something I have not heard anyone speak on in RE Trump Raid

[justaschmuck9]

Search Warrant Requirements - FindLaw

FindLaw's search and seizure section details the Fourth Amendment's search warrant rules and other topics related to searches and seizures.

www.findlaw.com

OK, maybe someone has brought this up, but I myself did not hear of it:

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Obviously, one's home fits that description. A man's home is his castle.

It seems that if the govt can raid your home while you are gone with no attorney representing you allowed in to see what is done.. Sorry, but that looks like an open and SHUT case. There was no emergency. They got the warrant on Friday and didn't execute it until Monday, so there goes the state's charges of "urgency"

 

[whitehall]

Possession of classified documents by a former president is such a preposterous charge that some democrats are even embarrassed by it.

 

[task0778]

Is 'urgency' a part of the consideration for a warrant? I didn't see that in your link, but maybe I missed it.


Anyway, I do believe the primary motive for this action was not justice but politics. IOW, this was an excuse to go looking for anything the democrats can use against Trump if he decides to run for president in 2024. If he does, then everyone on the Left with any kind of voice will be screeching long and loud about whatever they found in this raid. It may not be evidence that can be used in court, but that ain't the point. This entire exercise has only one goal: to prevent Trump from getting re-elected in 2024. And there is absolutely NOTHING the democrats won't do towards that effort.

 

[Donald H]

Search Warrant Requirements - FindLaw

FindLaw's search and seizure section details the Fourth Amendment's search warrant rules and other topics related to searches and seizures.

www.findlaw.com

OK, maybe someone has brought this up, but I myself did not hear of it:

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Obviously, one's home fits that description. A man's home is his castle.

It seems that if the govt can raid your home while you are gone with no attorney representing you allowed in to see what is done.. Sorry, but that looks like an open and SHUT case. There was no emergency. They got the warrant on Friday and didn't execute it until Monday, so there goes the state's charges of "urgency"

There was an emergency in that the subpoena wasn't abided by and responded to completely. It was of the greatest urgency.

 

[The Duke]

There was an emergency in that the subpoena wasn't abided by and responded to completely. It was of the greatest urgency.

Look, commie shill, you're going to fool many people here.

Not many at all. That you're a deceptive shitbag is a subject for another thread.

AFAIK this is a messageboard for Americans. All others are welcome, of course.

 

[justaschmuck9]

Possession of classified documents by a former president is such a preposterous charge that some democrats are even embarrassed by it.

they likely keep said embarrassment to themselves, as i have not heard of many of them defending Trump or the Constitution (save Jonathon Turley).

In any case, think about this: If the govt can enter your private home w/ a bogus (lying) warrant, they can not only go through ALL your private papers and effects and learn any damn thing they want about your private (erstwhile private) life, they can use it to blackmail you or use it just.. however.

Then there is the issue of how they can plant whatever the hell they want and charge you with... whatever the hell they want (Who is there to witness what they do?)

I am tending to think that anyone who is threatened w/ a search by the go vt should be allowed to have a respresentative there as it happens or best of all, should be "allowed " to be there him or herself (both being preferable of course)

 

[White 6]

Search Warrant Requirements - FindLaw

FindLaw's search and seizure section details the Fourth Amendment's search warrant rules and other topics related to searches and seizures.

www.findlaw.com

OK, maybe someone has brought this up, but I myself did not hear of it:

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Obviously, one's home fits that description. A man's home is his castle.

It seems that if the govt can raid your home while you are gone with no attorney representing you allowed in to see what is done.. Sorry, but that looks like an open and SHUT case. There was no emergency. They got the warrant on Friday and didn't execute it until Monday, so there goes the state's charges of "urgency"

He had an attorney representing him there. She is the one that received the search warrant. She was interviewed on New Nation, giving confirmation of her being there, that she received the search warrant that day, that the security cameras were left on the wholes time, (so we know there wasn't claimed funny business, or they would have had the video blasting across the internet), that they have had the receipt and inventory list of exactly what was taken by the 30 plain clothes agents, before they left the site and the Trump had all of this, Monday, but chose not to release any of it, while the rumor flew. The hot young lawyer was OK. The interviewer was absolutely great, pressing her on everything she did not volunteer or tried to be evasive on.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Search Warrant Requirements - FindLaw

FindLaw's search and seizure section details the Fourth Amendment's search warrant rules and other topics related to searches and seizures.

www.findlaw.com

OK, maybe someone has brought this up, but I myself did not hear of it:

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Obviously, one's home fits that description. A man's home is his castle.

It seems that if the govt can raid your home while you are gone with no attorney representing you allowed in to see what is done.. Sorry, but that looks like an open and SHUT case. There was no emergency. They got the warrant on Friday and didn't execute it until Monday, so there goes the state's charges of "urgency"

Yea, go with that.

 

[justaschmuck9]

Is 'urgency' a part of the consideration for a warrant? I didn't see that in your link, but maybe I missed it.


Anyway, I do believe the primary motive for this action was not justice but politics. IOW, this was an excuse to go looking for anything the democrats can use against Trump if he decides to run for president in 2024. If he does, then everyone on the Left with any kind of voice will be screeching long and loud about whatever they found in this raid. It may not be evidence that can be used in court, but that ain't the point. This entire exercise has only one goal: to prevent Trump from getting re-elected in 2024. And there is absolutely NOTHING the democrats won't do towards that effort.

they have sold their souls to the god of this world and we all know what his name is.

