FBI is a politiced institution. There is no doubt.

Is that a setup question?

If the search was more narrow as is standard protocol then I can indeed fault them for seizing non relevant documents. It's not Trump's fault that he didn't clearly label boxes. They could have looked through the boxes to determine their designation before just grabbing everything up.

 

I'm not interested in an ad populum argument.

 

You are the one that made the argument inferring that different methods are okay no matter what. The issue I was pointing out that most common sense people do keep them separate.

But you never had that experience, have you?

 

Now you're making it personal. What I do is not on trial. And subtle insults are grounds for wishing you to have a good evening.

 

No, an observation.

 

Nope. If you and Trump allies are attempting to make this argument, I can bet that this will be applied to all the documents. After all, it really must be all of them because of a "special lock" was on the door." Right?

The search was narrow enough to meet Constitutional and Criminal Procedural guidelines so the judge had no option but to sign the search warrant. A federal magistrate has no optoin but to sign a search warrant as long as the search warrant, in their professional option and what was being presented, was proper and met those guidelines.

As for the documents. as I stated before, the Agents do not have time to look at every piece of document. If there was a folder labeled "Miscellaneous Top Secret stuff" and it had one piece of paper in it that was attorney/client privilege unrelated to the folder, then that is the fault of the person who put it there, but the FBI. A reasonable standard to know would not have been met.

Again, your whole argument is trying to blame anyone and everyone except Trump for having these documents in the first place.

 

The above doesn't negate what I wrote.

 

Sorry, but anecdotal evidence is not proof for much of anything.

 

Actually, no you don't just go through everything on scene to determine which individual documents are of interest.

I documented crime scenes for 9 years. If you found a box that might contain evidence, you take the WHOLE box, because the box
itself can hold evidence. They will need to fingerprint the box to determine if anyone besides Trump accessed the box or might
have had access to the contents. They can't just disregard protocol because YOU don't like it.

 

Im sure Gotti would qualify as an authoritarian within his organization, assuming it was a stereotypical mafia where once 'in' there was no getting out and neither participation nor his authority were consensual or voluntary.

...it might be worth noting that the 'consent' is really the only objective difference between a mafia and a govt- that oft-mentioned yet hard-to-define 'consent of the governed' that ostencibly seperates democracy from autocracy, even though they both (and mafias ftm) operate on similar principles and to similar ends.

But back to the point: unless you're suggesting Trump's authority over his administration derived from the use (or threat) of force, then it wasn't authoritarian. Authoritarianism requires a lack of peaceful alternatives to obedience. So far as Im aware, everyone in the Trump admin was completely free to quit (or be fired) if they weren't willing to follow orders. If thats 'authoritarian', then so is every employer on the planet and the word has no real meaning at all.

 

I have no problem with a fair investigation, followed by either an indictment or dismissing the charge, and if indicted a fair trial with a prosecuter who needs to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury or a judge.

In June they were told there was no more classified documents there. I believe that one of the former Presidents signed a document stating that. Perhaps they believed what the lawyer said.

 

I wasn't trying to negate your comment - simply adding to it.

 

Please refer to your OP subject line, which explains it rather well.

 

Then define and cite examples of what is meant by "narrow in scope" for me.

 

"Narrow in scope" in this case would mean the Trump residence at Mar a Lago - not the public spaces (the ballroom, the restaurant and other public spaces)
and not the dozens of other Trump properties. A full investigation would have included raids on EVERY Trump property and every inch of Mar a Lago
holdings (his NY apartment, golf courses and any other residents). This was a very limited search by FBI standards.

 

That's bogus!
https://www.lslawyers.com/scope-of-the-search-consent-and-warrant-searches-cases.html

Searching the whole residence of Trump's home is beyond "narrow" because they knew exactly where they would find the classified documents they were searching for. That's verified because it was the FIRST place they looked and where they seized the evidence they were authorized to seize (along with any materials stored with them). It's reasonable to include his office (typically used for documents location) and his safe. But there's nothing narrow about searching through Melanie's private room or any other location. This was a whole/broad search of the entire residence.

 

And it doesn't negate what I wrote, does it? Nor does it address the argument I wrote, does it?

 

rules for thee and not me.

same rules never apply to democrats and their politicians.

They're above the law.

 

The title is correct. There is no doubt.

Feds Swear Trump Investigation Was in ‘EARLY STAGES’ When FBI Stormed Mar-a-Lago. Oh, Really? “This is a breathtaking statement. And it raises more questions than it answers. Let’s go through a few of them.”

Epstein Judge Reinhart, who’d previously recused himself from another lawsuit involving Trump, approved the raid on Melania's closet for nuclear secrets and is not considering how much of the affidavit to release. The lying scum FBI/DOJ/AG who conducted the raid under false pretexts in a collapsing attempt to rig the 2024 election don't want anything released.

"The “early stages” comment came from the head of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) counterintelligence division, Jay Bratt. Bratt argued to Epstein Judge Reinhart that the “open investigation” was still in its “early stages” and that to reveal any of the supporting documents at such an early stage would ” jeopardize ‘several witnesses’ whose accounts of Trump’s actions were specific enough that the sources for them might be easily identified.”

"why conduct a smash and grab raid at the “early stages” when you haven’t investigated enough to know what you need to make your case?"

And that's what the Epstein Judge should have asked them. Normally the search warrant comes with the arrest warrant and they have have admitted they don't have probable cause for criminal charges.

This answers why "the FBI combed through Melania Trump’s under lovelies and hired a safecracker. They didn’t know what they were looking for. This was a raid in search of a crime."

A gross constitutional violation of Biden's principle opponent in 2024. See why the FBI looks works that a homeless guy's deuce dropped on a San Francisco street?

Look for the entire case to get tossed as soon a judge with integrity looks over the illegal warrant. "If agents had an appropriately tailored search warrant and had the Epstein judge bothered to look at the underlying documents, then privileged documents that were clearly out of the scope of the warrant wouldn’t have been confiscated. That is unless Trump and his attorneys were scoring crack, smoking meth, doing deals to get raw materials to make lithium batteries for the Chi-coms, and getting payoffs from the Ukrainians and Russkies. Wait, sorry, that’s Hunter Biden and The Big Guy."

"Immediately following the raid, the media reported the Feds had hoped to keep the sacking of Mar-a-Lago under wraps, hoping no one would notice–least of all Trump since they knew he was out of town. This is important because it supports the speculation –- and educated speculation is all we’ve got on this point — that the raid was a Hoover special, vacuuming up as many documents, photos, and underpants they could in the hope that they’d find something."

Unconstitutional Wild Goose Chase in an Unconstitutional Witch Hunt in a vain attempt to illicitly fix the 2024 election.

"We are also told that Attorney General Merrick Garland agonized for weeks or months over raiding a former president’s home. Well, we certainly hope so. But how long has this “early stages” investigation been going on, anyway?"

"Sitting presidents can declassify at will. In the realm of declassification, nobody’s the boss of the president."



Just 81 days and we begin the beautiful process of restoring the Rule of Law to this wonderful country of ours!

 

My cat likes boxes, despite whatever important goes into it. lmao.