Stasi Raid Mar-a-Lago

[Gondwanaland]

Thanks for that. So it sounds like the only thing they got was a copy of the warrant after the raid was finished ten hours later, which seems odd.

Yes, Eric Trump lied and somebody died.

Christina Bobb didn't say that she was given an itemized list of what was taken, only that the warrant apparently stated what they were looking for.

She also didn't state that she wasn't given an itemized list. Meanwhile, we know from Garland that they recieved both the warrant and a receipt of what was taken. Your source slied to you.

Based on other reports, it sounds like Trump's legal team has requested a list of items taken along with the affidavit the FBI used to get the warrant.

'other reports' you mean the report you cited warlier that claimed they were taking legal action to force the FBI to hand over a copy of the warrant along with those things? Even though they already had? That source, the one that lied to you?

As to the affadavit, they can request that from the legal system, it's up to the judges on if they get it - it's not something legally required to be given when serving the warrant.

[NorrinRadd]

Shannon Bream -- soon to be the new host of Fox News Sunday -- just reported that not only will Bad Orange Man not oppose the release of the warrant and inventory receipt, he is urging it be released promptly. The legal eagles on her panel opined that those documents probably won't be particularly revealing, and what is really needed is the underlying "affidavit."

They also noted that BOM and his team have copies of the warrant and inventory list, and could choose to release them themselves, and are not sure why they are not doing so. I'm assuming there's some political/theatrical reason.

[Mountain Man]

Shannon Bream -- soon to be the new host of Fox News Sunday -- just reported that not only will Bad Orange Man not oppose the release of the warrant and inventory receipt, he is urging it be released promptly. The legal eagles on her panel opined that those documents probably won't be particularly revealing, and what is really needed is the underlying "affidavit."

They also noted that BOM and his team have copies of the warrant and inventory list, and could choose to release them themselves, and are not sure why they are not doing so. I'm assuming there's some political/theatrical reason.

Have heard from other sources that Trump requested the release but have been unable to find independent confirmation. I wonder what the ploy is? Forcing the DOJ to show its own hand first perhaps?

[Gondwanaland]

Have heard from other sources that Trump requested the release but have been unable to find independent confirmation. I wonder what the ploy is? Forcing the DOJ to show its own hand first perhaps?

Or realizing his son got caught lying for him and not expecting the move by the DOJ, so now trying desperately to look 'good'

[Mountain Man]

Yes, Eric Trump lied and somebody died.

She also didn't state that she wasn't given an itemized list. Meanwhile, we know from Garland that they recieved both the warrant and a receipt of what was taken. Your source slied to you.



'other reports' you mean the report you cited warlier that claimed they were taking legal action to force the FBI to hand over a copy of the warrant along with those things? Even though they already had? That source, the one that lied to you?

As to the affadavit, they can request that from the legal system, it's up to the judges on if they get it - it's not something legally required to be given when serving the warrant.

Yes, apparently a copy of the warrant was handed over but only after the raid was concluded around 8p. According to Bobb, she wasn't allowed to examine the warrant in any detail before that, and nobody from the FBI would give her an explanation. This is also what Eric Trump said, but I misread him as saying that the warrant wasn't handed over at all: "'They would not give her the search warrant,' he claimed. 'So they showed it to her from about 10 feet away. They would not give her a copy of the search warrant.'" So not a lie, just my mistake. It also seems that Trump's lawyers had to ask for an itemized list of what was taken since Bobb apparently didn't receive one according to the interview you referenced.

[Gondwanaland]

Yes, apparently a copy of the warrant was handed over but only after the raid was concluded around 8p. According to Bobb, she wasn't allowed to examine the warrant in any detail before that, and nobody from the FBI would give her an explanation. This is also what Eric Trump said, but I misread him as saying that the warrant wasn't handed over at all: "'They would not give her the search warrant,' he claimed. 'So they showed it to her from about 10 feet away. They would not give her a copy of the search warrant.'" So not a lie, just my mistake.

But they did give her the search warrant. They did give her a copy of the warrant. So yes, Daddy's boy lied.

It also seems that Trump's lawyers had to ask for an itemized list of what was taken

It 'seems'? Seems to who?

since Bobb apparently didn't receive one according to the interview you referenced.

No, the interview does not say she did not receive an itemized list. Nowhere in there indicates that, you pulled that out your bum.

Again, according to Garland they have both the list and the warrant. Every source you've provided lied about the warrant, why would we assume they're right about the second?

[NorrinRadd]

SCOTUS has ruled w.r.t. Article I that laws passed by Congress cannot add conditions beyond those specified in the Constitution to qualify for Senate or House. By logical extension, the same should apply to Article II and III. So, if nothing in the Constitution specifies conviction of felony as precluding from office, no law adding that proscription matters.

Someone asked about this assertion and the SCOTUS case(s) in question, but I can't find that post now.

In any case, per Turley's article, "In analogous cases like Powell v. McCormack and U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton, the Supreme Court rejected the authority of states to impose new qualifications for congressional seats under Article I. The same is presumably true under Article II when it comes to the chief executive."

