Trump says FBI agents raided his Florida home

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: frogs453
It’s interesting how the fbi has already admitted in court to lying to get a warrant to violate this man’s civil rights, yet we are to believe they are on the level with this guy now?
Lol
Mkay
Guess they just won’t lie no more?
We are supposed to believe that?

They didn’t even get a real judge to sign the warrant.
If it is all so up and up why not get a real judge?

Exactly. They then immediately seal the warrant information to avoid scrutiny. Super serious this time guys - this info is so important and real!

It is a joke and a banana republic is forming.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Did I miss something? What did they lie about to get the warrant? Trump's attorneys have not claimed that as far as I can see.

And what do you mean, not a real judge?

By federal law, magistrate judges must meet specified eligibility criteria, including at least five years as a member in good standing of a state or territory’s highest court bar. They must also be vetted by a merit selection panel that consists of lawyers and non-lawyers from the community. By majority vote of the U.S. district judges of the court, magistrate judges are appointed for a renewable term of eight years.

They have authority to issue warrants, conduct preliminary proceedings in criminal cases, such as initial appearances and arraignments, and hear cases involving petty offenses committed on federal lands.

They didn't need a trial judge. A federal magistrate judge is a lawful federal judge.

U.S. Courts

So now we're flipping a 3rd time? First it was "a witch hunt" then "probably planted evidence", now it's a "bad warrant and not a real judge". Yet still no claims of innocence. Interesting. And regardless of the Feds sealing the warrant, if Trump truly wanted you to know what they sought and found, he could tell you. For some reason he won't, just goes on tirades. Interesting as well.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: kwakakev

We do know what was recovered. The attorneys have a list of items. You do understand people are not always immediately arrested after a search warrant right? He's busy today anyway being deposed in NY. I'm sure they would rather he gets that done anyway.

Yeah that’s not important when doing something NEVER done before.
It’s just the administrations political rival, you know like they do in china.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: kwakakev

His attorney's were on site, and they can certainly release the warrant with what they were seeking and what they obtained.

They have no obligation to release any information. In fact they are obligated to act as fiduciaries to their client; and frame anything and everything in favor of their client. That is how our system of Jurisprudence works in this country.

Expecting the defendant prove his side of the story in the court of public opinion is childish. At this point in time forcing the prosecutors to tip there hand is more advantages.

Its the DOJ and Merrick Garland who have to explain why they did not make an unforced error or reap the political consequences.

a reply to: frogs453
Lol
Attempt to justify this all you like.
It is a stain on this administration and on the already compromised fbi.
The man’s civil rights have been violated. AGAIN. By the same biased government agency.

They took it to the magistrate because no real judge would sign it.
The first search warrant on a former president and these kindergarten asshats at the fbi can’t even find a real judge to sign on.
This is a national disgrace. As are those cheering this event on.

a reply to: dandandat2

They do not owe you any explanation. They owe him and his attorney.

And seriously? Expecting the defendent to prove his side? I'm sure you prefer to just have him rile you up instead of addressing the actual issue. He will keep doing it as long as possible. He's probably thrilled that the warrant is not yet public. He really does not want you to know what they found.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Hmm. Maybe he can try that as a defense. A federal magistrate is not a real judge. Sure that will go over well.

His civil rights? That is really very funny.

a reply to: frogs453
People like you do laugh at his civil rights.
That is sick.
Typical but sick.


Who does deserve civil rights in your world?

originally posted by: 3000Hard
a reply to: network dude

Several excuses are always less convincing than one.
-Aldous Huxley

deflection and a healthy dump smell the same.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: dandandat2

They do not owe you any explanation. They owe him and his attorney.

And seriously? Expecting the defendent to prove his side? I'm sure you prefer to just have him rile you up instead of addressing the actual issue. He will keep doing it as long as possible. He's probably thrilled that the warrant is not yet public. He really does not want you to know what they found.

I live in the USA; our system of Jurisprudence does not obligate a defendant to do anything that does not benefit themselves. Its what sets us apart from countries that we call enemies. In fact we tolerate allowing guilty men go free in order to give the innocent man all the advantage.

