‘Burden Is on the FBI to Justify’ Mar-a-Lago Raid, Prove It Wasn’t ‘Politically Motivated Witch Hunt’

[BWK]

How would you know?

They were at his tacky mansion you idiot.

 

[toobfreak]

At least two glaring mysteries remain. Why did Trump steal that stuff and why did he resist giving it back. Aren't you even a little curious?

What makes you think Trump "stole" anything much less refused to give it back? Why do you insist in swallowing the tripe excuses and stories of an agency which has been lying ever since Trump got in office now just lying again?

They've really gone too far this time and heads must role or they must prove the justification for the raid, otherwise it is obvious that any agency which has so much power to no longer be accountable to neither the government nor public must be disbanded.

If Trump had anything, I'd wager that it was evidence either proving his innocence in something or the FBI's guilt and they simply deemed they could not afford to let Trump expose the extent of their true crimes.

 

[BWK]

This is why you don't unseal prematurely. Trumps lackies, goons, and other misfits want it unsealed so they can go after witnesses.

 

[rightwinger]

I think if you read the law, the President and Vice-President are exempt.

Exempt from the laws of the land!

 

[rightwinger]

What makes you think Trump "stole" anything much less refused to give it back? Why do you insist in swallowing the tripe excuses and stories of an agency which has been lying ever since Trump got in office now just lying again?

They've really gone too far this time and heads must role or they must prove the justification for the raid, otherwise it is obvious that any agency which has so much power to no longer be accountable to neither the government nor public must be disbanded.

If Trump had anything, I'd wager that it was evidence either proving his innocence in something or the FBI's guilt and they simply deemed they could not afford to let Trump expose the extent of their true crimes.

Trump was entitled to the information

He just had to properly request it and protect it

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

What makes you think Trump "stole" anything much less refused to give it back? Why do you insist in swallowing the tripe excuses and stories of an agency which has been lying ever since Trump got in office now just lying again?

They've really gone too far this time and heads must role or they must prove the justification for the raid, otherwise it is obvious that any agency which has so much power to no longer be accountable to neither the government nor public must be disbanded.

If Trump had anything, I'd wager that it was evidence either proving his innocence in something or the FBI's guilt and they simply deemed they could not afford to let Trump expose the extent of their true crimes.

That's because you seem to guzzle Trump's semen 24/7. A loyal member of the magaturd tribe.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Exempt from the laws of the land!

It is the law as written.

 

[toobfreak]

That's because you seem to guzzle Trump's semen 24/7.

Ah yes, a virile and capable president. That must really torque you. Bet he lives in your dreams. Wonder how many decades it's been since Joe was able to fill even a thimble?

Now we know why Jill still calls him her "little squirt."

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Ah yes, a virile and capable president. That must really torque you. Bet he lives in your dreams. Wonder how many decades it's been since Joe was able to fill even a thimble?

Now we know why Jill still calls him her "little squirt."

Question: What does any of your meandering sexually repressed bullshit have to do with with the current political discussion?

Answer: MAGA!

 

[Chillicothe]

"Then release the affidavit. Unredacted."

"Unredacted".
Think about that one.
It's a silly assertion. We all know that.

Just for a nano-second let's think why:
1. If there really was a secret whistleblower......that cover is blown. And that sends a message that chills that particular snitch from providing new stuff. And more broadly it chills future whistleblowers in ----say, the IRS, or a hospital, a meat-packer, a baby-forumula plant, a drug maker, etc. etc. WE....as a society ......have benefitted by whistleblowers. And by protecting them.


2. Details of the contents may be Top Secret information ....at least the scope and scale of it, perhaps a named spy in North Korea, Venzuala, China......well, we don't need to know that...... nor want that.

So, I'm somewhat content to leave it up to the judge and the arguing DOJ attorneys to determine what....if anything.....can be released. And what must be protected -- for the sake of the investigation, and the wider equities that we cannot know at our level at this time.

Remember this was, and is, an 'investigation'. And per FBI communiques an ongoing one.
It is NOT an arrest warrant or an indictment. Investigations need to progress in the manner that best ensures that what is being investigated is done thoroughly. Duh!
If an indictment ensues, or an arrest.....well, we can expect to learn more about what the DOJ knows and thinks.

Giving the subject of an investigation a road-map on what law enforcement knows ain't exactly prudent law enforcement. Or prudent investigating.

I know y'all know that.

 

[toobfreak]

Question: What does any of your meandering sexually repressed bullshit have to do with with the current political discussion?

You're the one obsessed with bringing up semen!

 

[Rigby5]

Exempt from the laws of the land!

No, exempt from classified document restrictions.
That is because one else can be the ultimate in deciding what to classify or not.
And presidents also have to sometimes disseminate documents, even if they are classified Top Secret.
So presidents always have ultimate personal discretion.
And while they can lose clearance to new classified documents after losing an election, they can never lose clearance to classified documents they had command over while president.

 

[francoHFW]

It was obviously handled legally or he would have been charged.

