FBI doubted probable cause for Mar-a-Lago raid but pushed forward amid pressure from Biden DOJ, emails reveal

[ThisIsMe]

Okay.

What does that have to do with a search warrant for Mar a Lago?

Trump was charged with…31? counts of taking and retaining classified documents, Biden wasn’t charged at all

 

[Marener]

Trump was charged with…31? counts of taking and retaining classified documents, Biden wasn’t charged at all

What does that have to do with the search warrant or Mar a Lago?

 

[beagle9]

He was a vegetable.



Yes, there was. They just didn't think they could get a conviction because of his aforementioned vegetable status.


Trump isn't a rapist. I think it would be cool if he sued you for character deformation.


They staged the photos. They lied to all of us.

Almost as if the whole thing was a fraud.

Biden being this so called vegetable that couldn't be charged was just an excuse used. They all knew better than that. Justice is Blind regarding color, creed, religion or mental state !! The Nazis that were captured year's later even though they were some in their 90s were taken back to Israel to be tried and convicted of their crimes.

 

[postman]

PRA stipulates that Trump had full control over his records, even kept by the Archivist.

Specifically, the PRA:

• Establishes public ownership of all Presidential records and defines the term Presidential records.
• Requires that Vice-Presidential records be treated in the same way as Presidential records.
• Places the responsibility for the custody and management of incumbent Presidential records with the President.
• Requires that the President and his staff take all practical steps to file personal records separately from Presidential records.
• Allows the incumbent President to dispose of records that no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value, once the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal have been obtained in writing.
• Establishes in law that any incumbent Presidential records (whether textual or electronic) held on courtesy storage by the Archivist remain in the exclusive legal custody of the President and that any request or order for access to such records must be made to the President, not NARA.
• Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.
• Establishes a process by which the President may restrict and the public may obtain access to these records after the President leaves office; specifically, the PRA allows for public access to Presidential records through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) beginning five years after the end of the Administration, but allows the President to invoke as many as six specific restrictions to public access for up to twelve years.
• Codifies the process by which former and incumbent Presidents conduct reviews for executive privilege prior to public release of records by NARA (which had formerly been governed by Executive order 13489).
• Establishes procedures for Congress, courts, and subsequent Administrations to obtain “special access” to records from NARA that remain closed to the public, following a privilege review period by the former and incumbent Presidents; the procedures governing such special access requests continue to be governed by the relevant provisions of E.O. 13489.
• Establishes preservation requirements for official business conducted using non-official electronic messaging accounts: any individual creating Presidential records must not use non-official electronic messaging accounts unless that individual copies an official account as the message is created or forwards a complete copy of the record to an official messaging account. (A similar provision in the Federal Records Act applies to federal agencies.)
• Prevents an individual who has been convicted of a crime related to the review, retention, removal, or destruction of records from being given access to any original records.

PDF files require the free Adobe Reader.

Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978

The Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978, 44 U.S.C. ß2201-2209, governs the official records of Presidents and Vice Presidents that were created or received after January 20, 1981 (i.e., beginning with the Reagan Administration). The PRA changed the legal ownership of the official records of...

www.archives.gov

You gloss over this part

Establishes that Presidential records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist as soon as the President leaves office.

That's why the Archivists "legal custody" is done by also taking "physical custody"

It's just like in a divorce or guardianship case, where a person is granted "legal" custody. It means whoever has the child, must turn them over to the one with "legal custody"

 

[ThisIsMe]

What does that have to do with the search warrant or Mar a Lago?

Nobody said it had to do with mar a lago. It has to do with who has been charged with a crime for having classified documents.

 

[postman]

Nobody said it had to do with mar a lago. It has to do with who has been charged with a crime for having classified documents.

Only those people that they can show had the intent to retain the classified documents.

After all, somebody could tape a classified document to someone's back, like they would a "kick me" sign. And as soon as that person walked passed security, they would arrest him for possession of classified documents.

That's why the law requires that to be charged, the person intended to do it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Only those people that they can show had the intent to retain the classified documents.

After all, somebody could tape a classified document to someone's back, like they would a "kick me" sign. And as soon as that person walked passed security, they would arrest him for possession of classified documents.