Assuming you also enjoy our system of Jurisprudence it should matter little to you what Donald Trump wants anyone to believe. All that matters at this tine is the DOJ justifying their unprecedented move to raid the home of a former president in what looks like a political motivated action.

a reply to: frogs453

I'd honestly like to see someone do an analysis on if district judges or federal magistrates sign more search warrants. If I had to guess, it's going to be magistrates. Dealing with search warrants seems like the kind of thing a district judge will act like they don't have time for.

a reply to: shooterbrody

This is your new talking point apparently since you repeated it in another thread to me, so I'll just give the same reply here.

The man stole classified documents. He did not return all of them. A legal judge signed off on a warrant, they came and searched for the items on the warrant. His attorneys were given the warrant.

How were his civil rights violated? I mean he was the "law and order" President right?
Now suddenly we are against law and order and all for defunding law enforcement. It's the upside down world.

a reply to: frogs453

Which they will do most likely in a court of law. Which is how the system works.

a reply to: frogs453
Back up your claim he stole anything.
I will wait.
Perhaps you don’t understand the word?
You know like “ raid” or “ recession “?

a reply to: shooterbrody

How were his civil rights violated? The Constitution prevents against illegal search & seizure. Since the FBI agents had a signed warrant, this was a legal search. Unless you can prove that the evidence the FBI presented to the judge was falsified or that the judge signed off on the warrant in bad faith. Do you have proof for either of those scenarios?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Since you again are repeating the same response in multiple threads, here's my response from the other one.

He stole is a lie. Ok, he collected property of the federal government that he was not allowed to by law and then refused to give part of it back. Is that better?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Well there's the fact that Trump's lawyers had been in negotiations with the DOJ to return the missing documents. So if there were no missing documents, what have Trump's lawyers and the DOJ been discussing since January?

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: shooterbrody

Well there's the fact that Trump's lawyers had been in negotiations with the DOJ to return the missing documents. So if there were no missing documents, what have Trump's lawyers and the DOJ been discussing since January?

I don’t know, but do you think ANY judge would sign off on law enforcement entry into the presidents HOME over an issue under negotiation?
Before a subpoena is issued?



Yeah
I don’t think so either

With FBI Raid, Merrick Garland Has No Choice But to Go Big on the Trump Probe

Merrick Garland has forced his own hand. 

With the surprise FBI raid on Donald Trump’s much-cherished Mar-a-Lago residence and club, the attorney general has set up a serious test for himself, the Justice Department, and the FBI: to prove this unprecedented act was fully justified. To do that, the feds will eventually have to produce an indictment. Consequently, Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, who each presumably okayed the FBI search, have created a powerful incentive for a thorough investigation that will yield public evidence of Trump-related wrongdoing. 

The insta-commentary regarding the FBI visit, which was reportedly in connection with Trump’s improper retention of official records and classified documents after he left the White House, made the obvious point: The Justice Department was highly unlikely to authorize such an action without a clear indication that a crime had occurred. Of course, to obtain a search warrant, FBI agents must demonstrate probable cause to a judge. In this case, it is reasonable to assume that Garland’s DOJ was especially fastidious and believed the case at hand was a strong one, with the possible crime a serious offense. Ralph Waldo Emerson’s famous quote comes to mind: “When you strike at a king, you must kill him.” Or the version uttered by Omar, the legendary stick-up man on The Wire: “Come at the king, you best not miss.” You don’t raid the home of a former president, unless you have damn good reason to do so.

Mother Jones

It seems all most all the liberal media outlets understand the risk the Biden Administration has taken in the unprecedented raiding of a former president’s home.

They know the risk because if the shoe was on the other foot they would be running articles about a Conservative Administration who was engaging in political persecution; a charge that is especially important to journalists, as they are targeted more than most around the world.

Obviously these liberal outlets are hoping the DOJ does have something big to reveal; the question is how long with the American people wait for the DOJ to be transparent?

One of Trumps lawyers on the scene has come out with an interview.

EPOCH-TV: REAL STORY OF FBI’S 10-HOUR RAID ON TRUMP’S HOME: INTERVIEW WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP’S LAWYER

She had to fight to even see the warrant, after presidential records and confidential files. She does not know what the probable cause for the warrant is. Legal work is ongoing to find out why. The FBI did not trash the place as they sometimes do. She does not know what was taken.

They have been working with the National Archives in the past, nothing in the relationship to justify this action. Looks purely political to her. Is preparing for some trumped up charges around the record handling to show up soon, not worried about it.