FBI took records from Mar A Lago covered by attorney client privilege.

[bripat9643]

So it's easy to pull the wool over Trump's eyes? I mean after all, it was Trump that told us he only hires the best.

One of the problems with being a newbie in politics is not having a large pool of people you can trust to appoint to important positions. Trump keeps getting stung because of that.

 

[bripat9643]

Sorry? You are saying this is what should be done but you aren't actually going to run with it yourself?

We want to defund the FBI, not all law enforcement, you ******* douchebag.

 

[easyt65]

Criminals and extortionists and monsters are the enemy of Americans not the DOJ and FBI.

The FBI has proven itself at times to be criminals, extortionists, Patriot Act / Constitution violators, threats to Americans by illegally spying in them.

Why do you not want the FBI to be held accountable...or do you?

 

[bripat9643]

You need to check the facts. President's don't "classify" documents. Security drones do that.

Wrong.

 

[pknopp]

One of the problems with being a newbie in politics is not having a large pool of people you can trust to appoint to important positions. Trump keeps getting stung because of that.

So it was easy to pull the wool over his eyes and you want him to run again. I guess that makes sense to you.

 

[bripat9643]

The FBI has proven itself at times to be criminals, extortionists, Patriot Act / Constitution violators, threats to Americans by illegally spying in them.

Why do you not want the FBI to be held accountable...or do you?

Not as long as they persecute Republicans.

 

[multivita-man]

We are talking about communications between Trump and his attorney.

Except we're not - because attorney-client privilege can't protect everything you think it does. I know Team Trump claims that some documents that were retrieved are covered under attorney-client privilege, and Fox News and other outlets parroted that claim. But that doesn't make it true. As I said before, anyone can claim anything on the interet.

Here's an article from 2019 that gives you a better explanation of attorney-client privilege, not by Trump and Fox News, but by actual legal experts:

Why Giuliani and Trump Can’t Hide Behind Attorney-Client Privilege

Sure, the privilege works sometimes. But not when it looks like the lawyer might be in on alleged crimes.

www.politico.com

Here’s the bad news for Giuliani and Trump: Attorney-client privilege, which preserves confidentiality between the two parties to ensure that legal advice can be given freely, doesn’t apply to everything. If there is evidence that a lawyer has been used to advance a crime or fraud, the privilege vanishes.

In short, attorney-client privilege protects the confidentiality of attorney-client communication about legal matters. It cannot be used as a shield to facilitate criminal conduct, and it cannot be used to invalidate a Constitutionally valid search warrant. In the event that attorney-client communication is swept up, attorney-client privilege means that whatever information is in those communications cannot be used by prosecutors in 'discovery', and thus can't be used as evidence to prosecute Trump for crimes.

You really should stop watching Fox News because you're being lied to.

 

[multivita-man]

You implied that judges are qualified to determine if documents are classified.

No, they're qualified to determine if there's probable cause that a crime has been committed. Knowingly possessing, withholding, leaking, or otherwise mishandling classified information is a crime. The DOJ presented evidence that Trump was in possession of classified documents and thus the judge determined probable cause, and signed the warrant.

The end.

If they took documents covered by attorney-client privilege, then that's exactly what the FBI did.

They can take whatever the **** evidence they want as long as it is within the scope of the search warrant. I'm sorry you don't understand your own legal system. Privileged communication could possibly have been included in those sets of documents, but that doesn't mean shit. All it means is that the government can't use those documents/emails/whatever as evidence to prosecute Trump.

 

[bripat9643]

Except we're not - because attorney-client privilege can't protect everything you think it does.

Yes we are, moron.

I know Team Trump claims that some documents that were retrieved are covered under attorney-client privilege, and Fox News and other outlets parroted that claim. But that doesn't make it true. As I said before, anyone can claim anything on the interet.

What evidence do you have that it's false? . . . .

Just as I thought: none.

Here's an article from 2019 that gives you a better explanation of attorney-client privilege, not by Trump and Fox News, but by actual legal experts:

Why Giuliani and Trump Can’t Hide Behind Attorney-Client Privilege

Sure, the privilege works sometimes. But not when it looks like the lawyer might be in on alleged crimes.

www.politico.com

I don't need to have attorney client privilege explained to me, especially not by an ignorant dumbass like you

In short, attorney-client privilege protects the confidentiality of attorney-client communication about legal matters. It cannot be used as a shield to facilitate criminal conduct,

What evidence do you that anything was used to facilitate criminal conduct?

and it cannot be used to invalidate a Constitutionally valid search warrant.

That's dead wrong. And you presumed to instruct me about the meaning of attorney-client communication. There is no Constitutionally valid search warrant that allows the police to collect attorney-client communications.

