The probable cause declaration is the basis for the search.
there is no legal basis for it to be kept secret, and in fact it must be provided to Trump, since he has a right to attack it as insufficient in a motion to quash for example. it isn't secret information.
Any time I've worked on a criminal case where there are search warrants, the probable cause declaration for the warrant is always included. If you could withhold them, there would be no way to challenge a warrant. It would be a total violation of due process.
"Disclosure at this juncture of the affidavit supporting probable cause would, by contrast, cause significant and irreparable damage to this ongoing criminal investigation."
Bullshit, and even if true: too bad. You need to show your hand to some degree to get the warrant, and Due Process means the other side gets to see it.
Implying that everything they've done to him for the past 6 years hasn't been? I don't doubt you're correct in a legal sense, but that got thrown out when a 100% fabricated dossier was used to spy on a presidential campaign.
"Disclosure at this juncture of the affidavit supporting probable cause would, by contrast, cause significant and irreparable damage to this ongoing criminal investigation."
That's why you're required to disclose it, Stasi scum.
Meaning the tried to bluff thinking "Trump would never want to admit he got raided because it'll make him look weak!" Failed badly.
We've had years of Trump yet the left still can't understand him, this is a man that did a WWE performance, when a pornstar tried to make claims about him, he called her horse face on national TV. Shrugged off the pee tape hoax by saying he's obsessive about being clean and embraces memes about himself.
You can't try to embarrass him, he can just power straight through, you could've just reached a deal but that went out the window because he wouldn't 'bend the knee'
There's absolutely an easy way to defeat him. Put him up against a strong, intelligent, stoic leader. Someone who has the kind of masculine charisma that inspires respect, and also refuses to "lower himself" to the brash, shit-talking, that Trump does.
People are craving that figure in their lives, let alone in politics. The problem is, no such man exists within politics. The very nature of such a man on the political Left is an anathema to it, even more threatening and foreign than Trump would ever be.
You're basically asking for a George Washington, or to a lesser extent: Eisenhower-like figure. But those are in very short supply.
So, Trump is the best we get because since we can't assert a superior moral order and refuse to abide by Progressive degeneracy and power-mongering, we must instead mock and belittle those things to undermine their authority.
Could also put him up against a famous actor that hasn't yet shit the bed with leftist ideology. Like Denzel Washington or Matthew McConaughey. Have them play that strong, intelligent role and promise to bring politics back to the rational center. Leftists would hate it but they wouldn't have a choice. Ardent conservatives would see through the act but it would easily fool normies.
The only reason I think it wouldn't work is that the establishment is already so captured by the ideological left that they have ridiculous woke blind spots. They've all but ruined their chance with McConaughey by having him give that gun control speech. It was probably meant to launch his political career but they failed to read the room and see that gun control is a dead issue.
Absolutely he's toast, and I don't think they could push Denzel into running. Those are the only two choices I could think of at the time. Tom Hanks was raked over the coals by the QAnons and Tom Cruise knows how to sell to a broad audience but he's still personally nuts.
You're basically asking for a George Washington, or to a lesser extent: Eisenhower-like figure.
Yo, dawg, I'm-a let you finish, but you forgot Silent Cal. A Coolidge/Goldwater ticket right now would be all the benefits of Trump 47 with none of the side effects.
Eisenhower was a milquetoast moderate who pretty much flipped a coin to determine which party he ran for. There are a handful of decisions he made that were utterly disastrous for American stability (let's fuck with French Indochina, that'll be a bright idea! NASA, self-sustaining and self-funding? Nope), but he never gets shit on, because kindly old grandpa.
Withholding this makes it an illegal search and seizure. They already admitted to taking (and possibly returning) items outside the scope of the warrant, so this is being mishandled nicely. Keep in mind this is a former president they're tramping the rights of. They would stoop that low for someone that sat in the oval office. They'll do it to any one of us without a second thought, and we would have no recourse.
Even if the affidavit makes the warrant justified (fat chance), from their perspective I'm sure the idea that they even need to answer for themselves is rage-inducing and they would probably resist just on principle.
Can you imagine the absolute retardation of having to explain that Trump is a evil, Machiavellian, piss-baby, who is so evil he stole nuclear secrets, but is so stupid he tried to destroy them by "making them go where the poop goes", even though the only person who has access to those documents... is the FBI because you put a lock on the door that no one else can get in to.
The probable cause declaration is the basis for the search.
there is no legal basis for it to be kept secret, and in fact it must be provided to Trump, since he has a right to attack it as insufficient in a motion to quash for example. it isn't secret information.
