Justice Department ordered to release redacted Mar-a-Lago search warrant affidavit

[Scott]

 

(CNN)The Justice Department must release a redacted version of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant affidavit by noon on Friday, a federal judge ruled.

The affidavit lays out why investigators believe there was probable cause that crimes had been committed. The warrant authorized the FBI to search former President Donald Trump's home and private club earlier this month.

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/25/politics/trump-mar-a-lago-fbi-raid/index.html

[LarrySR]

Can't wait to see the lame excuses Trump & Fox dream up next.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, LarrySR said:

Can't wait to see the lame excuses Trump & Fox dream up next.

Next outrage:

 

’What are the Government hiding under those redactions’.

 

 

[LarrySR]

Trump will spin it to make Trump the victim and then (let’s be nice here) “the undereducated” will believe him. 
 

[riclag]

7 hours ago, LarrySR said:

Can't wait to see the lame excuses Trump & Fox dream up next.

Why wait, Former  Supreme court law clerk speaks out on the Fbi mar-a-lago raid. He says they are improperly leaking!

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by riclag

[LarrySR]

14 minutes ago, riclag said:

Why wait, Former  Supreme court law clerk speaks out on the Fbi mar-a-lago raid.

 

Fox?

You really watch that garbage?

Edited August 26, 2022 by LarrySR

[placeholder]

6 minutes ago, riclag said:

Why wait, Former  Supreme court law clerk speaks out on the Fbi mar-a-lago raid. He says they are improperly leaking!

 

Such a load of nonsense. For one thing, he claims Biden knew about the raid because waived executive privilege for Trump. And even that allegation that he waived it not true. He left it up to the acting director of the Archives to decide if it was necessary. This guy may have a law degree but here he's acting as an agent of disinformation.

[riclag]

7 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Fox. Nuff said.

Merely Fox giving a expert on the matter time to reflect , me thinks.

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, riclag said:

Merely Fox giving a expert on the matter time to reflect , me thinks.

Merely Fox not offering an expert rebuttal.

[placeholder]

Anyway, the disclosure won't amount to much since the judge agrees that the most pertinent info be withheld

1)witnesses' names 

2)information about where the investigation is headed

3)grand jury info

[Chomper Higgot]

The Washington Post is now reporting that Trump took boxes of classified documents with him on trips overseas.

 

As I have already commented, the criminal investigation into Trump removing and keeping these documents is one thing.

 

The far more serious n investigation is who got to see these documents and did Trump play a part in them seeing these documents.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

23 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Washington Post is now reporting that Trump took boxes of classified documents with him on trips overseas.

 

As I have already commented, the criminal investigation into Trump removing and keeping these documents is one thing.

 

The far more serious n investigation is who got to see these documents and did Trump play a part in them seeing these documents.

 

 

He's got a history for revealing classified intel, this from 2017:

 

Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-revealed-highly-classified-information-to-russian-foreign-minister-and-ambassador/2017/05/15/530c172a-3960-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html