UPDATE: Eric Trump Says Mar-a-Lago Security Cameras Captured FBI Agents Behaving Improperly

[Oddball]

Now I have Anton talking to itself.

Dude, we had some epic fist fights....This shit isn't even fair........roflmfao

 

[AntonToo]

Answer my question. Educate yourself. The DOJ wouldn’t have to ask for an order to not do something (like revealing their own requested subpoena). They could simply choose to not do so. Yet, remarkably, they did seek an order. No. Not against their own actions. But against the concern that the subject might reveal shit they want kept confidential.

Moron I already showed you that DOJ moved to force Trumps hand, here it is AGAIN:


Exactly contrary to your claim, DOJ requested UN-sealing to force Trump to explicitly take a position on releasing the warrant.

DOJ presser: Justice Dept. Moves to Unseal Warrant in Trump Search (Published 2022)

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said he had personally approved the decision to seek the warrant and was asking to unseal it because of “substantial public interest.” The former president has until 3 p.m. on Friday to oppose the motion.

www.nytimes.com

He has, and his team is currently mulling over finally releasing the warrant:

Trump team weighs releasing Mar-a-Lago search warrant, inventory, video and photos

The Justice Department asked a judge to unseal the search warrant and inventory, but Trump lawyers are considering releasing material prior to a ruling.

www.cbsnews.com

Former President Donald Trump's legal team is weighing whether to release the search warrant and inventory of material seized at Mar-a-Lago before a federal judge rules on the matter, according to a Florida-based attorney for Trump, Lindsey Halligan.



So Trump's own lawyer is telling you they may release the warrant before the Judge rules on un-sealing it and you are still too fucking stupid to get a clue and stop publicly shitting your pants.

 

[two_iron]

Now I have Anton talking to itself.

Quit rattling the chimp cages.... you got 'em throwing shit at each other.

 

[The Duke]

^ conservatives love to imagine depravity

Yet you wallow in it.

 

[The Duke]

Funny you said nothing to moonglow who claims there is no President Trump.

Technically we are correct, once they leave office, they don’t hold that title.

But Obama is running things right now.

That's not legal.

 

[BackAgain]

Moron I already showed you that DOJ moved to force Trumps hand, here it is AGAIN:


Exactly contrary to your claim, DOJ requested UN-sealing to force Trump to explicitly take a position on releasing the warrant.

DOJ presser: Justice Dept. Moves to Unseal Warrant in Trump Search (Published 2022)

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said he had personally approved the decision to seek the warrant and was asking to unseal it because of “substantial public interest.” The former president has until 3 p.m. on Friday to oppose the motion.

www.nytimes.com

He has, and his team is currently mulling over finally releasing the warrant:

Trump team weighs releasing Mar-a-Lago search warrant, inventory, video and photos

The Justice Department asked a judge to unseal the search warrant and inventory, but Trump lawyers are considering releasing material prior to a ruling.

www.cbsnews.com

Former President Donald Trump's legal team is weighing whether to release the search warrant and inventory of material seized at Mar-a-Lago before a federal judge rules on the matter, according to a Florida-based attorney for Trump, Lindsey Halligan.



So Trump's own lawyer is telling you they may release the warrant before the Judge rules on un-sealing it and you are still too fucking stupid not to catch eggs with your face.

Scumbag retard. We all know that AG Gardenhose has now asked for partial unsealing. That’s not the issue. It’s not even in question.

But, what simpleton morons like you fail to recognize is that the GOVERNMENT itself is the party that initially ASKED to have everything sealed.

Now, i get that you’re hopelessly retarded. I see that you still decline to answer the question. So, I’ll put it to you again (you’re welcome).

Why would the DOJ need to make the original request to have the judge order sealing? DOJ wouldn’t need an order to refuse to disclose (except possibly to the subject since they otherwise must disclose to him. And they did). Shithead, they wouldn’t need an order. So why did they ask for one?

They did ask, too. Do you need that proved to you? Well, sure. You’re a retard.

gov.uscourts.flsd.617854.18.0_2 | DocumentCloud

embed.documentcloud.org

Look at page 3 of 5.

So, again, they asked not just for the warrant itself, but for the sealing of the warrant and the return and the application, etc.

I’m sure you won’t answer. And I doubt you could figure it out anyway. But their request to the judge for the sealing order was directed at the subject.

 

[AntonToo]

Scumbag retard. We all know that AG Gardenhose has now asked for partial unsealing. That’s not the issue. It’s not even in question.

But, what simpleton morons like you fail to recognize is that the GOVERNMENT itself is the party that initially ASKED to have everything sealed.

Now, i get that you’re hopelessly retarded. I see that you still decline to answer the question. So, I’ll put it to you again (yiure welcome).

Why would the DOJ need to make the original request to have the judge order sealing? DOJ wouldn’t need an order to refuse to disclose (except possibly to the subject since they otherwise must disclose to him. And they did). Shithead, they wouldn’t need an order. So why did they ask one?

They did ask, too. Do you need that proves to you? Well, sure. You’re a retard.

gov.uscourts.flsd.617854.18.0_2 | DocumentCloud

embed.documentcloud.org

Look at page 3 of 5.
View attachment 681030
So, again, they asked not just for the warrant itself, but for the sealing of the warrant and the return and the application,
etc.