Any time I've worked on a criminal case where there are search warrants, the probable cause declaration for the warrant is always included. If you could withhold them, there would be no way to challenge a warrant. It would be a total violation of due process.
Bullshit, and even if true: too bad. You need to show your hand to some degree to get the warrant, and Due Process means the other side gets to see it.
Implying that everything they've done to him for the past 6 years hasn't been? I don't doubt you're correct in a legal sense, but that got thrown out when a 100% fabricated dossier was used to spy on a presidential campaign.
That's why you're required to disclose it, Stasi scum.
"Evidence of our criminal wrong-doing would do serious damage to our illegal investigation! You're honor this is devastating to my case!"
Meaning the tried to bluff thinking "Trump would never want to admit he got raided because it'll make him look weak!" Failed badly.
We've had years of Trump yet the left still can't understand him, this is a man that did a WWE performance, when a pornstar tried to make claims about him, he called her horse face on national TV. Shrugged off the pee tape hoax by saying he's obsessive about being clean and embraces memes about himself.
You can't try to embarrass him, he can just power straight through, you could've just reached a deal but that went out the window because he wouldn't 'bend the knee'
There's absolutely an easy way to defeat him. Put him up against a strong, intelligent, stoic leader. Someone who has the kind of masculine charisma that inspires respect, and also refuses to "lower himself" to the brash, shit-talking, that Trump does.
People are craving that figure in their lives, let alone in politics. The problem is, no such man exists within politics. The very nature of such a man on the political Left is an anathema to it, even more threatening and foreign than Trump would ever be.
You're basically asking for a George Washington, or to a lesser extent: Eisenhower-like figure. But those are in very short supply.
So, Trump is the best we get because since we can't assert a superior moral order and refuse to abide by Progressive degeneracy and power-mongering, we must instead mock and belittle those things to undermine their authority.
Could also put him up against a famous actor that hasn't yet shit the bed with leftist ideology. Like Denzel Washington or Matthew McConaughey. Have them play that strong, intelligent role and promise to bring politics back to the rational center. Leftists would hate it but they wouldn't have a choice. Ardent conservatives would see through the act but it would easily fool normies.
The only reason I think it wouldn't work is that the establishment is already so captured by the ideological left that they have ridiculous woke blind spots. They've all but ruined their chance with McConaughey by having him give that gun control speech. It was probably meant to launch his political career but they failed to read the room and see that gun control is a dead issue.
Isnt Matthew mcconaughey always calling for intelligent gun control and doesnt oppose vaccine mandates?
Absolutely he's toast, and I don't think they could push Denzel into running. Those are the only two choices I could think of at the time. Tom Hanks was raked over the coals by the QAnons and Tom Cruise knows how to sell to a broad audience but he's still personally nuts.
The problem with gun control is that they fucking need it. But the level of violence and balkanization they've created means it's impossible to touch.
Yo, dawg, I'm-a let you finish, but you forgot Silent Cal. A Coolidge/Goldwater ticket right now would be all the benefits of Trump 47 with none of the side effects.
Eisenhower was a milquetoast moderate who pretty much flipped a coin to determine which party he ran for. There are a handful of decisions he made that were utterly disastrous for American stability (let's fuck with French Indochina, that'll be a bright idea! NASA, self-sustaining and self-funding? Nope), but he never gets shit on, because kindly old grandpa.
Calvin Coolidge is still to weak of a personality to go against Trump. He'd be made to look like Mitt Romney
I'm not talking about Eisenhower's policies, or even the man himself. I'm talking about his persona.
Withholding this makes it an illegal search and seizure. They already admitted to taking (and possibly returning) items outside the scope of the warrant, so this is being mishandled nicely. Keep in mind this is a former president they're tramping the rights of. They would stoop that low for someone that sat in the oval office. They'll do it to any one of us without a second thought, and we would have no recourse.
Even if the affidavit makes the warrant justified (fat chance), from their perspective I'm sure the idea that they even need to answer for themselves is rage-inducing and they would probably resist just on principle.
How much you want to bet it's because they lied in the affidavit again?
If they actually put that in the affidavit that judge will become a laughing stock. (more than an Epstein-linked judge already is...)
Can you imagine the absolute retardation of having to explain that Trump is a evil, Machiavellian, piss-baby, who is so evil he stole nuclear secrets, but is so stupid he tried to destroy them by "making them go where the poop goes", even though the only person who has access to those documents... is the FBI because you put a lock on the door that no one else can get in to.
Also, that Trump has never heard of "fire" or "shredders".