BREAKING>>FBI raids Trump’s Mar-a-Lago

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty @Bigun

No, that's not what's happening.  Judicial Watch has petitioned the judge to release the warrant.  The judge is giving DOJ an opportunity to respond to (and potentially block) that request.   In other words, he is telling DOJ that he will release a copy of the warrant to Judicial Watch if he doesn't hear back from DOJ by Monday.

The DoJ controls whether a document is sealed?

[EdinVA]

@EdinVA

Is it legal to do that?

@sneakypete
Don't know but I have seen lotsa blank documents get official signatures on them... to be determined.... 

[roamer_1]

The DoJ controls whether a document is sealed?

Obviously, the DOJ asked for the original warrant to be sealed, National security and all that... and the judge did that.

Now that there is a challenge, the judge has offered time for the DOJ to offer arguments as to why the warrant should remain sealed, which they must present on Monday.

[Hoodat]

The DoJ controls whether a document is sealed?

The DoJ was the one making the original request to seal it.  Another party has come forth and petitioned the court to unseal it.  The court is giving the original requestor (DoJ) the opportunity why the second party's request should be denied.

Consider a regular trial.  A defendant is released on bail while awaiting trial.  Part of the bail agreement is that the defendant can't leave the State.  But the defendant's daughter is suddenly getting married in another State and the the defendant wants to attend.  So the defendant petitions the judge to allow him/her permission to leave the State.  Before the judge can grant that permission, he has to allow the prosecution the opportunity to offer an argument why that permission should not be granted.

Same as in this case.  The warrant is under seal.  The defendant (or third party in this case) wants it unsealed.  The prosecution must be afforded the opportunity to argue against unsealing it.  The judge will then decide.  He can still deny even if the prosecution fails to contest the release.

Now according to that lying POS Merrick Garland, he says that DOJ has already responded by also petitioning that the warrant be released.  If this is really the case, then the judge should have already unsealed the warrant.  But giving him the benefit of doubt, he could still wait until Monday. 

[GtHawk]

It makes zero sense for the Judge that signed the Warrant for the search to demand a copy from DoJ...of his own document.  What's the game here?

Maybe the judge wants to make sure that the DOJ's copy still reads the same as the one he signed off on?

[Cyber Liberty]

Maybe the judge wants to make sure that the DOJ's copy still reads the same as the one he signed off on?

Now that would make sense, if he issued a blank Warrant.

[Hoodat]

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty @Bigun

No, that's not what's happening.  Judicial Watch has petitioned the judge to release the warrant.  The judge is giving DOJ an opportunity to respond to (and potentially block) that request.   In other words, he is telling DOJ that he will release a copy of the warrant to Judicial Watch if he doesn't hear back from DOJ by Monday.

I'm having difficulty computing this.  The Judge is asking for it to be released to him.

Shouldn't he have already seen it?  Make a copy for court records (SOP)?

It's like I have a pebble in my shoe that I can't find.  Something's wrong.

[Kamaji]

The DoJ controls whether a document is sealed?

As the movant regarding the warrant, the DOJ most likely would have filed an ex parte motion with the judge requesting that the warrant be sealed, and setting out the basis for that, and the judge would then grant the motion to seal if he/she was satisfied.

Since it's an ex-parte motion, the other side doesn't get to be heard before the judge makes the sealing decision, so depending on the temperament of each particular judge, it might not take much to get a judge to agree to seal a warrant like this.

[Hoodat]

I'm having difficulty computing this.  The Judge is asking for it to be released to him.

No.  The judge has it.  He is the one who issued it.  He is the one who placed it under seal.

Current rules -  Warrant under seal

Judicial Watch Request  -  Change the rules to release the warrant

DOJ  -  Has until Monday to challenge Judicial Watch Request.

[Bigun]

Screw the dammed warrant! Let's see the supporting documents!

[mountaineer]

Here's a theory:

Erick Erickson
@EWErickson
Personal theory: They used classified documents as the excuse to search, but were really looking for January 6 related materials.  They didn't find them.  So they're now pushing back claiming it really was the classified docs all along.

Erick Erickson
@EWErickson
Personal theory: They used classified documents as the excuse to search, but were really looking for January 6 related materials.  They didn't find them.  So they're now pushing back claiming it really was the classified docs all along.
4:46 PM · Aug 11, 2022·

[Hoodat]

@Cyber Liberty

Let's start at the beginning.

• DOJ goes judge-shopping in South Florida.  They find one that is a known Trump hater and ask him to issue a search warrant of Trump's house.  They submit a sworn affidavit from a witness saying that he has seen 'X' documents in 'Y' location inside the Trump house.  DOJ corroborates that these documents are in violation of some federal statute.
  
  
• Based on affidavit, Judge agrees to issue a warrant.  That court order (which includes a copy of the warrant) is now recorded in the official courthouse records.
  
  
• DOJ makes second request.  Because of the notoriety of the person involved, they ask that the warrant be sealed.
  
  
• Judge agrees to that request and seals the warrant.  'Under seal' means that these courthouse records cannot be made available to the public.
  
  
• Warrant is served.  By law, the subject of the warrant must be served a copy of that warrant detailing the target and location of the search.
  