That's why the law requires that to be charged, the person intended to do it.

If I willfully take something I’m not supposed to, and never give it back, did I act with intent?

 

[krichton]

Doubt probable cause, even though Trump had stolen countless classified and top secret files from the national archives including nuclear secrets. Right, doubtful probable cause. Let's completely ignore that Trump ignored a subpeona to return the material he stole and continued to ignore all requests after 18 months.

 

[Marener]

Nobody said it had to do with mar a lago. It has to do with who has been charged with a crime for having classified documents.

Then it has nothing to do with the topic.

 

[postman]

If I willfully take something I’m not supposed to, and never give it back, did I act with intent?

If you never gave it back when asked to return it, then YES.
There was the overt act, of refusing to return it. Which is proof of intent.

 

[postman]

Doubt probable cause, even though Trump had stolen countless classified and top secret files from the national archives including nuclear secrets. Right, doubtful probable cause. Let's completely ignore that Trump ignored a subpeona to return the material he stole and continued to ignore all requests after 18 months.

It's kinda like HAMAS taking a bunch of hostages. And as Israel negotiates, they keep releasing them in batches, until they claim they've released all of them.

But Israel knows they still have a bunch of hostages. So instead of waiting over a year to get the last of the hostages back, they raid the place.

Would people then say that Israel didn't have probable cause to do that.

 

[postman]

Trump was charged with…31? counts of taking and retaining classified documents, Biden wasn’t charged at all

That's because Trump had 31 classified documents he refused to return.
Biden, like Mike Pence had zero documents they refused to return.

 

[Nostra]

Only those people that they can show had the intent to retain the classified documents.

After all, somebody could tape a classified document to someone's back, like they would a "kick me" sign. And as soon as that person walked passed security, they would arrest him for possession of classified documents.

That's why the law requires that to be charged, the person intended to do it.

Biden intended to keep his stolen TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS in his open garage.

 

[Nostra]

If I willfully take something I’m not supposed to, and never give it back, did I act with intent?

Yep. 100%

Only a brain dead moron would think otherwise.

 

[Nostra]

Doubt probable cause, even though Trump had stolen countless classified and top secret files from the national archives including nuclear secrets. Right, doubtful probable cause. Let's completely ignore that Trump ignored a subpeona to return the material he stole and continued to ignore all requests after 18 months.

Lies.

 

[Nostra]

If you never gave it back when asked to return it, then YES.
There was the overt act, of refusing to return it. Which is proof of intent.

Seriously? Quote the statute where it says “There is no intent if you give it back when busted?


GO!


Using your logic I could go steal a car and when pulled over I could just hand the keys to to the cop and walk away scott free. Moron.

 

[Nostra]

That's because Trump had 31 classified documents he refused to return.
Biden, like Mike Pence had zero documents they refused to return.

No stupid, the FBI was there months before, given full access, and asked Trump to add a lock to the room while they negotiate who is entitled to them. Which he did.

The Garland sent in he armed goons to rifle thru Melania’s underwear drawer.

 

[postman]

Biden intended to keep his stolen TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS in his open garage.

Biden intended to keep his box of personal documents from his white house office in his garage.

Someone else packed the box. Because Biden was out of the country for the transition.

One Last Trip With Joe Biden

How the vice president spent a few of his closing days in office

www.theatlantic.com

One Last Trip With Joe Biden

When I boarded Air Force Two for Vice President Joe Biden’s final overseas mission, he had four days left in office.

 

[postman]

Using your logic I could go steal a car and when pulled over I could just hand the keys to to the cop and walk away scott free. Moron.

You could if the statute was theft and retention of a motor vehicle.

Since the larceny statute requires no "retention", as opposed to the classified document law, which does.
You example doesn't apply.

 

[postman]

No stupid, the FBI was there months before, given full access, and asked Trump to add a lock to the room while they negotiate who is entitled to them. Which he did.

The Garland sent in he armed goons to rifle thru Melania’s underwear drawer.

And after those negotiations Trumps lawyers LIED about having additional documents. They violated the agreement, which resulted in them getting a search warrant to retrieve the documents Trump claimed he didn't have, but they had proof that Trump still had them at Mar-a-lago.