In the event that attorney-client communication is swept up, attorney-client privilege means that whatever information is in those communications cannot be used by prosecutors in 'discovery', and thus can't be used as evidence to prosecute Trump for crimes.

They can never be collected by the police legally.

You really should stop watching Fox News because you're being lied to.

You need to stop watching the fake news.

 

[bripat9643]

No, they're qualified to determine if there's probable cause that a crime has been committed. Knowingly possessing, withholding, leaking, or otherwise mishandling classified information is a crime. The DOJ presented evidence that Trump was in possession of classified documents and thus the judge determined probable cause, and signed the warrant.

The end.

You're weaseling and lying about what you posted.

They can take whatever the **** evidence they want as long as it is within the scope of the search warrant. I'm sorry you don't understand your own legal system. Privileged communication could possibly have been included in those sets of documents, but that doesn't mean shit. All it means is that the government can't use those documents/emails/whatever as evidence to prosecute Trump.

Attorney-client communications are not within the scope of any legal search warrant. It means they can't have it in their possession. They can't use it to learn anything about the case.

I'm sorry you're such a brain damaged dumbass.

 

[Winco]

He doesn’t need evidence that he declassified documents. There is no set procedures for presidents to declassify records. He just says they are de classified and they are. Period.

So..... "abracadabra".
Magic Fairy Tiny Hands. LOOOLLOOLLLL

 

[multivita-man]

Yes we are, moron.


What evidence do you have that it's false? . . . .

Just as I thought: none.


I don't need to have attorney client privilege explained to me, especially not by an ignorant dumbass like you


What evidence do you that anything was used to facilitate criminal conduct?


That's dead wrong. And you presumed to instruct me about the meaning of attorney-client communication. There is no Constitutionally valid search warrant that allows the police to collect attorney-client communications.


They can never be collected by the police legally.


You need to stop watching the fake news.

<sigh> You don't understand your own legal system. Oh well, whatever.

Have a beautiful Sunday anyway.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Do away with it for all I care.

I agree

 

[bripat9643]

Except we're not - because attorney-client privilege can't protect everything you think it does. I know Team Trump claims that some documents that were retrieved are covered under attorney-client privilege, and Fox News and other outlets parroted that claim. But that doesn't make it true. As I said before, anyone can claim anything on the interet.

Here's an article from 2019 that gives you a better explanation of attorney-client privilege, not by Trump and Fox News, but by actual legal experts:

Why Giuliani and Trump Can’t Hide Behind Attorney-Client Privilege

Sure, the privilege works sometimes. But not when it looks like the lawyer might be in on alleged crimes.

www.politico.com

In short, attorney-client privilege protects the confidentiality of attorney-client communication about legal matters. It cannot be used as a shield to facilitate criminal conduct, and it cannot be used to invalidate a Constitutionally valid search warrant. In the event that attorney-client communication is swept up, attorney-client privilege means that whatever information is in those communications cannot be used by prosecutors in 'discovery', and thus can't be used as evidence to prosecute Trump for crimes.

You really should stop watching Fox News because you're being lied to.

You've proven that you're a moron, so I'm done dealing with you. I don't have time to deal with your geyser of stupidity and lies.

 

[bripat9643]

<sigh> You don't understand your own legal system. Oh well, whatever.

Have a beautiful Sunday anyway.

ROFL! Spits the forum moron.

 

[Nostra]

Tell me what you're posting that displays your intelligence, or even your ability to think. All you do is deny facts and reality, and then call others "stupid". What a waste of life you are. 60 posts a day, insulting people and lying.

Tell us again how the US isn't a Republic, Simp.

 

[Nostra]

You need to check the facts. President's don't "classify" documents. Security drones do that.

Once again you demonstrate what a colossal moron you are.


Executive Order 13256, issued by Obama, spells out who specifically may classify information.

Authority to take certain information – say, the existence of a weapons program – and classify it top secret is given only to specific individuals, including the president and vice president and certain agency heads.

Here’s How Government Documents Are Classified to Keep Sensitive Info Safe

What are classified documents? Who gets to see them? What happens if they are released?

heavy.com

 

[Marener]

Do you ever contact reality at any point?

Actual reality or your alternative reality?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, they're qualified to determine if there's probable cause that a crime has been committed. Knowingly possessing, withholding, leaking, or otherwise mishandling classified information is a crime. The DOJ presented evidence that Trump was in possession of classified documents and thus the judge determined probable cause, and signed the warrant.

The end.

What evidence did the corrupt DOJ present, that they told the MSM what to print?

The President has exclusive power to determine the declassification process. Trump's policy was that anything that leaves the White House is automatically officially declassified. So how could he possibly be in possession of classified material?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You need to check the facts. President's don't "classify" documents. Security drones do that.

You need to read slower. I said declassify documents.