Retired FBI boss disassembles Trump search warrant: Feds ‘going to regret this’

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
108,065
62,690
1
It should be crystal clear it is an attempt to stop TRUMP 2024.

https://justthenews.com/politics-po...-chief-raid-trump-home-i-think-they-are-going

The FBI's former intelligence chief declared Friday the agency should not have criminalized the records dispute between Donald Trump and the National Archives and that the bureau appears to have failed to meet the probable cause standard for the invasive search of the former president's Florida estate.

"I think they're going to regret this," retired Assistant Director Kevin Brock told the "Just the News, Not Noise" television show after reviewing a heavily redacted affidavit the FBI used to persuade a judge to allow the Aug. 8 search at Mar-a-Lago.

Brock, ordinarily an ardent defender of his former agency, has raised concerns for several days that the bureau did not exhaust other means to resolve the dispute over presidential and alleged classified records Trump kept. He said he did not believe the FBI adequately considered the possibility that Trump had wide latitude to declassify records and declare them personal.

He said Friday his concerns were only heightened by the court-ordered release of the search warrant affidavit, which he noted was still heavily redacted.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
6,255
10,677
1
It isn’t the FBI. It’s the DOJ forcing the FBI. I’m pretty confident that this was not a decision made by the FBI.
There is no reason for your confidence.

After all, the FBI went on their own and censored Hunter Biden laptop as disinformation - a story they KNEW to be true.

Don't be a dupe like Sean "good guys in the rank and file of the fbi" Hannity.
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
25,373
29,846
1
An altered state
It isn’t the FBI. It’s the DOJ forcing the FBI. I’m pretty confident that this was not a decision made by the FBI.
Disagree. It’s both. The FBI could have stood up and refused the raid until all other options were exhausted. And the FBI was an integral part of Russiagate, framing Gen Flynn, going after Carter Page, Stone, Navarro, and more.

Both are scared ....petrified......of Trump. He must be stopped at all costs.
 

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
Sorry, WHAT?
Clinton took highly secret materials and illegally moved them to her private server -- actions that precisely violate 18 USC
§ 793 (f) which states:

"Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody..."

Her guilt and status as a felon (though not charged) couldn't be clearer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206 and psuted

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
Wow. That made up bizarro world, Republican fantasy land narrative that you folks create requires quite the imagination.
No, just the ability to read a clear, simple criminal statute and the common sense to know that a high govt officer can't put all of her communications on an insecure private server.
 
  • Like
Reactions: royboy

royboy

Well-Known Member
Nov 9, 2001
46,837
32,273
1
Lewisville, NC
Wow. That made up bizarro world, Republican fantasy land narrative that you folks create requires quite the imagination.
So says @PaoliLion

A man so pleased with himself that he likely sports a shit-eating grin.

(1) n. A shit eating grin is a very wide and, to the outside observer, stupid looking grin, usually showing smugness, self-satisfaction, or inner humor.
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,786
6,385
1
No, just the ability to read a clear, simple criminal statute and the common sense to know that a high govt officer can't put all of her communications on an insecure private server.

I take it that you’re calling for Trump’s head right now
 

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
I take it that you’re calling for Trump’s head right now
Decent chance that Trump violated statute, although he had the right to declassify and Clinton didn't so he has a legal defense not possessed by Clinton . Clinton's violation much worse than Trumps (all of her email records were on private server which was insecure) and she was given a pass. If she was given a pass for that and destroying 30,000 emails Trump is entitled to a pass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Spin Meister

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,786
6,385
1
Decent chance that Trump violated statute, although he had the right to declassify and Clinton didn't so he has a legal defense not possessed by Clinton . Clinton's violation much worse than Trumps (all of her email records were on private server which was insecure) and she was given a pass. If she was given a pass for that and destroying 30,000 emails Trump is entitled to a pass.

You mean the situation where they found “no deliberate mishandling of classified information”????
 

