FBI search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago (Update: Trump Indicted!)

[emailking]

Hope this is about what I'm hoping it's about.

[emailking]

lol at his post on his wannabe Twitter.

[emailking]

Yeah, for these raids they have to convince a judge it is likely something is there now, not that there was something there previously.

[emailking]

So it might not be about the J6 investigation then.

[emailking]

Secret Service facilitated access but did not participate in the search.

Whether he's charged may depend a lot on what's in these documents. Though from the gravity of the action today maybe they're quite important.

[emailking]

I have a sense this may motivate the Republicans.

Maybe but he's not on the ballot, at least not this Fall.

[emailking]

This probably wouldn’t apply to the presidency since the qualification and disqualification rules are in the constitution and a law does not supersede that . Now a conviction for attempted insurrection could as their is a provision in the constitution that says those people are disqualified

I'm sure it doesn't bar him from serving if 270 electors vote for him, but maybe it bars him from filing to run and getting on ballots.

[emailking]

Well they're not denying a raid took place which they almost certainly would have by now if it didn't happen.

[emailking]

His lawyer who used to be an anchor on OANN, I forget her name, also confirmed it happened on record. She was there when it took place.

[emailking]

I mean we got you the first 4 times you posted something like that.

[emailking]

Pretty sure what Yang said is true. It's not an argument it shouldn't have happened of course but it's something we should expect.

[emailking]

^ they're speculating though.

[emailking]

The warrant isn't going to tell us anything we don't already know from reporting.

[emailking]

The warrant isn't going to tell us anything we don't already know from reporting.

Not true.  It would list the statutes under which the FBI demonstrated probable cause to the judge, i.e. it would tell us what crimes were being investigated.

We know whatever that is it would relate to mishandling of classified information or not preserving government records, something like that. Like we know what the search was about, they needed to reacquire these sensitive documents. Open questions are whether that's all it is or whether they want to charge Trump for something or whether it's a pretext for collection of Jan 6 evidence but the warrant won't tell us that.

[emailking]

This is why we need immediate oversight and answers from the Justice Department on why the raid was conducted.  The DOJ seems to be downplaying the raid, which is not a very smart political calculation.   

Well they're not supposed to be political.

[emailking]

This is why we need immediate oversight and answers from the Justice Department on why the raid was conducted.  The DOJ seems to be downplaying the raid, which is not a very smart political calculation.   

Well they're not supposed to be political.

Merrick Garland is a political appointee.  Any raid/investigation into a former president is going to attract major political attention, so he should have been out in front of this with a major press conference the day after the raid was conducted.  Staying silent makes it seem like they're hiding something. 

He's a political appointee who is supposed to act apolitically the moment he is confirmed. Whether it makes seem to you they are hiding something is irrelevant. That's standard DOJ procedure. Say nothing, confirm nothing, until you're indicting.

[emailking]

The media and political pressure on Merrick Garland to indict Trump is intense.  Are we to uncritically believe that this raid isn't cloyingly timed to coincide with the escalation of the DOJ's Jan. 6th investigation into Trump, the Jan. 6th committee's continuing work, and an impending national election where Democrats have campaigned to keep Trump front-and-center? 

You can believe that if you want I guess. I don't. No evidence to support such a claim.

[emailking]

One thing I don't understand is all the media says Trump broke this story himself and Garland sort of implied that too. But the tweet that opens this thread is before Trump's post. Wouldn't this have ultimately been tracked down anyway?

[emailking]

The court said, Trump has until 3 PM tomorrow to object to unsealing.

[emailking]

Note: I believe the judge can still unseal even if Trump doesn't want it to be. But the judge will hear him out to determine what is best one way or the other.

[emailking]

This is Fox's headline on the site.

"Judge punts back to DOJ, gives agency deadline to see if Trump supports unsealing warrant"

[emailking]

Maybe what happened is they really were initially there by accident and then he didn't want to give them back because he thought he would be charged for having them and was gambling on them never being taken back by force.

[emailking]

Maybe what happened is they really were initially there by accident and then he didn't want to give them back because he thought he would be charged for having them and was gambling on them never being taken back by force.

That is still very much a crime.

Oh agreed. Just musing on BRTD's question I guess lol

[emailking]

Trump supporting the release of the search warrant AND even the release of these Documents tells me two things:

# 1 He & his lawyers are confident that whatever the FBI/DoJ found will not be harmful to him.

# 2 He thinks Garland overplayed his hand.

If the ladder proves to be correct Garland/Biden/Congressional Democrats will be in full damage control mode and this whole stunt by Garland will do more harm then good.

It's latter and another possibility is he knows the documents are coming out (because court records are supposed to be public when possible) and he wants to project the image of innocence to his base.

[emailking]

Nothing official has happened with that 3pm deadline set for today, right? Or am I late to the party again as usual?

Nothing new yet, besides Trump's claim he won't oppose unsealing.