Why won’t Merrick Garland release the affidavit for the Mar A Lago invasion?

[otto105]

You think Albert Einstein was one of the clients of the democrat pedophile pimp Jeff Epstein?

Nein, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Robert DiNero, Matt Daemon, Kevin Spacey, Prince Andrew, Katie Couric (kinky)

But Professor Albert and Donald Trump were never guests of the democrat pedophile island,

Do you think that you’re posting on Gab?


Boi

 

[Uncensored2008]

Okay, does that include sycophancy to the state? Like defunding the FBI because…

Ah, there's that otterism, or Malapropism you're so famous for,

What "sycophant" actually means is "slavish devotion."

Obvious to the sentient would recognize that defunding the secret police is the polar opposite of "sycophancy."

But you're good for a laugh - otter.

Yeah, we're laughing AT you,,,

Or the labeling of any opposition as RINO or leftists?


Also, how many nationalities did the Nazi movement include?

I think they lived white privilege…

Well there you go, it's all because of Der Juden - the hated whites.

If ONLY your party could come up with a final solution....

 

[otto105]

Ah, there's that otterism, or Malapropism you're so famous for,

What "sycophant" actually means is "slavish devotion."

Obvious to the sentient would be that defunding the secret police is the polar opposite of "sycophancy."

But you're good for a laugh - otter.

Yeah, we're laughing AT you,,,



Well there you go, it's all because of Der Juden - the hated whites.

If ONLY your party could come up with a final solution....

Wow, you sycophant well.


Can you also be a dancing bug!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Do you think that you’re posting on Gab?


Boi

No, but I know that I'm posting to a simp.

Does that count?

I know, you were born this way.

Retards have feelings too...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wow, you sycophant well.


Can you also be a dancing bug!

 

[Oldestyle]

[ Wishing what you post to be true does not make it true ]

In the weeks leading up to the FBI's August 8 search of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, Attorney General Merrick Garland debated whether or not to sign off on the warrant, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Garland met with Justice Department and FBI officials for weeks before making the decision to personally approvethe warrant application, sources familiar with the matter told the WSJ.

Former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick told the WSJ that Garland is "extremely careful" and "understands the critical role of an attorney general in these circumstances."

"He appreciates the context in which this is occurring," Gorelick told the WSJ. "I don't think he considers politics at all, but I do think he recognizes the seriousness of actions against a former president."

Merrick Garland mulled over decision to approve Trump search warrant at Mar-a-Lago for weeks, highlighting his 'extremely careful' nature, report says

Justice Department officials and the FBI met for weeks discussing the warrant application before deciding to sign off on it, sources told The Wall Street Journal.

www.businessinsider.com

If he understood the seriousness of taking that action (raiding an ex President's home) then why didn't he go to court and force Trump to comply with the subpoena? That's the logical step you take before you get a warrant to conduct a raid. If he didn't do that then it's fairly apparent that he wanted to raid Trump's home and that is an issue!

 

[Oldestyle]

[ Wishing what you post to be true does not make it true ]

In the weeks leading up to the FBI's August 8 search of former President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago home, Attorney General Merrick Garland debated whether or not to sign off on the warrant, The Wall Street Journal reported.

Garland met with Justice Department and FBI officials for weeks before making the decision to personally approvethe warrant application, sources familiar with the matter told the WSJ.

Former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick told the WSJ that Garland is "extremely careful" and "understands the critical role of an attorney general in these circumstances."

"He appreciates the context in which this is occurring," Gorelick told the WSJ. "I don't think he considers politics at all, but I do think he recognizes the seriousness of actions against a former president."

Merrick Garland mulled over decision to approve Trump search warrant at Mar-a-Lago for weeks, highlighting his 'extremely careful' nature, report says

Justice Department officials and the FBI met for weeks discussing the warrant application before deciding to sign off on it, sources told The Wall Street Journal.

www.businessinsider.com

So we're expected to believe that Garland debated doing this for "weeks" yet didn't inform Joe Biden that it might happen? Do you really buy that, SF? I think people in the White House HAD to know about this raid prior to it happening!

 

[Sixties Fan]

If he understood the seriousness of taking that action (raiding an ex President's home) then why didn't he go to court and force Trump to comply with the subpoena? That's the logical step you take before you get a warrant to conduct a raid. If he didn't do that then it's fairly apparent that he wanted to raid Trump's home and that is an issue!

This has been going on since May 2021 as per the
following timeline: [ Please read ]

No Longer Available

www.kcra.com

------------
[ No court necessary. Both sides were negotiating giving the documents. Trumps lawyer said in a letter in June 2022, that all documents had been returned. It was found out not to be true. More negotiations. Two subpoenas . No answer from Trump side. ]
-----------------

One of former President Donald Trump's attorneys signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

The letter signed by the attorney raises fresh questions about the number of people who may have legal exposure in the ongoing investigation into the handling of classified materials from Trump's time in the White House.

That inventory list contradicts the attorney's letter. The removal of that classified information after the letter was sent could explain why prosecutors cited an obstruction law in their search warrant request.

The sources did not identify when the letter was signed or by whom. It was part of an ongoing correspondence with the Department of Justice over the issue.
The New York Times first reported the existence of the letter.

CNN previously reported that following a June meeting at Mar-a-Lago, where Justice officials left with classified information, investigators developed evidence, including from a witness, that led investigators to believe there still was more classified information in documents stored at the complex.

