Stasi Raid Mar-a-Lago

[Mountain Man]

CP that is not all he has been saying and calling me. I suspect he hasn't realized yet that I am aware of his condescending attitude towards me he uses to ignore the fact he has shown no proof that Trump was not cooperating; and we have shown lots of proof Trump was cooperating since day one and this raid was not necessary.

Par for the course. He becomes instantly condescending whenever someone disagrees with him.

[seanD]

I think you replied to the wrong one-line MM post.

You are correct. It should have been post#1111.

In regards to Jordan; the Reps have got to keep the dream alive.

[Juvenal]

I notice you are not giving a citation either. In particular, I'd like to see where your claim that FBI agents went through the documents in June comes from, and where you got the idea that the FBI normally lets someone watch them search.

Feds removed documents from Mar-a-Lago in June with grand jury subpoena
.

(CNN)The FBI search at Mar-a-Lago this week came months after federal investigators served an earlier grand jury subpoena and took away sensitive national security documents from former President Donald Trump's property during a June meeting, people familiar with the matter tell CNN.

Investigators executed Monday's search in part because they had developed evidence, including from at least one witness, that there were potentially classified documents still remaining at the Palm Beach, Florida, property months after the National Archives arranged for the retrieval of 15 boxes of documents that included classified information in January of this year, a person briefed on the matter said.

Authorities also believed the documents remaining at Mar-a-Lago had national security implications, CNN reported earlier this week.The subpoena issued before the June meeting, during which investigators were shown where documents were held in a basement room at the Trump residence and private club, shows how the investigation has escalated and suggests the discussions had become confrontational long before Monday's search.

I’ve never heard of a lawyer being permitted to tag along during a search.

[NorrinRadd]

Mr. Mustache said as far as he knows, Bad Orange Man's supposed "standing order" is Bovine Scat. He claims that in his 17 months with the Admin., he never heard of any such thing. -- Clip from another network shown on Special Report on Fox.

[The Pendragon]

I’ve never heard of a lawyer being permitted to tag along during a search.

This is SOP. It protects Law Enforcement from being suspected of planting evidence.

[NorrinRadd]

Love me some Crazy Little Rand. Repeal the Espionage Act.

[Mountain Man]

Mr. Mustache said as far as he knows, Bad Orange Man's supposed "standing order" is Bovine Scat. He claims that in his 17 months with the Admin., he never heard of any such thing. -- Clip from another network shown on Special Report on Fox.

I assume you mean Bolton?

[Teallaura]

It's being reported that Trump claims the FBI took three of his passports. As with all claims made by Trump, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

The DOJ just confirmed it.

[The Pendragon]

Now on to Sweet Cheeks (Gondwanaland), Stoic, Juvenal, and Starlight (If he's gotten over his fear of me) and their unsubstituted claim of no co-operation.

Here is a short timeline

Dec 2020 - Jan 2021
Trump staffers (Not Trump) packup documents in boxes. (This is normal process that all exiting presidents go through)

Dec 2021
Presidential Archives informs Trump that he has documents belong to the archives. (This happens to all exiting presidents)

Feb 2022
Trumps Lawyers send 15 Boxes of documents back to the Presidential Archives.
Two important points here. This shows that Trump is co-operating with the Archives, and others on this tread have given citations for this so its redundant to do it again.

May 2020
Presidential Archives send a subpoena to Trump for additional documents (normal process)
Again others on this tread have given citations for this so its redundant to do it again.

June 2020
Trump allows FBI to come in and go through the remining documents to identify and remove any documents that where not supposed to be there. FBI did take some documents with them (interesting that they left some to find in the raid). Again this shows co-operation on Trump side as late as June, the FBI can’t just come in and search without a warrant Trump had to co-operate and let them search. Thanks for the citation Juvenal. BTW CNN was biased in that citation because it can’t be called hostile if Trump allowed them in, hard to square that.


Now to the point at hand All of the above mentioned posters keep claiming that Trump never co-operated with the FBI on the records. The timeline shows that up until June Trump was being more then co-operative. What happened in July to warrant a Search Warrant? Any of you have any real citations as to Trumps non co-operation I’ve seen several people ask but I’ve seen nothing.

Since the timeline show co-operation up through June your citation needs to tell what happened in July to warrant the raid.

Also can any of you give a good reason that the FBI would leave the sensitive document in June , if it was not so that they could find them in the raid?

Side note; If your going to say that it was a mistake that they where left that’s a big oops on the FBI not Trump and they need to stop this give everything back and do a huge Mea Culpa to Trump, preferably with a lot prostration that includes CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the liberal media. So that excuse does not work.

Any of you brave enough to explain why the sensitive documents where left?

[Teallaura]

Sounds like you didn't read the warrant



That's not how it works, because then you could just get any lawyer to come and claim everything is 'privileged' during a search warrant execution. If they want to claim they're privileged, they are welcome to do so in a court of law with evidence and allow the judge to determine.

