Answering the question, 'why didn't the FBI grab the TS docs back in june'?

You and me don't know anything about what was said and done during that June visit. So, stop speculating and inventing!

 

Maybe, I say MAYBE, these agents took some of the documents on that day. But obviously, they weren't given all of them.

Anyway, the redacted affidavit will hopefully shed some, limited, light on these events.

 

Those of us who have read the letter from the NA know just how patient the authorities have been. The DoJ/WH acquiesced to a request from Trump that they delay the inspection of the seized docs by a month. Once the month was up Team Trump asked for another delay.
If we go back to Jan. when the first boxes of docs were taken from MaL, confirming Trump had illegally taken classified material, it showed restraint on Garland's part that he didn't immediately indict Trump.
The Orange Menace has been given undeserved deference throughout this entire episode, abused it, and now is fatuously claiming he is being persecuted.

 

Fake news. The reason the FBI waited is because they wanted it to be close to the midterms.

 

If they had raided back in Jan we might now be up to the point where his trial for those crimes listed in the affidavit might be now starting

 

We advised you inwriting onApril 12 that, “ in light ofthe urgency of this request, we planned to provid[e] access to the FBI next week i.e., the week of April 18. See Exec Order No. 13,489, 2 (b ), 74 Fed. Reg. 4,669 (Jan. 21, 2009) (providing a 30-day default before disclosure but authorizing the Archivist to specify a shorter period of time if required under the circumstances ) ; accord 36 C.F.R. § 1270.44( g) ( The Archivist may adjust any time period or deadline under this subpart, as appropriate, to accommodate records requested under this section. ) . In response to a request from another representative of the former President, the White House Counsel's Office acquiesced in an extension of the production date to April 29, and so advised NARA. In accord with that agreement, we had not yet provided the FBI with access to the records when we received your letter on April 29, and we have continued to refrain from providing such access to date.
It has now been four weeks since we first informed you of our intent to provide the FBI access to the boxes so that it and others in the Intelligence Community can conduct their reviews. Notwithstanding the urgency conveyed by the Department of Justice and the reasonable extension afforded to the former President, your April 29 letter asks for additional time for you to review the materials in the boxes in order to ascertain whether any specific document is subject to privilege and then to consult with the former President so that he may personally make any decision to assert a claim of constitutionally based privilege. Your April 29 letter further states that in the event we do not afford you further time to review the records before NARA discloses them in response to the request, we should consider your letter to be a protective assertion of executive privilege made by counsel for the former President. The Counsel to the President has informed me that, in light of the particular circumstances presented here, President Biden defers to my determination , inconsultation with the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, regarding whether or not I should uphold the former President's purported protective assertion of executive privilege. See 36 C.F.R. 1270.44( ( 3) . Accordingly , I have consulted with the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel to inform my determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege Exec . Order No. 13,489, § 4(a) .
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/national-archives-letter-trump-fbi/1a5fa3f08cdb0f7d/full.pdf

 

Possibly. The point being he has been given every consideration imaginable since the illegal theft of the documents was realized. Why is beyond my understanding in light of his consistently reckless handling of classified info all during his presidency.

 

Yep, we saw that with hillary.

 

Well, if there is anything that is not fake is a right winger's cynicism and disingenuousness.

 

As usual you don't know what you are talking about.. they were declassified
This is what they were looking for to coverup their misdeeds
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.go...lated-fbis-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-202100044/pdf/DCPD-202100044.pdf

 

hAHAHAHAHA!

 

Yeah Jesse looked like a deer in head lights as well!

 

Excellent! This kills the cultists' assertion that documents can be declassified by a mere ABRACADABRA pronouncement by POTUS.

 

liberal cheap talk no rebuutthole...

 

LOL You don't understand the consequence of your post.

 

DOJ reveals redacted affidavit justifying Trump Mar-a-Lago raid

The FBI had probable cause to believe that records containing classified national defense information would be found at the Palm Beach, Florida, residence, according to an agent who wrote the 32-page affidavit.

“There is also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found” at Trump’s home, read an unredacted portion of the affidavit.

“The government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment and removal of government records,” the FBI agent, whose name was blacked out, wrote in the affidavit’s first line.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/26/doj-reveals-redacted-affidavit-justifying-trump-mar-a-lago-raid.html

It should be shocking, but it's typical.

 

~ Another embarrassment from California — one of many ...

" The evidence is clear and obvious ..."​

 

From everything I have read this is not how it went down at all. I think it is accurate that a subpoena accompanied the June, 2022 visit, but that is a bit uncertain (also there is confusion about a subpoena for looking at documents or a subpoena for reviewing security video camera views.) In any case both the DOJ and the FBI made the visit. They inspected the premises but it is unclear if they inspected individual documents. They did not take back any documents nor did Trump return more documents after the June visit. The conclusion of the FBI and DOJ was that everything looked in order though they did request a second lock on the storeroom door, which Trump had done. It was also at the conclusion of this visit that Trump personally told the FBI and DOJ that if they needed anything else or wanted to look at anything else they were completely welcome. Trump had already affirmed that everything that should have gone back to the Archivist had been returned (meaning he had nothing more that need be returned.)

 

Garland is not the type of man that would make the mistakes that Comey made.

Why don't you ask Carl Rove?