FBI Raid On Trump's Mar-A-Lago Had No Valid Legal Basis

[Magnus]

No one is. He was president she was Secretary of State. Different security clearances

Yeah, sure. Ask your douche bag to trot that out in court. Let's see how far he gets.

 

[Magnus]

no, that's what the constitution tells me. But you haven't a clue about what that is. peanut butter boi.

Prove it. Go.

 

[Nostra]

You were serious? Man, you are more of a retard than I thought. Sure, I'll play along.

The National Archives and Records Administration earlier this year retrieved 15 boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago. The National Archives said it arranged for the transport of the records in January and that talks with Mr. Trump’s representatives began in 2021.

The 1978 Presidential Records Act, adopted after President Richard Nixon’s attempt to claim ownership of his own White House records, mandates every administration take steps to maintain and preserve adequate records. The records automatically transfer into the legal custody of the Archives after a president leaves office.

Multiple criminal statutes cover the mishandling of government records. Former prosecutors said that if Mr. Trump were accused of a crime related to removing or destroying documents, charges under at least one, and possibly two, statutes related to improper handling of government records were most likely.

One of those laws bars government employees from removing classified information and holding it at an unauthorized location. Someone convicted of that offense could face a fine and up to five years in prison.

A second statute makes it a crime to conceal, remove or destroy records filed with courts or in public offices, punishable with a fine and up to three years in prison. Someone convicted of breaking that law “shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States,” it says.

Government Records Case Against Trump Could Raise Rare Legal Issues

Multiple laws could be in play, along with questions about whether the former president could be barred from running again if convicted.

www.wsj.com

I have quoted two legal problems that your orange douchebag is facing. Try to keep up.

Now your turn. Now prove that there is an "obvious weaponizing of the DOJ and the FBI and 0 transparency". Go

I'll bet you won't. You are a retard and a coward. But, hey, prove me wrong.

First, still waiting for you to quote my post saying what you claimed I said, liar.

Second, the rest of your post outlines hypotheticals. I live in the real world. You should try it sometime, Simp.

Now, where is that post?

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

LOL Rump should retain you as counsel. Your excuse is even more novel than the ones they have come up with. Even they do not argue over the meaning of "legal" and "physical" custody.

Sorry chum, you lose. You should have done a bit more research.

Transfer of Custody. At the conclusion of a president’s term of office, Subsection 2203(g) provides for the transfer control of custody of presidential records from the president to the archivist, who must deposit the records in an archive.

Trump’s Presidential Records Act Violations: Short- and Long-Term Solutions

What are available mechanisms for accountability against a president who violates these rules?

www.lawfareblog.com

Also here...
In 1978, Congress enacted the PRA, which applied the public custody and control principle of the PRMPA to presidential records generally. The PRA states that “[t]he United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records.” It establishes a complex system for processing presidential records and assigns to the archivist of the United States (and NARA, which the archivist oversees) independent legal responsibility for custody, preservation and access control of these records.
Biden vs. Trump: Who Has the Last Word on Presidential Records?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Nothing new.

"(2) The Archivist shall deposit all such Presidential records in a Presidential archival depository or another archival facility operated by the United States."

"The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter."

There is no set timeline. There is no penalty prescribed for failure to comply. There is nothing that provides a basis for a raid while negotiations were ongoing.

The return of records after the end of a term seems to be a process former presidents go through based upon discussions and negotiations.

They sent in 30 jack-booted thugs with a warrant that allowed forceful removal of all documents, including passports and privileged info.

 

[jc456]

So what? That's the whole crux of the matter. The records need to go back to the archive. Man, you really are a retard.

Why aren’t obammy’s not there six years later? Eventually is when they get there.

 

[Lastamender]

Actually you idiots are. Prove that there was an "obvious weaponizing of the DOJ and the FBI and 0 transparency". Go.

They have proven it. Again, it is right in front of your goofy traitorous face.

 

[jc456]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Nothing new.

"(2) The Archivist shall deposit all such Presidential records in a Presidential archival depository or another archival facility operated by the United States."

"The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter."

There is no set timeline. There is no penalty prescribed for failure to comply. There is nothing that provides a basis for a raid while negotiations were ongoing.

The return of records after the end of a term seems to be a process former presidents go through based upon discussions and negotiations.

They sent in 30 jack-booted thugs with a warrant that allowed forceful removal of all documents, including passports and privileged info.

Exactly

 

[jc456]

Prove it. Go.

The constitution can be found online

 

[Magnus]

First, still waiting for you to quote my post saying what you claimed I said, liar.

Second, the rest of your post outlines hypotheticals. I live in the real world. You should try it sometime, Simp.

Now, where is that post?

You are right. I confused you with the other retard. All you retards are starting to sound the same. My bad.

Second. You asked. I delivered. You don't like it? Go suck an egg.

 

[Magnus]

The constitution can be found online

Yes, retard. I know the Constitution can be found online.

But, prove that what you stated is in it. Go.

 

[Magnus]

They have proven it. Again, it is right in front of your goofy traitorous face.

So, in other words, you couldn't prove it. Thought so. You retards are big on bluster. Short on facts. Thanks for playing.

 

[Magnus]

Why aren’t obammy’s not there six years later? Eventually is when they get there.

Waaaa... Not fair. Why is everybody picking on my orange douche bag... waaaa

 

[jc456]

Yes, retard. I know the Constitution can be found online.

But, prove that what you stated is in it. Go.

That what’s in it? I don’t do mind reading

 

[jc456]

Waaaa... Not fair. Why is everybody picking on my orange douche bag... waaaa

Never said any such thing liar! Not even close.

Looks like you are whining at me

 

[Magnus]

That what’s in it? I don’t do mind reading

Retard. You made an assertion. Now, quit stalling and start proving. Go.

 

[Care4all]

You're desperate to believe that aren't you?

I'd just like the WH furniture back from hitlary since she won't be going back there herself.

I wonder if Monica ever got that blue dress back or is it still in Epstein's closet?

View attachment 686583
.

The Clintons gave the furniture they got as gifts back, and then purchased some of it, from our gvt.

I thought Monica's blue dress was in the Clinton presidential library?!!! J/K

 

[Magnus]

Never said any such thing liar! Not even close.

Looks like you are whining at me

Sure, retard. My guy is in the WH while your orange douche bag is in Florida scared of the next FBI visit.

 

[Nostra]

You are right. I confused you with the other retard. All you retards are starting to sound the same. My bad.

Second. You asked. I delivered. You don't like it? Go suck an egg.

Funny how you can't keep posters straight but call others retards.

You delivered wishful thinking and hypotheticals, Simp.

Grow a brain.

 

[dudmuck]

The NARA was in the process of obtaining the records and Trump had previously provided any records they wanted physical custody of, and he was cooperating.

If you read the WSJ opinion, they argue that there no definitive timeline for turning everything over. Additionally, the PRA says that not even the DOJ or Biden can have access to Trump's records without showing need. That's quite telling.

There was not probable cause for a raid, but maybe we'll see some lame reasoning in the affidavit once released.

They are not Trump's records, they belong to the executive branch. The documents should have never left the white house, instead NARA should have taken them from the white house into the archives. Taking them to mar-a-lago is a crime.

 

[Nostra]

They are not Trump's records, they belong to the executive branch. The documents should have never left the white house, instead NARA should have taken them from the white house into the archives. Taking them to mar-a-lago is a crime.

That depends. The court has ruled a President can deem any document his personal document.