself, often to avoid arrest or prosecution.
            To hide, withdraw, or be concealed.
            To depart clandestinely; to steal off and secrete one’s self; — used especially of persons who withdraw to avoid a legal process.

            As used by the author, it fits Trump’s taking the documents almost perfectly.

            Liked by 1 person

          17. “Where is the lie in that statement?”

            You have already identified what makes it a lie. Duh!

            Trump absconded with Presidential papers. Obama did not.

            “To abscond : leave hurriedly and secretly, typically to avoid detection of or arrest for an unlawful action such as theft.”

            Liked by 1 person

    1. “Until we have a reliable explanation for why the raid occurred. . .”

      We have that. Try to keep up.

      The FBI based on representations by the NARA and other witnesses presented a judge with evidence that lead him to believe that there was probable cause that a crime had been committed and that a search for evidence at his golf club would meet that Constitutional standard. Simple.

      And sure enough, the search did discover such evidence – prima facie evidence that the statutes cited were not obeyed. That does not mean that Trump is guilty. It means the evidence was there that he is. If he has other evidence, he can present it to a jury.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. No, you have a pretense, not an explanation.

        Absent the affidavit, you have no idea what they told the judge to get the warrant, and they have lied to judges before

        Nor has the issue of whether those documents were classified or not been determined.

        BTW, still nothing on the nuclear stuff.


        1. “BTW, still nothing on the nuclear stuff.”

          I believe in our system of the Rule of Law. You obviously do not. You believe that everyone is corrupt – except of course the criminal Trump. You are full of shit. You showed that with your posting and defense of a bullshit polemic from a lying liar to start this thread.

          I believe that the Trump-appointed FBI Director, The AG of the United States and the administrative judge appointed by a committee of Federal District Judges are honorable men doing their level best to uphold the law. You have challenged that belief with nothing but lies, slanders, innuendos, hypotheticals, and half-truths parroted from Donald Trump or pulled out of your magic ass. It is really bizarre and it shows Trump’s statement about that murder on Fifth Avenue was not wrong.

          You have no need or right to be let in on nuclear secrets – if any are involved. You are just not that special. Hard to believe, I know, but true none the less.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “More ad hominem with no basis.”

            Sadly I have PLENTY of basis to pen negative remarks about Dr Tabor’s constant slanders and lies. Yours too.

            The three principle government figures in this – Garland, Wray and Reinhart – have done nothing to merit the avalanche of bullshit dumped on them by you two hacks without even one shred of evidence that they have done anything other than the duty in this matter.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. “If they’re going to make the accusation that Trump placed nuclear secrets at risk… blah blah balh”

            Who is they?

            Their has been no “accusation” of the specific contents. Just speculation in the media about what might be so serious. There is no evidence that it the unredacted Russia-gate binder is involved but you people post as if it were. Speculation.

            The courts, not you, decide if the government’s actions were warranted.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. And he complained because The Daily Beast didn’t provide a link to the Russia story I posted yesterday. At least they quoted and named reporters in Russian media.

            Can you smell the hypocrisy? Or is it overwhelmed by the desperation?

            Liked by 1 person

          4. “Not speculation in the media, Cherry picked, out of context, leaks to the press.”

            There is a difference between what they were looking for and what they found. They have said on background that they were concerned about nuclear secrets. A valid concern given (a) the highly sensitive nature of such material and (b) Trump’s almost total disregard of security protocols.

            That is very different than saying that they found nuclear secrets. As far as I have seen there has been nothing said about the NDI documents that were found or what they covered.


          5. And yet they chose to leak to the NYT their most inflammatory speculation.

            The possibility of nuclear secrets was front page news and spread through the liberal media like gospel, let’s see if they even mention not finding any.

            Plant the idea in people’s heads and it becomes common knowledge before it turns out to be nothing.

            The FBI has no business leaking their suspicions.


          6. “ Plant the idea in people’s heads and it becomes common knowledge before it turns out to be nothing.”

