Federal Judge Reveals Incumbent President Joe Biden Ordered FBI Access to Mar-a-Lago Documents

[Faun]

Yes you do. The FBI says the president approved it. Therefore he HAD to know.

You lose.

But we knew that already

LOL

You're lying again. Watch this...

Quote the FBI saying Biden approved the search warrant...

 

[scruffy]

Of course I have that proof and I already posted it.

To win a presidential election, one must get a majority of electoral votes. Electoral votes are issued by the 50 states and D.C. in 2020, after counting and canvassing their respective ballots, each state and D.C. certified their results. That is the first phase of winning an election. Up to that point, as I've shown, Biden was wining 306 to 232. The second phase of winning the election then turn from state level certification to federal certification. That's where, in accordance with the Constitution, Congress counts the electoral votes and decides who won the election. Congress did that despite magatard interruption and certified Biden the winner.

I posted all of that so don't lie and falsely claim I haven't proven Biden won.

You posted the same bullshit leftards always post.

It doesn't answer the question and never will.

You fuckers are too retarded to address the actual problem.

 

[scruffy]

LOL

You're lying again. Watch this...

Quote the FBI saying Biden approved the search warrant...

Why would I quote a bunch of liars?

 

[forkup]

With all due respect, Forkup? It this case really WAS on the level then if I'm the Attorney General of the DOJ and I'm about to raid the home of an Ex President of the United States? The LAST judge that I'm going to get my warrant from is Magistrate Reinhart! A judge who recused himself from hearing a lawsuit between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton because he felt he was biased against Trump? With the shit storm that you had to have known this was going to create...why would any rationale person go to THAT judge and why would THAT judge ever agree to issue the warrant?

As for sufficient probable cause? The first question any judge SHOULD have asked is doesn't a President of the United States have the ability to classify materials and if so how could anything Trump had at his home be considered "classified"?

The LAST judge that I'm going to get my warrant from is Magistrate Reinhart!

Anyone claiming the DOJ's warrant would have been accepted by those that choose to defend Trump as being above board if only another magistrate would have signed off on it is dumb or dishonest. Sorry to put in those terms but those are the only options. One of the go-to defenses for any person coming into contact with the DOJ is something in the line of " they don't like me, so they are going after me." This defense is only very rarely successful because one has to actually SHOW misconduct. What you have is no evidence of that but evidence to the contrary. In the form of the fact that the FBI said they expected to find evidence of certain crimes in Mar O Lago and they found exactly that.

A judge who recused himself from hearing a lawsuit between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton because he felt he was biased against Trump?

He did recuse himself. The reason for it though is something you infer because it was never motivated, like it ususally isn't.

The first question any judge SHOULD have asked is doesn't a President of the United States have the ability to classify materials and if so how could anything Trump had at his home be considered "classified"?

Interesting theory. So you think a judge before he approves a search warrant should consider whether or not there is an (incredulous) possible defense of the plaintiff that would at best mitigate but not absolve somebody of a crime?

-First none of the 3 statutes the FBI said that they believe Trump violated hinges on the files being declassified.

-Second, the idea that Trump declassified while in office (the only time he would have had the authority) without there being ANY paper trail the support it is simply ludicrous. There is a reason the lawyers who represent Trump in court aren't making any such claims.

I'll put it like this. Your argument would mean that let's say a suspected murderer shouldn't have his house searched because he could claim that the bloody knife the police claim they expect to find in his home could be explained away by the guy saying the knife fell into the leg of the victim. Hell, it's even worse since at least that explanation has the possibility of absolving him from the murder.

I don't think that sounds right. Do you?

The fact that a search conducted with a warrant turns up evidence of a crime doesn't mean that said warrant was valid. Americans have rights

No, it doesn't mean the warrant was valid. It strongly indicates though that it probably is. Unless you believe the FBI just got really, really, really lucky to find the exact thing they expected to find.

One of which prohibits the Government from raiding any of our homes with a general warrant looking for evidence.

The warrant wasn't general. It was specific to documents from his time in the White House, with the caveat that it also includes documents found in the boxes where the documents were found.

As for the government's prohibition on conducting unreasonable searches. That's why a search has to be signed off on by 2 branches of government. Which happened here making the search by DEFINITION lawful.

 

[Faun]

Oops.

Now crickets from Faun. lol

LOL

Crickets?

I already addressed that, con. I already showed where it was revealed Biden's involvement was 3 months before the raid when he asked NARA to turn over documents to the FBI which were collected back in January.

That's not the raid, ya dumbfuck.

 

[Faun]

The premise is the same as the Magna Carter to the US Constitution!
The 4th Amendment took out that thrash, yet the DOJ and the FBI seemingly either forgot their ABC's of Law School, or they are out of control and unckecked rogue partisan HACKS!
A "warrant" for EVERYTHING???
GTFOH!!!

Shitstain, a warrant is not a bill.

 

[Faun]

Any malicious new president could do it to the old one, and so on, and so on.

And historically presidents in America have had more decorum than that.

Stupid shit like that when the idiots want to win that badly will make them lose in America. That was a stupid move, one that no other president America has ever had except Obama would pull.

Furthermore if any prosecution depends on that, it makes the whole thing entirely political, which I think it is anyway, so do 3x+ of those that don't, according to the OP poll.

So you think Trump should be above the law if he was violating it by being g in possession of those documents?

 

[Faun]

You posted the same bullshit leftards always post.

It doesn't answer the question and never will.

You fuckers are too retarded to address the actual problem.

LOLOL

It's all the proof needed that Biden won the election. Same way every U.S. president won their respective elections.

 

[Faun]

About as crazy as denying Biden authorized the raid.

Which you still haven't proven he did.

 

[The Duke]

So you think Trump should be above the law if he was violating it by being g in possession of those documents?

No, but he's not a criminal, faggot. The current installed regime all are.

Keep talkin' that commie shit bitch; You'll fuck around and find out this here is America.

 

[Faun]

No, but he's not a criminal, faggot. The current installed regime all are.

True, he's not a criminal yet. That remains be seen. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But as you acknowledge, he's not above the law. So if the investigation determines he broke the law, he should be charged, right?

 

[The Duke]

True, he's not a criminal yet. That remains be seen. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But as you acknowledge, he's not above the law. So if the investigation determines he broke the law, he should be charged, right?

That depends on how honest the investigation is.

Breaking the law is done by almost everyone, every day. There's too many laws.

It would have to be something extremely egregious, and I just don't see that happening.

 

[cnm]

lol

It's cruel to laugh at retards.

 

[Faun]

That depends on how honest the investigation is.

Breaking the law is done by almost everyone, every day. There's too many laws.

It would have to be something extremely egregious, and I just don't see that happening.

Other laws and other people are irrelevant to this. Being in illegal possession of nuclear documents is extremely egregious. If he did that, he should be held accountable.

 

[cnm]

Breaking the law is done by almost everyone, every day. There's too many laws.

But Hillary and Hunter should have been charged, right?

 

[Faun]

It's cruel to laugh at retards.

While that's true, how can you not laugh at these retards.

 

[cnm]

While that's true, how can you not laugh at these retards.

I suppose one would have to appeal to one's own better nature.




Oops.

 

[The Duke]

I suppose one would have to appeal to one's own better nature.




Oops.

Too bad you lack that, you piece of shit.

 

[The Duke]

But Hillary and Hunter should have been charged, right?

Well, Hillary should have. Hunter prosecution would be up to whatever state he's in besides "high".

Perfect viral video shows Hunter smoking crack while Joe Biden pushes for strict penalties against it

A viral video has surfaced split-screening a younger Joe Biden railing against crack cocaine while his son Hunter Biden gets high. Watch.

www.bizpacreview.com

And Pedo Peter is a POS hypocrite. I'll give Hunter that he's not a hypocrite, and he knows his dad is. Hunter isn't the real criminal here, it's his father, and he knows it. And I know it. Also Joe is beyond Reagan 2nd term dementia.

Yeah.. Let's just leave that alone, k?

 

[August West]

Boy you people are stupid.

You'll believe ANY damn thing the MSM tells you.

I like law enforcement far more than traitors who steal our Top Secrets.