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
You mean the situation where they found “no deliberate mishandling of classified information”????
Absolutely ridiculous conclusion. She had been informed of the rules. Only reason she did it was to protect herself politically and have control over the information so that embarrassing information wouldn't come out. She has never given an innocent explanation of why she moved these documents to her own, personal, insecure server.

Doesn't matter though because negligent or grossly negligent mis placement of these docs/information is also a felony.
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,786
6,385
1
Absolutely ridiculous conclusion. She had been informed of the rules. Only reason she did it was to protect herself politically and have control over the information so that embarrassing information wouldn't come out. She has never given an innocent explanation of why she moved these documents to her own, personal, insecure server.

Doesn't matter though because negligent or grossly negligent mis placement of these docs/information is also a felony.

Sorry bud, I know you hate the verdict, but that’s what it was.
 

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
Sorry bud, I know you hate the verdict, but that’s what it was.
Sorry bud, the statute is 100% clear.

You are welcome to break down the statute and explain how Hillary's personal possession of all of her emails didn't violate the statute.

Comey claimed that she was exculpated because she didn't have intent. (I believe that is wrong because she never offered an innocent explanation) Doesn't matter though because statute clearly doesn't require intent. Comey and Dem politicians know how stupid their followers are and dishonestly threw this out even though it is directly contradicted by statute.
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,786
6,385
1
Sorry bud, the statute is 100% clear.

You are welcome to break down the statute and explain how Hillary's personal possession of all of her emails didn't violate the statute.

Comey claimed that she was exculpated because she didn't have intent. (I believe that is wrong because she never offered an innocent explanation) Doesn't matter though because statute clearly doesn't require intent. Comey and Dem politicians know how stupid their followers are and dishonestly threw this out even though it is directly contradicted by statute.

Do you realize how idiotic you look??
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,786
6,385
1
Projection. Thank you for admitting that you are totally ignorant of the criminal statute and have no desire to understand it.

Let’s see, the FBI investigated and found that Clinton was careless, but there was no evidence of criminal intent. Trump’s justice department reviewed the case for 2 years and recommended no charges. Finally, the Trump‘s State department investigated And found “no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”

Yet, @dailybuck777, certifiable, internet nutjob thinks he’s got it all figured out. I guess the joke’s on me for wasting a few minutes of my life to point out how stupidly absurd you are
 
  • Haha
Reactions: psuted

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
25,373
29,846
1
An altered state
Decent chance that Trump violated statute, although he had the right to declassify and Clinton didn't so he has a legal defense not possessed by Clinton . Clinton's violation much worse than Trumps (all of her email records were on private server which was insecure) and she was given a pass. If she was given a pass for that and destroying 30,000 emails Trump is entitled to a pass.
There were rumors that she got a spy of ours executed in Iran. A nuclear scientist that was cooperating with us. She used his cover name in her emails, Iran realized who it was, and executed him.
 

TN Lion

Well-Known Member
Sep 6, 2001
33,630
14,073
1
There is no reason for your confidence.

After all, the FBI went on their own and censored Hunter Biden laptop as disinformation - a story they KNEW to be true.

Don't be a dupe like Sean "good guys in the rank and file of the fbi" Hannity.
Good guys that are 100% focused on their miserable careers and pensions. And yes, Hannity is a dupe.
 

dailybuck777

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2018
11,228
16,017
1
Let’s see, the FBI investigated and found that Clinton was careless, but there was no evidence of criminal intent.
Extremely stupid dumb*ss. Carelessness is a synonym for negligence. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/negligence#synonyms

Further the original draft of FBI investigation stated: ""Secretary Clinton, and others, used the private email server in a manner that was grossly negligent with respect to the handling of classified material." https://www.newsweek.com/comey-drafted-statement-clinton-grossly-negligent-email-fbi-704439

Of course, the FBI trying to protect Clinton and its pre-ordained decision not to prosecute her changed the terminology to "extremely careless" knowing that dumb people like you would think under the terms of the statute she had not committed a crime even though carelessness is a synonym for negligence.

You have proven wptlion to be correct.