            Italian satellites, Dominion machines, immigrants bussed in, mules, dead voters, suitcases of ballots. Republicans still believe this crap because Trump put it out day in and day out.

            Trump playbook from day one. So ironic, but you might not see that.

            Our nation’s most critical secrets are nuclear weapons, among others like foreign intelligence sources where people’s life’s are at stake.

            You might want to consider the damage done before raking some reasonable speculation by the media over the coals.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Do you have any evidence at all that the ‘nuclear secrets’ narrative is anything more than speculation at best or more likely, inflammatory deception?


          8. Whatever floats your boat. You have been passing around, multiple times I might add, that Obama took 33 million documents and won’t give them back. Even when presented with the evidence he didn’t, multiple times.

            So honestly, what do you really care about the truth of Trump’s case? No, I don’t know what the secrets were. Why don’t you ask some of the staff and members of Mar a Lago where Trump has been probably showing off his haul.

            Or ask Putin, he probably knows.

            All I have seen is that since he had TS/SCI documents that they could be nuclear secrets which obviously would be extremely damaging to our security should the closet be open to anyone who had a key.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. It is not up to me, but up to the DOJ and/or a court to determine what secrets were stored in a closet.

            So that will come out.

            One of the reasons, BTW, for moving cautiously on revealing too much in the affidavit is the safety and security of informants and witnesses now and in the future.

            This is very much like a Mafia investigation. And that should send a chill down the spine of every American.

            Liked by 1 person

          10. “The FBI has no business . . . blah blah blah”

            So you say. But you also say they have to explain why they did what they did. So, whatever they do or don’t do or say or don’t say will be wrong according to you so why bother to care what you have to say?

            Your whining will soon be more or less moot with the affidavit now on track to be released. We will see. But, be careful what you wish for.


        2. …”you have no idea what they told the judge to get the warrant,”

          Nor do you. But you just KNOW they are corrupt and lied to the judge. You keep saying it without evidence and then attack others who do the same thing.


          1. The past predicts the present. They have lied to courts before to spy on Trump’s organization. Why would I trust them now if they won’t release the affidavit?


          2. The judge has asked DOJ for their redacted version of the affidavit just a short time ago.

            Yes, people in power do lie, don’t they?

            Yet, if it is your man…we’ll, it must be OK.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. The past predicts the present?

            Ask any honest financial advisor they will disagree.

            Does your theory hold water with the ex-president?

            Liked by 1 person

          4. I thought Trump was a rogue president who tried to screw us all with The Big Lie, destroying and stealing top secret and other presidential papers, trying to install Clark to totally weaponize the DOJ so he could lie about finding fraud, extorting state election officials because of the power of the presidency, using his mob for violence, actually recruiting gangs for his agenda, threatening his own VP…

            Yet, you are up in arms over a legal search to secure top secret/SCI documents. A search that covered every legal step after over a year of efforts stonewalled by the ex-president.

            Mighty strange priorities I would think.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. “Again, a rogue government is far more dangerous than any individual.”

            You mean like a government that extorts a foreign country to produce dirt on an opponent? Or one that tries to discourage immigrants by stealing babies? Or produces fake Electors. Or pressures public officials to change vote totals. Or one that calls out friendly militias to steal an election? Those sorts of rogue governments.

            Be careful what you wish for cultists. Judge Reinhart has given DOJ a week to produce a redacted form of the Nar-a-Lago affidavit. Prepare to start squealing about innocent until proven guilty.


      1. Sorry. It is a twitter site and I can go straight to it. Maybe a twitter account is needed? I dunno.

        The gist of it is pretty obvious – Trump on record demanding prison for people who do not handle classified material carelessly.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. I tried again and got in.

      Trump said he could shoot someone and his followers wouldn’t care.

      Well, he may have effectively shot our nation with this fiasco. But l’etat c’est moi is what his people want, democracy be damned.

      IMO, of course.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s