Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge formally rejects Justice Department's plea to keep entire Trump raid affidavit sealed
Just the News ^ | 08/22/2022 | Madeleine Hubbard

Posted on 08/22/2022 7:33:50 AM PDT by dpetty121263

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: dpetty121263

21 posted on 08/22/2022 7:47:44 AM PDT by Magnum44 (...against all enemies, foreign and domestic... )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pierrem15

Judge Rinehart is a liberal plant by the DemonRats.

The MSM is totally in with this liberal judge.

There is nothing in this report and that is why he will not release it plus the fact that Biden has probably already told this Illegal Judge that he needs to keep the information sealed.

What a croc.

22 posted on 08/22/2022 7:48:23 AM PDT by TheConservativeTejano (The Business of America is Business)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

Kabuki theater. They will keep secret the parts that we citizens actually need to see, and release scary slanted things about President Trump.


23 posted on 08/22/2022 7:48:41 AM PDT by DesertRhino (Dogs are called man's best friend. Moslems hate dogs. Add it up..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon
It is interesting that he has not released copies of the security videos.

The editors are busy putting Blue bubbles over the faces of the FBI "agents".

24 posted on 08/22/2022 7:49:27 AM PDT by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263
LIBERALS BE LIKE......
25 posted on 08/22/2022 7:49:34 AM PDT by Red Badger (Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegal aliens are put up in hotels.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

So, this magistrate won’t refuse to release all of the affidavit, but will allow the DoJ to request parts be redacated. This is all window dressing. Let’s see how much of the affidavit Epstein’s lawyer redacts.


26 posted on 08/22/2022 7:49:56 AM PDT by Dr. Franklin ("A republic, if you can keep it." )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

The FBI is toast. Like Tony Montana says in “Scarface” “You know frog face, you just f***ed yourself”


27 posted on 08/22/2022 7:50:17 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (As long as Hillary Clinton remains free, the USA will never have equal justice under the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44

I don’t think they would redact the sentence “Trump is an anal sphincter.”


28 posted on 08/22/2022 7:50:59 AM PDT by gitmo (If your theology doesn't become your biography, what good is it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

“Which means the public will be given a hundred-page document with everything blacked-out...]

The affidavit is 17 pages total, ZERO need for a week to redact.

I have no doubt Magistrate Bruce is looking for the least painful exit available to him, but it does not exist. Redact too much, he looks bad, redact too little, he looks worse. He’s boxed into a corner and will likely find himself unable to safely walk down most streets in the U.S. because of his treachery; an honor well-deserved.

As for Garland, the world now sees how truly radical Obama was to attempt to put this clown-show of a man Garland on SCOTUS. He’s demonstrated he is wholly unfit for the position of trust he currently enjoys.

The sooner both of these men are removed from their positions the better!


29 posted on 08/22/2022 7:51:26 AM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

Who decides what is redacted on the affidavit? Can the redactions be challenged? If so, how does the redactio0n challenge process work?


30 posted on 08/22/2022 7:54:28 AM PDT by JesusIsLord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263
This is old news already. Why do websites act as if old news is somehow new?? We knew about this last week.
31 posted on 08/22/2022 8:10:21 AM PDT by cdnerds (Vapingunderground)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

As per the Prez’s son-in-law on Levine last night, Rat’s want the names in the affidavit hidden, because they are the same names as the Russia, Russia Russia, and Impeachments Docs in the Raid.


32 posted on 08/22/2022 8:11:37 AM PDT by duckman ( Not tired of winning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dpetty121263

This may backfire on the DOJ.
Someone may find the whole idea of a sealed warrant where the victim is never shown what items are to be searched for, or why, to be unconstitutional (like I believe it is) and ban that practice here on out.

Which a conservative Supreme Court it could happen.


33 posted on 08/22/2022 8:23:14 AM PDT by Toughluck_freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pierrem15

One has to wonder if he even has the authority to sign such warrants.

Years ago, in Atlanta, people charged with felonies would receive a preliminary hearing in city court. Of course, the judges would go through the motions, deny any bail request and have everything transferred over to Fulton county. It was just the way it had always been done.

One day a defense attorney asked how a city judge, hearing traffic violations and city ordinance violations had the authority to hear arguments and sign warrants for cases involving murder, rape and robbery.

The lawyer was right.

Wonder if something like that applies in this instance.


34 posted on 08/22/2022 8:26:56 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GrandJediMasterYoda
So law enforcement can flash a digital copy of the “search warrant” on their phone from 10 feet away, not leave a written copy and, get this, law enforcement does not need to provide the “search warrant” to the judge for release due to lawsuit over the warrant?

Also the judge signed the “search warrant”, didn’t he keep a copy? Just release your copy!

What a kangaroo law enforcement system.......

35 posted on 08/22/2022 8:27:17 AM PDT by Lockbox (politicians, they all seemed like game show hosts to me.... Sting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PGR88

I understand he will give DOJ an opportunity to redact it.

Has Fitton and Judicial Watch dropped any paperwork yet?


36 posted on 08/22/2022 8:28:43 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon

Years ago, it was detectives from the NYPD TARU that got into Weiner’s laptop and found all those emails.

They then contacted the FBI.

When he was Donald Trump, his head security guy was former NYPD. Donald Trump was somewhat revered by folks in NYC.

Would anyone doubt that the TARU guys were able to make copies of the information and that information, miraculously, ended up in the Oval Office?


37 posted on 08/22/2022 8:33:10 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Wow! Is that Carville as a baby?


38 posted on 08/22/2022 8:34:18 AM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (Beware the coming TRUMPster Fire!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Fido969

Foolish and complicit.

If this thing looks as bad as it’s starting to, his out is that the Affiant, FBI Agent, and the US Attorney that presented the warrant lied. His job is to take them at their word. Don’t matter if or how much they lied. It isn’t his job to verify the information they provide.

Basically, they give him a story to establish Probable Cause. If the story makes sense, then he signs the warrant. Later, during a Suppression Hearing the defense has the opportunity to challenge every sentence of the affidavit/story and prove that Probable Cause did NOT exist. That’s where they catch them in their lies.

IE….confidential source told me this because they saw XYZ in the safe. Pres Trump shows that there is no way for the source to have known anything as they were never in the building.

And in federal court, sources will be identified and cross examined.

That happens, warrant tossed. Everything returned. Lawsuits dropped on everyone.


39 posted on 08/22/2022 8:40:36 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lockbox

The original would be filed in the court in which it was taken out.

Copies given to the Fed’s.

Three parts to search warrants: affidavit, the actual order to search and the return of service.

The actual court order to search, is what is supposed to be left on the premises. The affidavit isn’t left.

They didn’t leave any paperwork?


40 posted on 08/22/2022 8:46:03 AM PDT by qaz123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson