Quoted:

Those aren’t very similar at all.

If you want similar, look at Manafort’s case and his attempt to quash a search warrant.

Quoted:


Your superficial arm waving doesn't change both the Constitution and the case law surrounding it. The warrant was unConstitutionally overbroad. The Supreme Court has ruled on very similar cases multiple times and each time narrows what is and isn't permissible. A general warrant of the type issued is unlawful. Further, the warrant is overbroad not only in the specific location to be searched but also on the documents themselves, basically arguing any document or item that was created during his entire Presidency was fair game. That breadth in and of itself cannot be supported by any affidavit, regardless of the content thereof. Again, the warrant was unlawfully broad and you are just wrong. And, shame on you for supporting it.

Quoted:
Fitton spells it out.
Judicial Watch does a lot of good work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWyEq0Qli4

Quoted:



That's one thing we can agree on, but is not likely to happen.  

There are a lot of us on the right tired of the incessant pursuit of Trump and anyone surrounding him, while the establishment completely ignores the criminality on the left.

The establishment has to dig and dig and fabricate shit on those surrounding Trump.  The most recent - "He's got classified material he's not supposed to have, MAYBE EVEN THE NUKE CODES" !!!   While Clinton's bathroom server was known to have contained classified material, was accessed by foreigners and nobody did shit.  

IRS - Targeted conservative groups for audits.
ATF - Trafficked guns into Mexico, to prove that guns were being trafficked into Mexico.
Swallwell - Banging a Chinese Spy.  
Feinstein - Chinese Spy for a driver.  
FBI - Lied about FISA warrant to spy on Trump.
CDC- Lied about effectiveness. (Not a COVID Thread).
CJCS - Colluded with China.
Who was it, State Department?  Lied to the sitting President about how many troops were in Syria.
Why don't we have a fucking border wall and have enough drugs coming across every day to kill the residents of entire states?  Oh, because the left fought the wall at every step.  

You know why people were pissed about the election?  

"Hey, we're supposed to have observers from both sides observing the ballot count!"  Shut the fuck up, you fucking racist!!
"Why did the counting stop in four states at the same time?  FUCK YOU, YOU HATE DEMOCRACY!!!
"The laws in this state say you can't do mass mail-in voting!"  I'm a judge and I just said we can.  

At every step, even when legitimate concerns were raised by serious people, they were squashed.  

And on, and on, and on.  

The right has continued to take it in the ass (figuratively) for fucking years.

And we're fucking tired of it.  

Quoted:



Indeed, the last affidavit for the FISA warrants had fabricated evidence, resulting in a felony conviction for an FBI agent.

And note, the now felon wasn't investigated by the FBI - they were all fine with the perjury and lies.  It took an outside special council to prosecute that turd and obtain justice.  What in the world would make anyone who had two brain cells think the FBI won't lie and commit perjury on this affidavit as well?

The KGBI has an much credibility at this point as the Nigeria price that keeps emailing me about all the money that he can't get out of his country.  I supposed he could be telling the truth this time ...

Quoted:

The claim is Trump declassed everything Russiagate the day before leaving office.

Per Kash two months ago, not everything was declassed.  Some Russiagate information is still classified and in the possession of the National Archives.  Kash claims Trump has tasked him with tracking those still-classified documents down and releasing them.

The claim that everything Russiagate was declassed doesn't seem completely honest when Trump's own boy is publicly saying some things regarding Russiagate were in fact not declassed.

It's not about the docs at MAL, it's about the statement that Trump declassed everything.

Quoted:


Except as a matter of settled law, a warrant of the type issued would have been tossed for being overly broad and insufficiently specific thus violating the 4th Amendment.

Quoted:
I'm afraid this is all academic at this point folks.

I highly doubt there will be a USA holding an election in '24 (at least, what we'd recognize as the USA), and I honestly wonder if 2022 will have one either!

Quoted:
It sounds like a Trump lawyer (Tim Trussy sp) is filing a 4th Amendment claim within the next few days. It appears to be a different judge.

No details, just heard on Fox.