Oh, I did better than that - I had a lawyer read it to me. Is it broad? Yes. Did it authorize confiscation of a passport? Absolutely not. Did it authorize taking MULTIPLE passports? Not a chance.

Best of all, the passports do NOT APPEAR on the inventory.

Passports are easily identifiable items and should not have been 'accidently' taken after ten hours onsite. No, that's either gross incompetence or police misconduct.


And on the matter of privilege: A warrant BY LAW must be specific. If an attorney claims privilege then they need a NEW warrant for those documents. Seizure without that second warrant is illegal.

Which brings us to problem number 75 with the FBI's warrant: it was NOT the least oppressive means to obtain the documents and there is no allegation of emergency (that means that they have PROBABLE CAUSE, not just a hint, whim or a Magic 8 Ball, to believe that the evidence may be destroyed if not immediately seized). This is one of the necessary conditions for obtaining a warrant according to the United States Supreme Court.

So yes, there are exceptions but the warrant itself establishes that those exceptions DO NOT APPLY.

Attorney client privilege is an exception to seizure unless a warrant specifically authorizes the seizure of privileged items. This is so cops can't 'accidentally' seize privileged documents and them use the information garnered from those documents (or other privileged materials). It is also Constitutional Law 101.

Blind hate just makes you blind.

[Stoic]

Now on to Sweet Cheeks (Gondwanaland), Stoic, Juvenal, and Starlight (If he's gotten over his fear of me) and their unsubstituted claim of no co-operation.

Here is a short timeline

Dec 2020 - Jan 2021
Trump staffers (Not Trump) packup documents in boxes. (This is normal process that all exiting presidents go through)

Dec 2021
Presidential Archives informs Trump that he has documents belong to the archives. (This happens to all exiting presidents)

Feb 2022
Trumps Lawyers send 15 Boxes of documents back to the Presidential Archives.
Two important points here. This shows that Trump is co-operating with the Archives, and others on this tread have given citations for this so its redundant to do it again.

May 2020
Presidential Archives send a subpoena to Trump for additional documents (normal process)
Again others on this tread have given citations for this so its redundant to do it again.

June 2020
Trump allows FBI to come in and go through the remining documents to identify and remove any documents that where not supposed to be there. FBI did take some documents with them (interesting that they left some to find in the raid). Again this shows co-operation on Trump side as late as June, the FBI can’t just come in and search without a warrant Trump had to co-operate and let them search. Thanks for the citation Juvenal. BTW CNN was biased in that citation because it can’t be called hostile if Trump allowed them in, hard to square that.


Now to the point at hand All of the above mentioned posters keep claiming that Trump never co-operated with the FBI on the records. The timeline shows that up until June Trump was being more then co-operative. What happened in July to warrant a Search Warrant? Any of you have any real citations as to Trumps non co-operation I’ve seen several people ask but I’ve seen nothing.

Since the timeline show co-operation up through June your citation needs to tell what happened in July to warrant the raid.

Also can any of you give a good reason that the FBI would leave the sensitive document in June , if it was not so that they could find them in the raid?

Side note; If your going to say that it was a mistake that they where left that’s a big oops on the FBI not Trump and they need to stop this give everything back and do a huge Mea Culpa to Trump, preferably with a lot prostration that includes CNN, MSNBC and the rest of the liberal media. So that excuse does not work.

Any of you brave enough to explain why the sensitive documents where left?

I think there is only one good explanation. The FBI was not aware of any classified documents remaining at Mar-a-Lago when they left in June. That would be consistent with reporting from NYT and CNN that one of Trump's lawyers signed a statement that there were no more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago.

I note that you didn't provide a citation for your timeline. I'm particularly curious about the December claim that "This happens to all exiting presidents", and your June claim that "Trump allows FBI to come in and go through the remaining documents to identify and remove any documents that were not supposed to be there."

[RumTumTugger]

Oh, I did better than that - I had a lawyer read it to me. Is it broad? Yes. Did it authorize confiscation of a passport? Absolutely not. Did it authorize taking MULTIPLE passports? Not a chance.

Best of all, the passports do NOT APPEAR on the inventory.

Passports are easily identifiable items and should not have been 'accidently' taken after ten hours onsite. No, that's either gross incompetence or police misconduct.


And on the matter of privilege: A warrant BY LAW must be specific. If an attorney claims privilege then they need a NEW warrant for those documents. Seizure without that second warrant is illegal.

Which brings us to problem number 75 with the FBI's warrant: it was NOT the least oppressive means to obtain the documents and there is no allegation of emergency (that means that they have PROBABLE CAUSE, not just a hint, whim or a Magic 8 Ball, to believe that the evidence may be destroyed if not immediately seized). This is one of the necessary conditions for obtaining a warrant according to the United States Supreme Court.

So yes, there are exceptions but the warrant itself establishes that those exceptions DO NOT APPLY.