I’m sure you won’t answer. And I doubt you could figure it out anyway. But their request to the judge for the sealing order was directed at the subject.

Moron, proccedings are sealed FOR THE CONFEDENTIALITY BENEFIT OF THE SUBJECT. It is completely standard for high profile case, for the BENEFIT OF THE SUBJECT.

A search warrant is issued to the investigators, but the subject can do whatever the fuck they want with any info they obtain, including the search warrant info they have a right to.

 

[BackAgain]

Moron, proccedings are sealed FOR THE CONFEDENTIALITY BENEFIT OF THE SUBJECT.

A search warrant is issued to the investigators, but the subject can do whatever the fuck they want with any info they obtain, including the warrant that must be presented to them.

Completely hopeless retard jerkoff:

No. You’re wrong again. The main reasons for sealing are for the benefit of the party seeking the search warrant (government agents and here the DOJ) to keep the identity of informants concealed as long as possible. They also claim that it’s for the benefit of the “court.”

But again, if their concern was for the confidentiality (note the correct spelling) benefit of the subject, they wouldn’t need to ask for an order. They could just do it.

The subject is still not free to share material under seal until and unless the court unseals it. Your insistence on repeating your mistaken notion is stupid of you. But, your mere repetition doesn’t suddenly make your error any less glaringly wrong.

Laughing at retards isn’t a nice thing to do. But you’re so completely clueless and lost and so insistent on exposing your pathetic ignorance, I can’t help but laugh at you.

 

[AntonToo]

Completely hopeless retard jerkoff:

No. You’re wrong again. The main reasons for sealing are for the benefit of the party seeking the search warrant (government agents and here the DOJ) to keep the identity of informants concealed as long as possible. They also claim that it’s for the benefit of the “court.”

There are no informants listed in this search warrant dumbass.

Do you just make this shit up on the fly?

 

[AntonToo]

The subject is still not free to share material under seal until and unless the court unseals it.

QUOTE LAW, OR CASE ON THAT.

You are clueless.

 

[BackAgain]

There are no informants in this search warrant dumbass.

Making shit up again, you absolute cretin.

You don’t have the warrant. You also don’t have the application or the affidavits In Support.

But you also have not been following along. The government does have an alleged inside informant.

Post some more. Just in case anyone hasn’t seen how completely clueless you are.

 

[BackAgain]

QUOTE LAW, OR CASE ON THAT.

You are clueless.

Answer the question without making shit up. Why would the government have had to request a sealing order?

 

[BackAgain]

I’ve spent way too much time on the retard Anton.

I’ll peek in again tomorrow (actually later today). It’s late.

I better get a court order so that I can give myself permission to go to bed.

 

[AntonToo]

Making shit up again, you absolute cretin.

You don’t have the warrant. You also don’t have the application or the affidavits In Support.

Moron, Trump never got application or the affidavits In Support which is where the informant info maybe. He got the warrant, which would not have something like that listed.

Do you actually practice criminal law? You can't be this clueless if you do.

 

[AntonToo]

I better get a court order so that I can give myself permission to go to bed.

...are you just laughing at how stupid what you say is?

 

[AntonToo]

Answer the question without making shit up. Why would the government have had to request a sealing order?

Go fuck yourself, I answered it just fine. High profile warrants are normally sealed for the confidentiality benefit of the subject. You putting your fingers in your ears and going nuh-uh is not an actual refute of that.

You obviously can't back up a single word you say, just like you couldn't in our last conversation about your baseless suspicions that DOJ was doing something wrong.

You are just a fucking windbag. I don't know if this empty shooting-the-shit is what you do in your lawyering, but clearly you are not a serious person, making seriously backed up arguments.

 

[The Duke]

Go fuck yourself idiot, I answered it just fine. High profile warrants are normally sealed for the benefit of the target. You putting your fingers in your ears and going nuh-uh is not a serious refute of that answer.

You obviously can't back up a single fucking word you say, just like you couldn't in our last conversation about your baseless suspicions that DOJ was doing something wrong.

You are just a fucking windbag.

Eat white dogshit, commie faggot. Fuck you and then fuck you some moar!

 

[AntonToo]

Eat white dogshit, commie faggot. Fuck you and then fuck you some moar!

...skipping meds today?

 

[The Duke]

...skipping meds today?

Skipping daily miles of BBC today, faggot? Not enough choad down your throat? Y U so cranky?

 

[two_iron]

Go fuck yourself, I answered it just fine. High profile warrants are normally sealed for the confidentiality benefit of the subject. You putting your fingers in your ears and going nuh-uh is not an actual refute of that.

You obviously can't back up a single word you say, just like you couldn't in our last conversation about your baseless suspicions that DOJ was doing something wrong.

You are just a fucking windbag. I don't know if this empty shooting-the-shit is what you do in your lawyering, but clearly you are not a serious person, making seriously backed up arguments.

By proxy, you've succeeded in humiliating every sad little queer that's ever walked this planet including the kenyan muzzie and Big Mike. You've actually set the same-sex cocksucking movement back several centuries.

Shut.

Up.