That's not directly in line with what I said, and pace Turley, the analogies are a bit loose. Those cases were about what "States" can do. As I understand it, this is about a law passed by Congress. It *should* work out the same, because the underlying point is that nothing less than an Amendment to the Constitution can alter or add to the requirements.

[shunyadragon]

Obama

False. Obama has never been accused of illegally removing secret documents from the Whitehouse.

[NorrinRadd]

It would be a hoot if it turned out that a Trump really was a Russian agent, but that it was Melania all along, and she Sandy Burglared the nuke docs out in her undies.

[Mountain Man]

But they did give her the search warrant. They did give her a copy of the warrant. So yes, Daddy's boy lied.

It 'seems'? Seems to who?





No, the interview does not say she did not receive an itemized list. Nowhere in there indicates that, you pulled that out your bum.

Again, according to Garland they have both the list and the warrant. Every source you've provided lied about the warrant, why would we assume they're right about the second?

Bobb also never said she wasn't served refreshing lemonade and given back rubs by the FBI agents, so based on your logic, I guess that's what happened. We can play the "she didn't say" game all day.

Garland says the Trump legal team has the itemized list now, but it appears that was only after Trump's lawyers demanded them since by every account I can find, no list was presented at the conclusion of the raid. Bobb says she was only given a description of what they were looking for.

[Terraceth]

Someone asked about this assertion and the SCOTUS case(s) in question, but I can't find that post now.

In any case, per Turley's article, "In analogous cases like Powell v. McCormack and U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton, the Supreme Court rejected the authority of states to impose new qualifications for congressional seats under Article I. The same is presumably true under Article II when it comes to the chief executive."

That's not directly in line with what I said, and pace Turley, the analogies are a bit loose. Those cases were about what "States" can do. As I understand it, this is about a law passed by Congress. It *should* work out the same, because the underlying point is that nothing less than an Amendment to the Constitution can alter or add to the requirements.

I asked about it back at back here:

What Supreme Court case was this in? I was actually curious about whether congress could add an extra requirement after I saw Laura Loomer say she wanted to pass legislation to expand the natural-born citizen requirement to apply to all federal offices.

Thanks for giving the information!

[Juvenal]

It would be a hoot if it turned out that a Trump really was a Russian agent, but that it was Melania all along, and she Sandy Burglared the nuke docs out in her undies.

You came up with that on your own, or were you following the Twitter thread?

[Juvenal]

WaPo is now reporting that one of the items being searched for was classified documents relating to nuclear weapons.

If it does go there, I think a lot of people are going to connect it with the Saudis’ handing billions to Jared against the advice of their due diligence panel.

Before Giving Billions to Jared Kushner, Saudi Investment Fund Had Big Doubts
Before committing $2 billion to Mr. Kushner’s fledgling firm, officials at a fund led by the Saudi crown prince questioned taking such a big risk.
.

Six months after leaving the White House, Jared Kushner secured a $2 billion investment from a fund led by the Saudi crown prince, a close ally during the Trump administration, despite objections from the fund’s advisers about the merits of the deal.

A panel that screens investments for the main Saudi sovereign wealth fund cited concerns about the proposed deal with Mr. Kushner’s newly formed private equity firm, Affinity Partners, previously undisclosed documents show.

Those objections included: “the inexperience of the Affinity Fund management”;the possibility that the kingdom would be responsible for “the bulk of the investment and risk”; due diligence on the fledgling firm’s operations that found them “unsatisfactory in all aspects”; a proposed asset management fee that “seems excessive”; and “public relations risks” from Mr. Kushner’s prior role as a senior adviser to his father-in-law, former President Donald J. Trump, according to minutes of the panel’s meeting last June 30.

But days later the full board of the $620 billion Public Investment Fund — led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler and a beneficiary of Mr. Kushner’s support when he worked as a White House adviser — overruled the panel.

[NorrinRadd]

You came up with that on your own, or were you following the Twitter thread?

It's all me. I'm not on Twitter. I don't even have a "mobile device," or whatever. I only see the occasional tweet that gets posted on TV or in an online article.

[Starlight]

Rumor has it that Trump's view of the documents he had was that they were a variety of famous and valuable mementos from his Presidency that he was planning to sell for personal profit. e.g. the 'love letter' Kim Jong Un wrote to him.

I'm not sure that I inherently object to the idea that someone might want some keepsakes from their time in office, or even seek profit by selling some sort of limited edition collectibles. However there's certainly a line for that sort of thing, and it seems like classified documents are well across that line, especially if the buyers are to be foreign nationals.

Supposedly a President can declassify anything he feels like, but somehow I doubt the everyone in the country would be okay with President Biden having a personal money making scheme where he went around grabbing all the declassified documents he could get his hands on, announcing they we declassified and handing them to Hunter to sell to the Chinese. So if this was Trump's plan, it seems like at a minimum some branches of government should need to sign off on the fact that the documents are indeed okay for him to do this with and indeed aren't state secrets.