Trump lawyer claimed no classified material was at Mar-a-Lago in signed letter to Justice Department

One of former President Donald Trump's attorneys signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

www.cnn.com

 

[Oldestyle]

This has been going on since May 2021 as per the
following timeline: [ Please read ]

No Longer Available

www.kcra.com

------------
[ No court necessary. Both sides were negotiating giving the documents. Trumps lawyer said in a letter in June 2022, that all documents had been returned. It was found out not to be true. More negotiations. Two subpoenas . No answer from Trump side. ]
-----------------

One of former President Donald Trump's attorneys signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

The letter signed by the attorney raises fresh questions about the number of people who may have legal exposure in the ongoing investigation into the handling of classified materials from Trump's time in the White House.

That inventory list contradicts the attorney's letter. The removal of that classified information after the letter was sent could explain why prosecutors cited an obstruction law in their search warrant request.

The sources did not identify when the letter was signed or by whom. It was part of an ongoing correspondence with the Department of Justice over the issue.
The New York Times first reported the existence of the letter.

CNN previously reported that following a June meeting at Mar-a-Lago, where Justice officials left with classified information, investigators developed evidence, including from a witness, that led investigators to believe there still was more classified information in documents stored at the complex.

Trump lawyer claimed no classified material was at Mar-a-Lago in signed letter to Justice Department

One of former President Donald Trump's attorneys signed a letter in June asserting that there was no more classified information stored at Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

www.cnn.com

Once again...why didn't Garland go to court to demand that the subpoena be obeyed? That's the normal next step. Why was it skipped? Why was a raid deemed neccessary?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Once again...why didn't Garland go to court to demand that the subpoena be obeyed? That's the normal next step. Why was it skipped? Why was a raid deemed neccessary?

Maybe going to court was not the next normal step in this case. Not everything is about going to court.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Once again...why didn't Garland go to court to demand that the subpoena be obeyed? That's the normal next step. Why was it skipped? Why was a raid deemed neccessary?

Did they go to court when they raided Eastman for his phone? Or Cohen, or Giuliani?

This seems to have a different procedure which does not concern the courts.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Once again...why didn't Garland go to court to demand that the subpoena be obeyed? That's the normal next step. Why was it skipped? Why was a raid deemed neccessary?

As you know, there are a lot of lawyers in Congress. Surely one of the Republicans would have brought the issue up, if the normal procedure would have been to take the issue to court, after the subpoenas and the Lawyer's letter.

 

[Delldude]

Just admit it. You want the names of everyone involved right now, so your can harrass them and their families.

Especially their families.

You mean like how the dems want to know who is contributing to repo campaigns so they can harass their contributors?

Or how they already harass them in public with their families?

Well thought out post, mamooth.

 

[The Original Tree]

If they do charge TDobnald rump with some trumped-up nonsense then Trump and his attorneys will get to see the affidavit during discovery.

But not making it public now just makes Garland look worse.

If Garland and The FBI were honest, they would have released a full statement about what was going on, and released the affidavit.
This was timed to try to do some political damage to the GOP just 90 days before the election.

 

[Nostra]

If Garland and The FBI were honest, they would have released a full statement about what was going on, and released the affidavit.
This was timed to try to do some political damage to the GOP just 90 days before the election.

And it's blowing up in their smarmy faces.

 

[Marener]

If Garland and The FBI were honest, they would have released a full statement about what was going on, and released the affidavit.
This was timed to try to do some political damage to the GOP just 90 days before the election.

You don’t actually want that. Exposing everything going on would be even more damaging to Trump.

 

[The Original Tree]

And it's blowing up in their smarmy faces.

To date, no one was punished for their involvement in Russian Collusion, or for The FBI's plot to kidnap a Governor to damage public opinion on Conservatives, or for The FBI infiltrating the January 6 Protestors and instigating them to go into the capital where Nancy Pelosi's personal police force welcomed them in with open arms, until they were all inside, and then they decided to turn on them.

When are we going to see some justice over crap like that? When is there going to be accountability in The FBI and DOJ for people that break the law and violate Civil Rights?

 

[The Original Tree]

You don’t actually want that. Exposing everything going on would be even more damaging to Trump.

No, exposing everything going on is damaging to The FBI and DOJ. You pieces of shit have been pulling these stunts for 6 years, and every time it has been proven President Trump did nothing wrong, and proves how Corrupt and Evil our Government has become.

You are all pathological liars worthy of the flames of an eternal Hell.

 

[Marener]

No, exposing everything going on is damaging to The FBI and DOJ. You pieces of shit have been pulling these stunts for 6 years, and every time it has been proven President Trump did nothing wrong, and proves how Corrupt and Evil our Government has become.

You are all pathological liars worthy of the flames of an eternal Hell.

Nope. Every time Trump has been proven to be a complete liar with his cronies doing the dirty work for him.

Trump doesn’t deal well with transparency. The more transparency, the worse Trump looks. What is best for Trump right now is for him to be able to completely lie day in and day out about this investigation and for the DoJ to not be able to respond due to longstanding rules.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If he understood the seriousness of taking that action (raiding an ex President's home) then why didn't he go to court and force Trump to comply with the subpoena?

How do you force someone to comply with the subpoena other than the threat of jail time.

You all have totally lost your shit over a simple search of his home, your reaction if they had charged him with contempt and jailed him you all would have been 100000 times worse