He had lots of lawyers who would stall for years. A real scumbag and a bad businessman to boot. I didn't mind until he became a dictator wannabe .

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

You're the one obsessed with bringing up semen!

I knew how much you liked semen. I'm a giver.

 

[Rigby5]

"Unredacted".
Think about that one.
It's a silly assertion. We all know that.

Just for a nano-second let's think why:
1. If there really was a secret whistleblower......that cover is blown. And that sends a message that chills that particular snitch from providing new stuff. And more broadly it chills future whistleblowers in ----say, the IRS, or a hospital, a meat-packer, a baby-forumula plant, a drug maker, etc. etc. WE....as a society ......have benefitted by whistleblowers. And by protecting them.


2. Details of the contents may be Top Secret information ....at least the scope and scale of it, perhaps a named spy in North Korea, Venzuala, China......well, we don't need to know that...... nor want that.

So, I'm somewhat content to leave it up to the judge and the arguing DOJ attorneys to determine what....if anything.....can be released. And what must be protected -- for the sake of the investigation, and the wider equities that we cannot know at our level at this time.

Remember this was, and is, an 'investigation'. And per FBI communiques an ongoing one.
It is NOT an arrest warrant or an indictment. Investigations need to progress in the manner that best ensures that what is being investigated is done thoroughly. Duh!
If an indictment ensues, or an arrest.....well, we can expect to learn more about what the DOJ knows and thinks.

Giving the subject of an investigation a road-map on what law enforcement knows ain't exactly prudent law enforcement. Or prudent investigating.

I know y'all know that.

A search warrant violates the rights of the accused.
A search warrant is only valid if there is sufficient evidence of a crime to warrant the invasion of privacy.
A search warrant has to specify the particular crime that authorizes the search.
If there is no crime, then a search warrant is invalid.
Its known as a "fishing expedition".

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The lying and corrupt Democrats have turned the DOJ and the FBI away from fighting crime to crime committing.
The Democrat Party is a dangerous political cult.

 

[MinTrut]

Rand Paul is right about a lot of things. This is one of them.
“You know, I think the burden is on the FBI to justify this raid. This is extraordinary,” Paul outlined. “This is also the same FBI that used a foreign intelligence warrant to snoop on and spy on the Trump campaign, to investigate them for over two years. So, I think the burden really is on the FBI. They’ve been wrong in the past. They’ve broken the law in using these foreign intelligence warrants; now, they use a domestic warrant. But I do think they need to release the justification for this because this is extraordinary.”

Rand Paul: 'Burden Is on the FBI to Justify' Mar-a-Lago Raid, Prove It Wasn't 'Politically Motivated Witch Hunt'

During a Thursday interview with FNC's "Fox & Friends," Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) called on the FBI to "prove" its raid of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home was "not a politically motivated witch hunt." | Clips

www.breitbart.com

Of course.

But they're a criminal organization.

Expecting them to do the right thing?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

The lying and corrupt Democrats have turned the DOJ and the FBI away from fighting crime to crime committing.
The Democrat Party is a dangerous political cult.

Magaturds support corruption at the highest level of our government. They do this willingly, and even tithe to their leaders to continue being corrupt.

All for their Orange Jesus. Embrace it!

 

[Lastamender]

"Unredacted".
Think about that one.
It's a silly assertion. We all know that.

Just for a nano-second let's think why:
1. If there really was a secret whistleblower......that cover is blown. And that sends a message that chills that particular snitch from providing new stuff. And more broadly it chills future whistleblowers in ----say, the IRS, or a hospital, a meat-packer, a baby-forumula plant, a drug maker, etc. etc. WE....as a society ......have benefitted by whistleblowers. And by protecting them.


2. Details of the contents may be Top Secret information ....at least the scope and scale of it, perhaps a named spy in North Korea, Venzuala, China......well, we don't need to know that...... nor want that.

So, I'm somewhat content to leave it up to the judge and the arguing DOJ attorneys to determine what....if anything.....can be released. And what must be protected -- for the sake of the investigation, and the wider equities that we cannot know at our level at this time.

Remember this was, and is, an 'investigation'. And per FBI communiques an ongoing one.
It is NOT an arrest warrant or an indictment. Investigations need to progress in the manner that best ensures that what is being investigated is done thoroughly. Duh!
If an indictment ensues, or an arrest.....well, we can expect to learn more about what the DOJ knows and thinks.

Giving the subject of an investigation a road-map on what law enforcement knows ain't exactly prudent law enforcement. Or prudent investigating.

I know y'all know that.

 

[Chillicothe]

To clarify for the good poster Rigby, the highly-regard poster-resource, a Google Juris Doctorate, enables one to ask....'what is needed to get a search warrant'.
And the learned Google Law professor states:

• To obtain a warrant, a police officer typically submits a written affidavit to a judge or magistrate. The affidavit, given under oath, must recite sufficient factual information to establish probable cause that a crime was committed and that the person named in the warrant committed it.

So then, it is a 'probable cause'-thingy.

Sounds like it could be serious for whoever was named on the warrant. No?