Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Let me put it simply, because your case was that the seizure was made without a warrant. The FBI taking your shit without a warrant is actually a crime. Whether it's a phone, or your Porsche 911 or your baseball autographed by Babe Ruth. You have standing to sue to get your stuff back.Addendum: a seizure made improperly leads to suppression in the criminal case not criminal charges against the law enforcement officers or agents, you bombastic twit. And as I already informed you, of course where the evidence obtained involves attorney client privilege, the aggrieved party can ask the court to intervene. Like demanding a special master. You are a very slow student.
Warrantless seizure would have his lawyers sue to get his stuff back, not just sue to appoint a special master to filter the phones content for privileged emails.But as you and I noted already, the determination of whether a seizure is actually one that required a warrant would be for the court to make. That the claimant insists that a warrantless seizure of his property is theft doesn’t automatically mean he gets his stuff back.
It is different. Giuliani was the lawyer seeking to protect attorney client privilege of all his clients. O’Keefe spoke TO an attorney and wants to protect his OWN right to attorney client privilege. Plus, I suppose he seeks to keep confidential sources identities confidential as a reporter.Warrantless seizure would have his lawyers sue to get his stuff back, not just sue to appoint a special master to filter the phones content for privileged emails.
This is no different from when the FBI seized Rudy Giuliani's phones. And he's a lawyer, so most of the content would be between attorney and client.
Wrong again. My “case” was not that the material was seized without a warrant. I noted that as one possibility only. Your ability to follow along is impeded by your meager intellect.Let me put it simply, because your case was that the seizure was made without a warrant. The FBI taking your shit without a warrant is actually a crime. Whether it's a phone, or your Porsche 911 or your baseball autographed by Babe Ruth. You have standing to sue to get your stuff back.
Actually when you introduced it happening sans warrant, I immediately posted you were wrong. That the only way that could have happened based on the actions of the judge, was if his lawyers were working with the FBI to screw their client. Since their actions would have precluded them from raising an objection to a warrantless search at a later time. Effectively making everything else searched on O'Keefe's phone without a warrant, admissible in evidence against him.Wrong again. My “case” was not that the material was seized without a warrant. I noted that as one possibility only. Your ability to follow along is impeded by your meager intellect.
Revisionist history about an open thread. Actually, you remain both plodding and confused. In any event, you deflect a lot. The point which you seem unable or unwilling to address remains: so I’ll rephrase it just for you.Actually when you introduced it happening sans warrant, I immediately posted you were wrong. That the only way that could have happened based on the actions of the judge, was if his lawyers were working with the FBI to screw their client. Since their actions would have precluded them from raising an objection to a warrantless search at a later time. Effectively making everything else searched on O'Keefe's phone without a warrant, admissible in evidence against him.
There is no attorney client privilege when that conversation involves a conspiracy to violate the law. Essentially their lawyers giving advice on how to get away with espionage, voided the privilege.
They have conjured up a fake domestic terrorism in order for them to do certain things. And since homegrown Russian agents, BLM, ANTIFA and Jan 6th Insurrectionists are labeled domestic terrorist's groups and the country is in disarray. That they can enact some of these executive orders.The Rogue / Criminal FBI is at it again:
Forget for a minute why the FBI would be involved in trying to recover a stolen diary...
The bigger question at the moment is why is FBI Director Wray's FBI releasing confidential documents obtained in a raid of Project Veritas James O'Keefe's home to the New York Times....
Lawless FBI Raids Project Veritas and James O'Keefe's Home Last Week -- Then Leaks Private Documents to New York Times This Week | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft
James O’Keefe’s New York home was raided by FBI agents just 5 days ago on Saturday.www.thegatewaypundit.com
www.factcheck.org
And of course meaner extra gene “knows” what was said?There is no attorney client privilege when that conversation involves a conspiracy to violate the law. Essentially their lawyers giving advice on how to get away with espionage, voided the privilege.
They have conjured up a fake domestic terrorism in order for them to do certain things. And since homegrown Russian agents, BLM, ANTIFA and Jan 6th Insurrectionists are labeled domestic terrorist's groups and the country is in disarray. That they can enact some of these executive orders.
Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
Obama's Executive Orders - FactCheck.org
Q: Has President Barack Obama signed 900 executive orders, some of which create martial law? A: No. Obama’s executive orders do not create martial law. And so far he has signed 139 executive orders — not 900. FULL QUESTION I am submitting the email below for analysis by your great organization...
View attachment 565057
project veritas is dead,, but james okeefe lives on and coming for you as we speak,,,,How do you morons feel about Project Veritas now tho?