Quoted:

the fact that they were able to muster so many agents to serve a warrant at a residence they knew was empty or had at best a skeleton staff tends to suggest that suspicions of the FBI being fully in the bag for the swamp critters, rinos, dems, progressives, and commie sympathizers, in general, is looking more and more likely a possibility.

Quoted:
The underlying affidavit isn't relevant to the warrant being unlawfully overbroad.

Quoted:

Everything in the warrant must be supported by the statement of probable cause in the affidavit.  It is entirely dependent on the affidavit.  The particularity and breadth of the location to be searched and evidence to be seized have to be specifically covered in the affidavit.  To state otherwise is mind-numbingly ignorant.

Quoted:
I think think piece is relevant to the thread.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/19/think-the-fbi-deserves-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-this-laundry-list-of-corruption-should-make-you-think-again/

Quoted:
I think think piece is relevant to the thread.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/19/think-the-fbi-deserves-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-this-laundry-list-of-corruption-should-make-you-think-again/

Quoted:


What hogwash. The warrant was unlawful because it was unConstitutionally overbroad and it violated the 4th Amendment. Full stop. The affidavit is irrelevant to the overbroad nature of the warrant. My contention is that the unredacted affidavit is likely to reveal it was a hoax just like the FISA warrant applications. As for experience, I have sufficient experience with both the process and the law that you seem to lack. If you cannot recognize what noted authorities like Dershowitz, Turley, and groups like Judicial Watch say on the matter, I'd say you're TDS is making you willfully blind regardless of your lack of experience in the matter.

The real question isn't whether the FIBs and DoJ have a great bias against Trump. The real question is who is pulling those strings to make that happen?

Quoted:


“The warrant was unlawful because it was unlawful.”  Just another example of you talking out of your butt.

The warrant is issued and predicated upon the content of the affidavit. You don’t get a warrant without an affidavit. The scope of the warrant is set forth in the affidavit, which nobody has seen yet.  

Your incredibly astute, scholarly analysis, and creative use of wishful thinking have helped you to arrive at a point far from reality. Just remember that your fictitious expertise does not translate into the outcomes you predict. This creates a feedback loop because you believe everything is a conspiracy, and believe you know how it’s all supposed to work, so when it doesn’t that’s just proof of conspiracy.

Welcome to my ignore list, Mr. purposely ignorant.

Quoted:


“The warrant was unlawful because it was unlawful.”  Just another example of you talking out of your butt.

The warrant is issued and predicated upon the content of the affidavit. You don’t get a warrant without an affidavit. The scope of the warrant is set forth in the affidavit, which nobody has seen yet.  

Your incredibly astute, scholarly analysis, and creative use of wishful thinking have helped you to arrive at a point far from reality. Just remember that your fictitious expertise does not translate into the outcomes you predict. This creates a feedback loop because you believe everything is a conspiracy, and believe you know how it’s all supposed to work, so when it doesn’t that’s just proof of conspiracy.

Welcome to my ignore list, Mr. purposely ignorant.

Quoted:
I think think piece is relevant to the thread.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/19/think-the-fbi-deserves-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-this-laundry-list-of-corruption-should-make-you-think-again/

Quoted:


We saw it over and over in the Q threads a few years back. The mental obstacle course some people would willingly put themselves through in order to defend indefensible positions was fascinating.

Quoted:
I think think piece is relevant to the thread.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/19/think-the-fbi-deserves-the-benefit-of-the-doubt-this-laundry-list-of-corruption-should-make-you-think-again/

Quoted:

The claim is Trump declassed everything Russiagate the day before leaving office.

Per Kash two months ago, not everything was declassed.  Some Russiagate information is still classified and in the possession of the National Archives.  Kash claims Trump has tasked him with tracking those still-classified documents down and releasing them.

The claim that everything Russiagate was declassed doesn't seem completely honest when Trump's own boy is publicly saying some things regarding Russiagate were in fact not declassed.

It's not about the docs at MAL, it's about the statement that Trump declassed everything.

Quoted:
I'm afraid this is all academic at this point folks.

I highly doubt there will be a USA holding an election in '24 (at least, what we'd recognize as the USA), and I honestly wonder if 2022 will have one either!

