Trump moves closer to getting a ''special master''

originally posted by: ATruGod
As if they haven't gone thru them already.

We'll just take their word for it.

The whole case would be thrown out and made moot, if the Special Master finds that the FBI took privileged information during their raid.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I've never heard of a special master. Is that something I can get if the fbi ever comes after me or is it just for rich elites?

Just calling it a "special" master oozes rich privilege.

it's just 100 BUCKS extra,

at a strip club.
50 bucks at a gay club.


don't forget your safe word.

a reply to: carewemust

The whole case would be thrown out and made moot, if the Special Master finds that the FBI took privileged information during their raid.

No. It would just mean that that particular stuff may not be admissible should there be an indictment. Unless, of course, it is evidence of criminal activity. That's different.

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: TerryMcGuire

A trump appointed judge....
Could've guessed that....wait I did and turns out I was correct.
BAPF as usual by both parties.

Nice try.
Obama appointed judge gave the FBI the raid “warrant”

a reply to: Phage

You’ve been gone for a while Phage.
Glad you came back to sort this all out.

a reply to: RazorV66

Short attention spans here. The whole "privilege" thing was gone through when Michael Cohen's office was searched.

Remember?

Special Master? Will there be BDSM gear involved? I know the original warrant judge was connected with Epstein, but this is ridiculous.

a reply to: ketsuko

I know the original warrant judge was connected with Epstein

"Connected" how? Exactly?

a reply to: RazorV66


Not at all my point but your deflection skills may seem good to you but you are not that art and just complain alot.
I will break this down for a Trumptard for your understanding.
The judge that has allowed for a special counsel ( which I am in full support of) is a Trump nominated judge.
You guys would be pooping your depends if this was the other way around.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ketsuko

I know the original warrant judge was connected with Epstein

"Connected" how? Exactly?

Supporting evidence doesn't matter here anymore.
They lost their marbles.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ketsuko

I know the original warrant judge was connected with Epstein

"Connected" how? Exactly?

Link 1

Link 2

He also worked as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida until 2008.

During his time as a federal prosecutor, Reinhart worked on the case against now-deceased Jeffrey Epstein, a convicted sex offender.

But, he switched sides in the middle of the case, quitting the US Attorney's office and going on to defend several of Epstein's employees. He later faced a lawsuit from several of Epstein's accusers, accusing him of sharing information with Epstein's legal team during the switch, The New York Post reported. He denied the allegations.

According to the Herald, which cited court documents, Reinhart resigned from the South Florida US Attorney’s Office effective on New Year’s Day 2008 and went to work for Epstein’s cohorts the following day.

Epstein, who was found dead in August 2019 of an apparent suicide in the Manhattan Correctional Center while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges, had hired a stable of high-powered lawyers for his defense in the late 2000s, including former independent counsel Kenneth Starr.

Ten months after starting work for Epstein’s co-conspirators, according to Federal Election Commission records, Reinhart gave $1,000 directly to the Obama campaign and another $1,000 to its fundraising arm, the Obama Victory Fund. Though the records show the judge made mostly small-dollar donations to his law firm’s political action committee in subsequent years, Reinhart also donated $500 to Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential campaign in November 2015.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: scraedtosleep

In the law of the United States, a special master is generally a subordinate official appointed by a judge to make sure that judicial orders are actually followed, or in the alternative, to hear evidence on behalf of the judge and make recommendations to the judge as to the disposition of a matter.

I don't know what Trump is hoping for here. Probably just another stalling tactic to slow down the process.

I can't disagree.
If that's what a special master does I can't see why trump would be so interested in getting one.
I feel like I'm missing something here. Unless it really is a staling tactic.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: scraedtosleep

In the law of the United States, a special master is generally a subordinate official appointed by a judge to make sure that judicial orders are actually followed, or in the alternative, to hear evidence on behalf of the judge and make recommendations to the judge as to the disposition of a matter.

I don't know what Trump is hoping for here. Probably just another stalling tactic to slow down the process.

I can't disagree.
If that's what a special master does I can't see why trump would be so interested in getting one.
I feel like I'm missing something here. Unless it really is a staling tactic.

You're missing the part where Trump got elected and all presumptions of sanity and legality went right out the window in the face of the shear, blind hatred.

a reply to: JinMI

Ah. So as an attorney he represented employees of Epstein's 14 years ago. That means he's "connected" to Epstein. Got it.

Oh, and he made small contributions to Obama and Jeb Bush. A man like that cannot be trusted any more than a judge who was nominated by Trump, I guess.

a reply to: ketsuko

You're missing the part where Trump got elected and all presumptions of sanity and legality went right out the window in the face of the shear, blind hatred.

Yeah, well. What comes around goes around. Remember them "birthers?" Remember "lock her up!" But we're venturing into mudpit territory now.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire

I don't know what Trump is hoping for here. Probably just another stalling tactic to slow down the process.

Think it through.

At this point, the FBI has two choices. They could allow this "Special Master" to examine all that was taken and verify that it was legally taken according to the warrant. Or, they could try to challenge this in a higher court.

If they opt to challenge this ruling, the obvious question would be why? If everything was on the up and up, they should have no objections to an independent verification. The Special Master would just come in, look over everything taken, and declare it was all classified material.

If they allow this Special Master to examine everything and he or she determines that all the material taken was legitimately classified and taken, then Trump can probably point to specific items and say, "What was classified about a toothbrush?", or photo, or whatever. Dollars to doughnuts somebody took a souvenir during that raid, or something else they shouldn't have taken.

Whatever route they take, the FBI's reputation is going to take a hit. They're probably past the point of caring about that, so they will decide to fight the ruling. In a few months, the media will give people another reason to hate Trump while telling people we need a Federal Police Force because the locals can't be trusted.

In any case, In spite of any illegal action, no one involved in the raid will go to jail, but that's to be expected.

a reply to: Phage

Ah. So as an attorney he represented employees of Epstein's 14 years ago. That means he's "connected" to Epstein. Got it.

Well, yes, Phage, it does. That's what connected means last time I checked.

Oh, and he made small contributions to Obama and Jeb Bush. A man like that cannot be trusted any more than a judge who was nominated by Trump, I guess.

I'd be more curious why he recused himself from the Trump v Clinton case but not this one. But thats just me.

a reply to: JinMI

I'd be more curious why he recused himself from the Trump v Clinton case but not this one.

Trump told you why. Don't you believe him?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JinMI

I'd be more curious why he recused himself from the Trump v Clinton case but not this one.

Trump told you why. Don't you believe him?

I missed the memo? Got a quote?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: kimish
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
I'll take a shot. I don't know why but the name "Jeff Sessions", former U.S. Attorney General, immediately came to mind.

Or Vindman. He has the security clearance and background.

Nah, how about Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or the most intelligent man Joe Biden knows- Hunter Biden.