The Trump Warrant Had No Legal Basis. BOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

V

volsrock

Verified User
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.

The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.


Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.




https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tr...st-custody-classified-fbi-garland-11661170684



WHOOPS


To summarize: Garland and his 30 Gaystapo cockroaches broke the law.
 
volsrock said:
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.

The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.


Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.




https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tr...st-custody-classified-fbi-garland-11661170684



WHOOPS


To summarize: Garland and his 30 Gaystapo cockroaches broke the law.
Click to expand...

More stupid claims.
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_B._Rivkin


One of the writers of that piece






David Boris Rivkin, Jr.[2] (born 1956) is an American attorney, political writer, and conservative media commentator on matters of constitutional and international law, as well as foreign and defense policy. Rivkin has gained national recognition as a representative of conservative viewpoints, frequently testifying before congressional committees, and appearing as an analyst and commentator on a variety of television and radio stations.[3] He is a visiting fellow at the Center for the National Interest, and a recipient of the U.S. Naval Proceedings Annual Alfred Thayer Mahan Award for the best maritime affairs article.[4] He is a fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies,[5] and is a former member of the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.[6][7]




Born
David Borisovich Rivkin
1956 (age 65–66)
Leningrad, Soviet Union[1]
 
volsrock said:
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.

The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.


Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.




https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tr...st-custody-classified-fbi-garland-11661170684



WHOOPS


To summarize: Garland and his 30 Gaystapo cockroaches broke the law.
Click to expand...
LMFAO.

You could not be more wrong. Nowhere does any law state that a POTUS can steal govt. documents.

NOWHERE
 
volsrock said:
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.

The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.


Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.




https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tr...st-custody-classified-fbi-garland-11661170684



WHOOPS


To summarize: Garland and his 30 Gaystapo cockroaches broke the law.
Click to expand...

OH FUCK YOU FOR BEING SO WRONG!

Yes, an ex-president has a right to access Top-Secret documents- BUT NO! A president has no legal authority to steal them from the WHITE HOUSE!

WHAT A FUCKING RETARD!
 
volsrock said:
Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978


U get that part..stupid fuck
Click to expand...

Amazing, only two opinion writers in a Murdoch entity came up with this interpretation, Trump ought to hire them, their view is right up their Rudi and Sidney's
 
volsrock said:
Was the Federal Bureau of Investigation justified in searching Donald Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago? The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid.

The materials to be seized included “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021”—i.e., during Mr. Trump’s term of office. Virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category. Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant.


Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978. It has long been the Supreme Court position, as stated in Morton v. Mancari (1974), that “where there is no clear intention otherwise, a specific statute will not be controlled or nullified by a general one, regardless of the priority of enactment.” The former president’s rights under the PRA trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.




https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-tr...st-custody-classified-fbi-garland-11661170684



WHOOPS


To summarize: Garland and his 30 Gaystapo cockroaches broke the law.
Click to expand...

Yeah, "WHOOPS".

This is the sentence the argument relies on: "Federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them. His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant."

The trouble with this argument is that Trump's "right of access to them" doesn't require or even imply the right to access them in his fucking basement to the exclusion of the access of all others. Nor does it imply the right to access without the protection required by law for classified documents. It doesn't imply the right, in other words, to convert sensitive government property to his own personal property.

If this is the argument the WSJ is making I'm amazed at their stupidity.
 
AG of Florida should be making the case right now to a Grand Jury to Indict the whole bunch for Felony Armed Home Invasion and issue a Governors Warrant for all of them.
 
volsrock said:
AG of Florida should be making the case right now to a Grand Jury to Indict the whole bunch for Felony Armed Home Invasion and issue a Governors Warrant for all of them.
Click to expand...

Look at the post above your own and you can make a good guess why that case isn't being floated.
 
volsrock said:
Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978 ...
Click to expand...

The Presidential Records Act (1978) requires that all Presidential records should automatically transfer into the legal custody of the National Archives and Records Administration as soon as the President leaves office.

Trump not only failed to do that, he tried to prevent it by concealing his possession of some Presidential records. In those circumstances, after repeated attempts to obtain all the records by agreement had failed, a search warrant was justified.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
The Presidential Records Act (1978) requires that all Presidential records should automatically transfer into the legal custody of the National Archives and Records Administration as soon as the President leaves office.

Trump not only failed to do that, he tried to prevent it by concealing his possession of some Presidential records. In those circumstances, after repeated attempts to obtain all the records by agreement had failed, a search warrant was justified.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is where he enjoys his right of access.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
The Presidential Records Act (1978) requires that all Presidential records should automatically transfer into the legal custody of the National Archives and Records Administration as soon as the President leaves office.

Trump not only failed to do that, he tried to prevent it by concealing his possession of some Presidential records. In those circumstances, after repeated attempts to obtain all the records by agreement had failed, a search warrant was justified.
Click to expand...

Regan, Bush, CLinton, Bush Jr, and Obama all turned them over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top