DOJ opposes making public details in Mar-a-Lago search warrant's probable cause affidavit

Yeah, that's not suspicious at all.

 

Seems everyone is a technical expert on this site.

 

Do you disagree that a boss's responsibility is to set the example and delegate?

 

Obviously, Opinions Differ in this Matter...
Most likely based on which party (or candidate) one supports...
I, personally, agree with Garland's position...
But, I certainly don't have any problems with an opposing position...
That said, terms like "violent elections" seem rather hyperbolic when applied to a Nation (with a history of peaceful transitions of power) such as the USA.
Time will tell, and Elections are right around the corner...
Once again, Opinions (on this matter) Clearly Differ...

 

This goes deeper than just legal issues. Many see this as a political move on Garland's part. Without transparency Americans will assume he is hiding something which will only benefit Trump. Let the huge Chaney loss and Palin win be a clue to what will happen in November and 2024.

 

In a perfect world, yes, but life isn't anything like that.

 

Do you think they should?

 

The evidence is he did or believed he did. So should he be treated equally under the law as Hillary? And no he can show that the information was cleared and picked by GSA shipped under their protection and stored at the secured Mir.a.Lago where the FBI and NARA have had access and no claims he destroyed anything. And no assertions this was real time even current intelligence matters.

The DOJ set the standard that "these types" of cases are not prosecutable and no prosecutor would ever take the case even if Trump knew current classified information was being sent to his home.

 

The term "ratting out" presupposes a crime. What information do you have to support that?

 

Do I think people should report potential crimes? Of course, takes a lot of bravery since they know if they do trump will try to ruin their life.

 

Except if he doesn't tell anyone its happening, its not a standing order.
And no one has any record of him telling anyone. And its the sort of thing that is, by law, something the flunkies would've written down upon being given.
And then there's the fact that he authorized his counsel to sign an acknowledgement that they were turning over classified materials and to certify there were no further marked materials in their possession.
If he'd declassified them, why did he authorize them to acknowledge the classified information they were turning over? Why was his response not "everything that left the white house was declassified"?

Seeing as he fought a ****ing subpoena over them and had just had this giant 4 year long "lock her up because she had these things" chant, he can't claim ignorance to the sensitivity of having such things.
Hillary broke the law and she should be underneath the ****ing jail.

 

I tend to agree on this but at some point they need to produce the discovery report. And we the people have a right to know those details.

 

I don't agree that we the people have any more right to know this information in this case than we do in any other case. But, I think it would be an important gesture by the FBI to release whatever information they can that would not compromise the investigation or a potential trial(I say potential because it remains to be seen whether anything that was found would lead to charges). Trump's status as a former president puts him in a unique class where I do not believe they deserve separate and special treatment, but the FBI should be making huge pains to go by the book and be as forthcoming as possible under the circumstances.

I will join those on the right in condemnation of the FBI if this does end up being politically motivated and they cannot justify their actions here. But we're far from there yet, and I think there's going to be a lot of discussion and debate over just what Trump had there, why he had it, whether he should have, and what he was doing with it(Regarding this, I am not one who thinks Trump had the documents to sell them to our enemies or something along those lines).

 

"Marked classified". He didn't have to white it out on the document for it to be unclassified. Did a couple of memos or notes get inadvertantly packed? They were packed by the GSA. There has to be intent meaning he KNOWINGLY and PURPOSELY took classified information. Has the FBI stated he did? The FBI and the NARA had inspected them TWICE and could have inspected them more. That as opposed to Clinton lying from the getgo and then trying to destroy the evidence.

Tell me what do you think are the chances that someone going through all 30,000,000 of the docs that were removed when Obama left there might spot one in there marked classflified? If so should he go to jail? Should the FBI raid his house?

And again this is not about those doc's, that could have been entirely handled in a far less intrusive manner without taking EVERYTHING from his office and bedroom and where the FBI had told them to store them. This is about getting everything they could so they can try to nail on SOMETHING......ANYTHING to prevent him from running again. And that is NOT how our system of justice and the Constitution isbsupposed to work. I seen this for almost SEVEN YEARS now.

 

They don’t need intent that he took them, they need intent that he refused to return them.

 

You do know "former president" has special and official status. They maintain an official office. They have an official budget and government staff. They maintain their security clearance. Their homes, where schiff rooms were built, are secured by the Secret Service.

We haven't come close to a justification. Yea they tried to float the "nuclear secrets" thingy but have you noticed that seems to have gone away. And they certain could tell us with lots more specificity as to what documents they took. Were they current intelligence with any national security issues, or just a printed travel schedule from 4 years ago. Were they known to still be classified and purposely removed without declassification?

I've read that this mole told them exactly what were the documents and where exactly they were locates so why thisniver 30 agent raid which grabbed EVERYTHING? Warrants are supposed to be specific and you can't go looking in unlikely places for things not covered.

 

For these statues they need it. If yours were the case Hillary would be in jail.