Quoted:



What we have is Hillary Clinton who got caught going 105 mph in a 40, and was given a pass.  Then we have Trump, who (based on the quantities of classified they say they took, and granting it was actually still classified) was going 55 in a 40. Hillary didn’t even have to attend a defensive driving course. It would be insane to give Trump a ticket and prosecute him. Additionally, Clinton’s documents were all still classified. There is a possibility Trump’s documents were in fact declassified, and that will mean he wasn’t doing more than 40 in a 40. The agents who swore out the warrant will have to explain what it is that led them to believe the documents were still classified, and face the legal perils that come about if it is determined they did this all in bad faith.

But for some here, the realities of how anything works are not important. They only care about outcomes that give them the political results they want, reality be damned.

  Fox also maintained that Clinesmith had no personal motive in forging the document. But Durham cited virulently anti-Trump political messages Clinesmith sent to other FBI employees after Trump won in 2016 – including a battle cry to “fight” Trump and his policies – and argued that his clear political bias may have led to his criminal misconduct.

“It is plausible that his strong political views and/or personal dislike of [Trump] made him more willing to engage in the fraudulent and unethical conduct to which he has pled guilty,” Durham told U.S. District Judge Jeb Boasberg.

Boasberg, a Democrat appointed by President Obama, spared Clinesmith jail time and let him serve out his probation from home. Fox and the D.C. Bar sided with Boasberg, who accepted Clinesmith’s claim he did not intentionally deceive the FISA court, which Boasberg happens to preside over, and even offered an excuse for his criminal conduct.

“My view of the evidence is that Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said about Mr. Page was true,” Boasberg said. “By altering the email, he was saving himself some work and taking an inappropriate shortcut.”

Fox echoed the judge’s reasoning in essentially letting Clinesmith off the hook. (The deal they struck, which the U.S. District Court of Appeals that oversees the bar approved in September, called for a one-year suspension, but the suspension began retroactively in August 2020, which made it meaningless.) Boasberg opined that Clinesmith had “already suffered” punishment by losing his FBI job and $150,000 salary.

But, Boasberg assumed, wrongly as it turned out, that Clinesmith also faced possible disbarment. ”And who knows where his earnings go now,” the judge sympathized. “He may be disbarred or suspended from the practice of law.”

Anticipating such a punishment, Boasberg waived a recommended fine of up to $10,000, arguing that Clinesmith couldn’t afford it. He also waived the regular drug testing usually required during probation, while returning Clinesmith’s passport. And he gave his blessing to Clinesmith’s request to serve out his probation as a volunteer journalist, before wishing him well: “Mr. Clinesmith, best of luck to you.”

Quoted:


We saw it over and over in the Q threads a few years back. The mental obstacle course some people would willingly put themselves through in order to defend indefensible positions was fascinating.

Quoted:


I have never seen a troll rub the fact that they are a troll in peoples faces while trolling before.

fascinating.

Quoted:


What hogwash. The warrant was unlawful because it was unConstitutionally overbroad and it violated the 4th Amendment. Full stop. The affidavit is irrelevant to the overbroad nature of the warrant. My contention is that the unredacted affidavit is likely to reveal it was a hoax just like the FISA warrant applications. As for experience, I have sufficient experience with both the process and the law that you seem to lack. If you cannot recognize what noted authorities like Dershowitz, Turley, and groups like Judicial Watch say on the matter, I'd say you're TDS is making you willfully blind regardless of your lack of experience in the matter.

The real question isn't whether the FIBs and DoJ have a great bias against Trump. The real question is who is pulling those strings to make that happen?

Quoted:
Here is how the DOJ treats FBI lawyers who lie to help destroy a sitting POTUS private citizen running for president at the time the investigation began.

Quoted:



Don’t forget about The one who just pleaded guilty to destroying evidence and was turned in by other agents.

Quoted:



There is a possibility the affidavit is valid, the warrant is good, and the search was reasonable.

Quoted:

Everything in the warrant must be supported by the statement of probable cause in the affidavit.  It is entirely dependent on the affidavit.  The particularity and breadth of the location to be searched and evidence to be seized have to be specifically covered in the affidavit.  To state otherwise is mind-numbingly ignorant.