It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
Why was a magistrate used instead of a judge?
Reinhart represented some of Epstein’s staff, including a scheduler and pilots for the infamous Lolita Express, after leaving his position at the U.S. Attorney’s office in 2008 to set up a private legal firm.
The judge was also accused in a lawsuit at the time of breaking Justice Department’s policies by using information from his previous government job to aid his work as a private attorney. Although Reinhart denied the accusation, the judge’s former supervisors at the U.S. Attorney’s Office said that “he learned confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter.”
Why did President Trump increase the severity of a security law that we are told he himself then broke?
Why did he leave documents that he supposedly intended to use against the national security if the USA in the same place that they were observed by the authorities on a previous visit?
Why were these documents packed up for him by the GSA? Was he aware of the contents?
Considering everything Trump has said over the years about the USA what would be his motive to betray his country?
Why was a magistrate used instead of a judge?
hy did the FBI demand that the cameras at Mar-a-largo be turned off?
Why did they arrive unannounced instead of showing the same courtesy that they showed on previous visits?
This raid is unprecedented, why didn’t the sitting President know?
Does ATS have any answers or just more questions?
originally posted by: Topcraft
a reply to: NorthOfStuff
Perhaps the better question would be. Why would someone from Canada want to stir up a bitter conversation?
originally posted by: NorthOfStuff
a reply to: Axios
Thanks for taking the time to go through the questions.
Is it true that the FBI was aware of and actually saw the additional documents and asked for them to be locked more securely?
originally posted by: Axios
That is speculation. No concrete evidence of this occurring has surfaced.?
originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: JinMI
you mental midgets don't really care about facts.
This. 1000%
All anti-Trumpers have an aversion to facts and reality, he has scarred their feelz for life.
originally posted by: Axios
originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: JinMI
you mental midgets don't really care about facts.
This. 1000%
All anti-Trumpers have an aversion to facts and reality, he has scarred their feelz for life.
lul, y'all are so bad@ss, feelings are for libs right?
Y'all can continue to think Papa Trump has not lied to you and the american people.
For the love of god, the GOP needs to find another candidate.
originally posted by: RazorV66
originally posted by: Axios
originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: JinMI
you mental midgets don't really care about facts.
This. 1000%
All anti-Trumpers have an aversion to facts and reality, he has scarred their feelz for life.
lul, y'all are so bad@ss, feelings are for libs right?
Y'all can continue to think Papa Trump has not lied to you and the american people.
For the love of god, the GOP needs to find another candidate.
Nope.
Trump will be the next president.
Start crying a river.
Magistrate was the appropriate authority, in the state and county, to issue the search warrant. Next level up would have been a circuit judge, I believe. But, that would not have been necessary, since a Magistrate had the required authority.
As it turns out, the fact that MAL staff did not turn off the cameras may have further fueled concerns within the Intel community regarding the access and security under which the most sensitive documents recovered, were kept.
Why should a sitting President have any knowledge, not to say, involvement, with ANY action taken by the Department of Justice (DoJ)?
Are you suggesting that a President, which is a political office should be involved, perhaps to the extent of exercising "influence" over who is, and isn't, investigated or charged with crimes?
Regardless of what you may, or may not believe about how the Justice system works in this country, I really do not think you would want to Codify cronyism as a fundamental principle of our laws.