  
• After the serving of the warrant, a third party (in this case, Judicial Watch and an Albany newspaper) filed a motion with the judge to unseal the court records.
  
  
• Since DOJ was the entity that initially requested the records be sealed, he is giving them the opportunity to argue why the records should remain sealed.
  
  
• Judge will receive DOJ argument on Monday.
  

[Cyber Liberty]

No.  The judge has it.  He is the one who issued it.  He is the one who placed it under seal.

Current rules -  Warrant under seal

Judicial Watch Request  -  Change the rules to release the warrant

DOJ  -  Has until Monday to challenge Judicial Watch Request.

Impasse here.  I think he has NOT seen it, likely because he signed a blank Warrant.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty

Let's start at the beginning.

• DOJ goes judge-shopping in South Florida.  They find one that is a known Trump hater and ask him to issue a search warrant of Trump's house.  They submit a sworn affidavit from a witness saying that he has seen 'X' documents in 'Y' location inside the Trump house.  DOJ corroborates that these documents are in violation of some federal statute.
  
  
• Based on affidavit, Judge agrees to issue a warrant.  That court order (which includes a copy of the warrant) is now recorded in the official courthouse records.
  
  
• DOJ makes second request.  Because of the notoriety of the person involved, they ask that the warrant be sealed.
  
  
• Judge agrees to that request and seals the warrant.  'Under seal' means that these courthouse records cannot be made available to the public.
  
  
• Warrant is served.  By law, the subject of the warrant must be served a copy of that warrant detailing the target and location of the search.
  
  
• After the serving of the warrant, a third party (in this case, Judicial Watch and an Albany newspaper) filed a motion with the judge to unseal the court records.
  
  
• Since DOJ was the entity that initially requested the records be sealed, he is giving them the opportunity to argue why the records should remain sealed.
  
  
• Judge will receive DOJ argument on Monday.
  

The Cyber Brain is not convinced, hence the Impasse.  Something is very wrong about this, and that's an easy conclusion.  Only time will bear this out, so I'm just going to wait.

[Hoodat]

Impasse here.  I think he has NOT seen it, likely because he signed a blank Warrant.

Nope.  That would end his job.  There is a warrant.  The warrant has an address printed on it.  It has a list of items that are being sought.  It has the boundaries of the search area identified.  It has a federal statute listed that pertains to this search.  And it has a record of a sworn affidavit that was submitted by a witness as probable cause.  The warrant will  include all of those things.  And there is a record of this warrant in the Palm Beach Courthouse where this judge resides.  That court record is currently under seal.

And there is zero reason to believe that Trump does not have a copy of it by now.  So the big question is - why is Trump not releasing it?  Is it because the warrant contains something he doesn't want the public to know?  Is it because the judge's seal order applies to him also?  Or is it because he is waiting it out for maximum benefit?

I'm thinking option 2 or 3.  If it was option 1, it would have been leaked already.

[Cyber Liberty]

Nope.  That would end his job.  There is a warrant.  The warrant has an address printed on it.  It has a list of items that are being sought.  It has the boundaries of the search area identified.  It has a federal statute listed that pertains to this search.  And it has a record of a sworn affidavit that was submitted by a witness as probable cause.  The warrant will  include all of those things.  And there is a record of this warrant in the Palm Beach Courthouse where this judge resides.  That court record is currently under seal.

And there is zero reason to believe that Trump does not have a copy of it by now.  So the big question is - why is Trump not releasing it?  Is it because the warrant contains something he doesn't want the public to know?  Is it because the judge's seal order applies to him also?  Or is it because he is waiting it out for maximum benefit?

I'm thinking option 2 or 3.  If it was option 1, it would have been leaked already.

I am willing to wait and see.  It's not going to be a long wait.   

[corbe]

   Interesting points to ponder @Hoodat
   Whether he is playing 3-dimensional chess or just got whacked/set-up by those bastards, yet again, is not a theory I'm willing to give up on.

[mountaineer]

FoiaFan
@15poundstogo
What might they be trying to distract us from with this whole Mar-a-Lago thing?
7:08 PM · Aug 11, 2022

They usually use school shootings as a distraction. This one seems a bit extreme - and odd.

[DCPatriot]

Jesse Watters is giving a wonderful chronology of events and also giving Merrick Garland and the F.B.I. a half-hour of hell!

[DCPatriot]

They usually use school shootings as a distraction. This one seems a bit extreme - and odd.

Okay...

Apparently it has to do with President Trump stating that he had DECLASSIFIED documents showing CLEAR, EGRARIOUS corruption inside the F.B.I..

That's what they are looking for. 

[catfish1957]

Jesse Watters is giving a wonderful chronology of events and also giving Merrick Garland and the F.B.I. a half-hour of hell!

Tucker Carlson took a heck of wrong time to take vacation too.

[DCPatriot]

Tucker Carlson took a heck of wrong time to take vacation too.

Yeah...Brian Kilmeade in the morning...in the evening...at suppertime!!   

Did you notice though that presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard is hosting Tucker Carlson on Friday night??

She was great last night in a guest segment.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

HORSESHIT. Pure and simple.

removed

[Mod5]

You have defined yourself

No personal attacks, @IsailedawayfromFR