They refuse to accept God as a guiding light to show them the way through life on Earth

and so life on Earth is their god... Good luck on Judgment Day, y'all

 

[Delldude]

There was an emergency in that the subpoena wasn't abided by and responded to completely. It was of the greatest urgency.

So they violated the constitution then.

But....Trump.

 

[justaschmuck9]

I saw Trump's attorney on the news (not fake news) who was "there" that day

She was not allowed in.

What... was she lying about that?

 

[Winston]

Search Warrant Requirements - FindLaw

FindLaw's search and seizure section details the Fourth Amendment's search warrant rules and other topics related to searches and seizures.

www.findlaw.com

OK, maybe someone has brought this up, but I myself did not hear of it:

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Obviously, one's home fits that description. A man's home is his castle.

It seems that if the govt can raid your home while you are gone with no attorney representing you allowed in to see what is done.. Sorry, but that looks like an open and SHUT case. There was no emergency. They got the warrant on Friday and didn't execute it until Monday, so there goes the state's charges of "urgency"

They waited till Monday so that Trump's attorney could be there.

 

[Paleman]

He had an attorney representing him there. She is the one that received the search warrant. She was interviewed on New Nation, giving confirmation of her being there, that she received the search warrant that day, that the security cameras were left on the wholes time, (so we know there wasn't claimed funny business, or they would have had the video blasting across the internet), that they have had the receipt and inventory list of exactly what was taken by the 30 plain clothes agents, before they left the site and the Trump had all of this, Monday, but chose not to release any of it, while the rumor flew. The hot young lawyer was OK. The interviewer was absolutely great, pressing her on everything she did not volunteer or tried to be evasive on.

Convince me as to how a single lawyer can keep track of what 30 FBI invaders are doing during this search. Can't be done, but go ahead and try your best.

 

[Winston]

I saw Trump's attorney on the news (not fake news) who was "there" that day

She was not allowed in.

What... was she lying about that?

Did she mention that two other lawyers were already there?

 

[justaschmuck9]

They waited till Monday so that Trump's attorney could be there.

ummm... I tend to think that if having an attorney "there" means anything, she should be allowed inside the place searched?

i dunno... just a thought???

 

[justaschmuck9]

Did she mention that two other lawyers were already there?

not that i heard and i was glued to the tv

In any case, I have heard or thought I heard that not one attorney was allowed in

 

[Winston]

not that i heard and i was glued to the tv

In any case, I have heard or thought I heard that not one attorney was allowed in

Glued to what, FOX news? Yes, three lawyers present. Trump watched the security camaras as the raid was conducted. Numerous staff were there. Trump could have released the search warrant on Monday. Instead, he let the Justice department open it up on Friday evening. LOL, I bet you don't get the significance of that. Ever hear of the Friday evening news dump?

Here is the thing. Trump's defense here is beyond stupid. First, well he claims he had a standing order to declassify all documents when he took them home to work. But then he claims the FBI planted documents. Tell me, how did he declassify documents that the FBI planted? Does he have a magic ball?

And this is not about Trump taking home classified documents. It is about possible violation of three federal statutes,

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

www.law.cornell.edu

That statue prohibits copying, transmitting, or having unauthorized possession of national security material. That includes removing it from its proper place of custody,

18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy

www.law.cornell.edu

This is the big one. It bars the destruction or falsification of any public document in order to impede, obstruct, or influence governmental matters or investigations. It carries a 20 year maximum sentence.

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

www.law.cornell.edu

This statue prohibits the removal, mutilation, obliteration, or destruction of any public property. Three year prison sentence and banishment of serving in public office.

Now I know you won't bother to read those federal statutes. Hell, you probably won't even hit the links. But there is not a mention of classified information in any of them. And there is no question Trump has violated all three. The first one, look, Trump can take information home with him, when he is president. But he can't have possession of public property when he is no longer president. While the second one is not as documented, if it is shown that Trump took those document to impede federal investigations, which he knew were coming, he will die at Butner, like Maldoff. Although I am leaning toward Fort Dix. But the third one, that is a given. We already have numerous reports from former staff members detailing how Trump ripped documents up and they salvaged them out of the trash can and tried to piece them back together.

Look, like pretty much everything else in Trump's life, he took leadership of this country and took a big old shit on all of us. That is what he does, rather it is a company, a steak, or a nation. When he gets control, he turns it to shit.

 

[justaschmuck9]

Glued to what, FOX news? Yes, three lawyers present. Trump watched the security camaras as the raid was conducted. Numerous staff were there. Trump could have released the search warrant on Monday. Instead, he let the Justice department open it up on Friday evening. LOL, I bet you don't get the significance of that. Ever hear of the Friday evening news dump?

I read this about half way through, then encountered an extremely illogical statement so I am out of here

leftists just cannot think clearly (or at all, some of us would say)

 

[Winston]

I read this about half way through, then encountered an extremely illogical statement so I am out of here

leftists just cannot think clearly (or at all, some of us would say)

You wouldn't know "logic" if it jumped up and bit you in the ass.

 

[xyz]

The Section of the 4th Amendment that addresses search and seizure mentions that a warrant must be obtained if it is to be a search of a place where the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The White House toilet was the most obvious place to find documents.

so...