 

He didn't no. But if he did ONE OF THE HUNDREDS OF FLUNKIES WHOSE SOLE JOB IT IS TO DO THAT WOULD HAVE. There is no evidence, from ANYONE, of a standing order as he describes. That **** gets written down because his standing orders would carry the force of law and people WRITE LAWS DOWN.

Not a couple of memos. 11 sets of documents, some of them of a classification that is never supposed to be digitized or even leave the room you read it in. Something you can't legally take with you, would've been marked 100% of the time by a flunky. I've been consistent on applying this to Hillary or anyone else. Quote me otherwise or stop using such a lame excuse.

There does not have to be intent in 18 USC 793(f). That applies to Hillary, Obama, W, ronnie I negotiate with terrorists and ban firearms ray gun and any other two bit jackass who enters federal service.
Should they raid his house if they have evidence he has things in violation of federal law? ****. Yes.

Yes, that's how search warrants are served and what happens when you dick around with the feds on espionage act related ****. They literally sought that **** by subpoena for over a year, so don't pretend he was perfectly cooperative

This won't constitutionally prevent him running again. It will just get him prison time at max.

 

There's still time to charge her and they could be cellies

 

And you think Garland will?

William Barr says Trump privately told him he wanted to drop the focus on Hillary Clinton's emails, despite suggesting the opposite publicly

""He said that, despite the chants of 'Lock her up!' from some of his supporters, he had felt after the 2016 election that the e-mail matter should be dropped," Barr writes in his new book, "One Damn Thing After Another." "Even if she were guilty, he said, for the election winner to seek prosecution of the loser would make the country look like a 'banana republic.'"

Barr says the moment came during a November 2018 meeting with Trump in the White House residence before Barr agreed to replace the ousted Jeff Sessions as the administration's next permanent Attorney General."
https://www.businessinsider.com/bil...inton-email-investigation-dropped-2016-2022-3

Do you think Biden will take the same attitude?

 

It didn't have to be written down. In 30,000,000 that were removed you don't thing even ONE might have a secret or confidential stamp on it? Really? Or not marked but still have what was classified information? REALLY?

Yes a couple out of how many? Clinton had 110 that we know of and were recoverable. Real time current intelligence. And you don't know it they were docs "never meant to leave the room" as the conversations from experts I have heard says those are never removed they are collected then and there even a President doesn't walk out with them. For all we know they were a simple as his schedule on a certain day. But again if he declassified them end of story.

That was the standard Comey applied INTENT. Even though they never questioned her and he admitted in the hearing they never questioned anyone else on intent because he said they could never prove it.

How long were Hillary's billing records under subpoena before they suddenly turned up on her private dinning room table? How long were her emails under subpoena until the server was found even though she attempted to destroy them?

They will have to prove that Trump knowingly took what he knew was still classified information, and remember he still had and still has his security clearance, and kept it in an unsecured location, Mir a Lago is a secured location, and knowing there was classified information knowingly hid it from the FBI and NARA. That HE packed it away, the boxes were packed by the GSA, knowing it was classified or even likely classified or did so with gross negligence which they had all over Clinton but did not charge.

But this is NOT about the docs and classifications that is a ruse so they could go in on a fishing expedition because it looks like Jan 6 is going to be bust for them and Pelosi and her bogus committee and they need something to prevent him from running again. And that is NOT the purpose of our system of justice.

 

Not by Trump, but all the rules for recording declassification events applies to all those flunkies he directed to box **** up. THEY would've written it down, like they write everything down. Because that is literally their primary function.

11 sets, we'll have to wait until trial to count how many. 1 is sufficient. It was sufficient on Clinton, and its sufficient on Trump.

Comey was wrong on a plain reading of the statute which in the case I've cited requires GROSS NEGLIGENCE as its mens rea. Its like when you pull an Alex Jones and argue that you're "basically retarded" as an excuse.

So you're saying Trump didn't take the steps that should've been taken. Bully for him, and completely unsurprising that he's a giant ***** in private when he talks so much **** in public.

That's not what they have to prove, but you go ahead and cope and seethe.

Its not a fishing expedition, they found what they thought would be there where they thought it would be.

 

110 in 62 different email chains that we know of weren't enough for Clinton. Realtime current intelligence wasn't enough for Clinton. Lying before Congress wasn't enough for Clinton. Trying to destroy the government property including the classified information was not enough for Clinton.

Comey spoke for the DOJ the government when said no prosecutor would take such a case so no charges would be brought. They set the standard. And she did not have the power a President vis-a-vis classification.

They were told EXACTLY what were the documents and EXACTLY where they were. Why did they take EVERYTHING they could then? Why did they seek such a broad search warrant, search warrants are to be limited to evidence of a specific crime and in specific locations.

This was ENTIRELY a fishing expedition because there is still a swamp that doesn't want Trump to seek reelection again. And I say that NOT WANTING HIM TOO. But that is not for the DOJ and FBI to decide.

 

Why would it be difficult for a boss to set an example for others to follow and delegate responsibility?