Attorney client privilege is an exception to seizure unless a warrant specifically authorizes the seizure of privileged items. This is so cops can't 'accidentally' seize privileged documents and them use the information garnered from those documents (or other privileged materials). It is also Constitutional Law 101.

Blind hate just makes you blind.

What did the lawyer say about the statues used in the warrant weren't 2 of them just process crimes less then misdemeanors and doesn't the 2nd statute, the one on espionage, need some thing more then we think he is going to do it, or we heard it from the grapevine, it needs to be stellar evidence to be valid as a reason? Enquiring minds want to know.

One more thing did the lawyer tell how good of a case Trump has against the DOJ on illegal seizure for there taking of privileged client/attorney documents they took?

[Cerebrum123]

Why am I imagining you actually speak like that, with no breaths or pauses in a stream of consciousness running on from topic to topic until not even you know where you began.

She certainly can do that. Especially if it is on a topic she is passionate about.

[Juvenal]

Now on to Sweet Cheeks (Gondwanaland), Stoic, Juvenal, and Starlight (If he's gotten over his fear of me) and their unsubstituted claim of no co-operation.

Here is a short timeline

Dec 2020 - Jan 2021
Trump staffers (Not Trump) packup documents in boxes. (This is normal process that all exiting presidents go through)

Dec 2021
Presidential Archives informs Trump that he has documents belong to the archives. (This happens to all exiting presidents)

The word you’re looking for is “unsubstantiated,” and it applies to both claims of SOP during the execution of search warrants and to unsourced timelines. Even if they’re accurate, which is not the case here.

As information has been released, timelines have become updated. Here’s a timeline that’s fairly up to date, and not behind a paywall.

Timeline: The DOJ criminal inquiry into Trump taking classified documents to Mar-a-Lago
.

May 2021
An official from NARA contacts Trump's team after realizing that several important documents weren't handed over before Trump left the White House. In hopes of locating the missing items, NARA lawyer Gary Stern reaches out to someone who served in the White House counsel's office under Trump, who was the point of contact for record-keeping matters. The missing documents include some of Trump's correspondence with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, as well as the map of Hurricane Dorian that Trump infamously altered with a sharpie pen.

Also unsubstantiated is the claim anyone posting this thread has said there’s been no cooperation from Mar a Lago. To the contrary, about a week ago, I posted the NARA press statement from February 8 that said otherwise.

Press Statements in Response to Media Queries About Presidential Records
.

February 8, 2022, statement
Throughout the course of the last year, NARA obtained the cooperation of Trump representatives to locate Presidential records that had not been transferred to the National Archives at the end of the Trump administration. When a representative informed NARA in December 2021 that they had located some records, NARA arranged for them to be securely transported to Washington. NARA officials did not visit or "raid" the Mar-a-Lago property.

There’s room for disagreement on how much cooperation was received, but the fact that further presidential records — including restricted documents — were retrieved in June when DOJ investigators served a subpoena, and in August when FBI agents executed a search warrant, makes clear the cooperation was insufficient.

[Stoic]

Oh, I did better than that - I had a lawyer read it to me. Is it broad? Yes. Did it authorize confiscation of a passport? Absolutely not. Did it authorize taking MULTIPLE passports? Not a chance.

Best of all, the passports do NOT APPEAR on the inventory.

Passports are easily identifiable items and should not have been 'accidently' taken after ten hours onsite. No, that's either gross incompetence or police misconduct.

I'm willing to wait to hear the circumstances by which the passports were taken. When the haul includes 20 boxes of documents, it's understandable that some items will probably have to be returned.

And on the matter of privilege: A warrant BY LAW must be specific. If an attorney claims privilege then they need a NEW warrant for those documents. Seizure without that second warrant is illegal.

My understanding is that the locations that can be searched have to be specific, but what can be taken is usually defined pretty broadly.

And I'd like a source for the claim that privilege claims require a new warrant.

Which brings us to problem number 75 with the FBI's warrant: it was NOT the least oppressive means to obtain the documents and there is no allegation of emergency (that means that they have PROBABLE CAUSE, not just a hint, whim or a Magic 8 Ball, to believe that the evidence may be destroyed if not immediately seized). This is one of the necessary conditions for obtaining a warrant according to the United States Supreme Court.

If, as has been reported, one of Trump's lawyers signed a statement that there was no more classified data at Mar-a-Lago, then that lawyer (or his client) would have an incentive to move or destroy any classified documents in order to avoid being charged with lying to investigators,

So yes, there are exceptions but the warrant itself establishes that those exceptions DO NOT APPLY.

Attorney client privilege is an exception to seizure unless a warrant specifically authorizes the seizure of privileged items. This is so cops can't 'accidentally' seize privileged documents and them use the information garnered from those documents (or other privileged materials). It is also Constitutional Law 101.

You seem to be operating under the assumption that documents must be considered privileged just because their possessor claims they are, or that searchers should be able to tell immediately if a document is privileged. I don't think either assumption is tenable.