Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

FBI Executed a Warrant at Mar a Lago; the Investigation Continues

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by duchen, Aug 8, 2022.

Page 128 of 190
  1. Aug 20, 2022 #2541
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    There's actually both. Case studies are done in Law school for students that are in Law school and case law is what's already on the books. So I gave you a HUGE area to recite from. I will wait.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  2. Aug 20, 2022 #2542
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,585
    2,004
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Wow, you really have no clue what you are talking about to the point that you can't even use the correct terms in asking for things. Do you want me to "recite" (usually, you would say cite) discussions from law school classes as if they are binding or something?

    I am just laughing that you are asking for case law about how police with a search warrant, signed off on by the courts, get to search a residence. A search warrant is the court giving permission to search a residence.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2022
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. Aug 20, 2022 #2543
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    Oh please do supreme being. Educate me. I am all ears.
     
  4. Aug 20, 2022 #2544
    duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    13,843
    5,155
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    I don’t need to cite cases to you. The warrant was signed by a judge based on a showing of probable cause. That is Facially Valid under the Fourth Amendment. Until the full application is reviewed, it is impossible to opine on the legality of the search. Because you don’t know the facts on which the warrant was based and if the warrant failed to establish probable cause or was otherwise defective. What we do know is that the warrant was addressed to information that was found. So we can intuit that the government had information to support the search. Once that video launched into a separation of powers argument, which was early, I stopped listening. Because Trump isn’t president. He has no article 2 powers any more. This was the search of a home. And the suggestion that a member of a coordinate branch of government is immune from a search is absurd. The warrant clause was instituted to prohibit practices that the British used to engage in by entering homes without cause and occupying them. I won’t watch a 48 minute gibberish video.
     
    • Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny x 1
    • Winner x 1
    • Best Post Ever x 1
  5. Aug 20, 2022 #2545
    duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    13,843
    5,155
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    Why don’t you read the exact language of the Fourth Amendment for yourself.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  6. Aug 20, 2022 #2546
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,585
    2,004
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Lol, you really want me to explain why search warrants issued by the courts are not a violation of the 4th Amendment? Because, that is what they are: a way for police to search a residence without violating the 4th Amendment.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  7. Aug 20, 2022 #2547
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    Why are you not willing to play your own game?
     
  8. Aug 20, 2022 #2548
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    Did you watch the video yet? Did you get him this time? Circa what 9 10? LMAO!!!!
     
  9. Aug 20, 2022 #2549
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    I am playing your game and you don't want to play it now? Don't lib on me.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Aug 20, 2022 #2550
    AzCatFan

    AzCatFan GC Hall of Fame

    11,897
    1,104
    1,618
    Apr 9, 2007
    Did Trump illegally have boxes belonging to the National Archives in his possession? Yes.

    Did some of these boxes contain classified materials? Yes.

    Did the Archives try non-legal ways of getting these boxes back? Yes.

    Did Trump return some of the boxes? Yes.

    Did Trump return all the classified materials? No.

    Did Trump lie about returning all classified documents in a affidavit? Yes.

    Did the Archives then get the FBI involved? Yes.

    Did the FBI issue a subpoena for Trump to return the classified materials? Yes.

    Did Trump ignore the subpoena? Yes.

    At this point, after looking over these facts, how can you claim the FBI violated Trump's 4th Amendment rights with their raid on MAR?
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  11. Aug 20, 2022 #2551
    duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    13,843
    5,155
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    Your lack of comprehension is astounding.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  12. Aug 20, 2022 #2552
    duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    13,843
    5,155
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    Nobody can say either way without seeing the application.
     
  13. Aug 20, 2022 #2553
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,585
    2,004
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Okay, sure. A search warrant is a court determining that investigators have provided enough probable cause of a crime to authorize a search of a property consistent with the 4th Amendment. So, short of some specific evidence of malfeasance, it is, on its face, consistent with the 4th Amendment. It is so simple that it is almost tautological.
     
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. Aug 20, 2022 #2554
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    I have. So you refuse?
     
  15. Aug 20, 2022 #2555
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    Ok so let's say for kicks and giggles this chit blows up in your all's faces AGAIN, it already is like all of the other chit has for the last 7 years then what?
     
  16. Aug 20, 2022 #2556
    duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    13,843
    5,155
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    Like I said, nobody can opine on the sufficiency of the showing of probable cause without seeing the application. That is why I asked you to apply law to facts. You don’t have any
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  17. Aug 20, 2022 #2557
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,585
    2,004
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    Try English next time, and I will answer.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  18. Aug 20, 2022 #2558
    AndyGator

    AndyGator VIP Member

    3,544
    346
    338
    Apr 10, 2007
    (pssst. IQ is not the number of stiches from your lobotomy. ;))
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
  19. Aug 20, 2022 #2559
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    You still haven't watched the video from Judicial Watch, why not? They are lawyers.
     
  20. Aug 20, 2022 #2560
    back2back2006

    back2back2006 GC Legend

    900
    1,201
    288
    Mar 1, 2017
    Shallotte, NC
    Pssst I can apply for Mensa, you???
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
Page 128 of 190