Why won’t Merrick Garland release the affidavit for the Mar A Lago invasion?

[Uncensored2008]

Again, idiot, no he didn't. Epstein had his own team of lawyers:

Epstein Files | The Ape Investors

In 1974 Jeffrey Epstein dropped out of Cooper Union to teach physics and math at the Dalton School without ever achieving a degree

www.theapeinvestors.com

​

Epstein's defense lawyers included Roy Black, Gerald Lefcourt, Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz, and former U.S. Solicitor General Ken Starr.​

Reinhart provided legal counsel for the Epstein team - fact.

Lie all you like. It's not like you have to worry about sullying your reputation...

I wonder if Bruce has a shirt with "I

Bill Clinton" on one side and "Team Kiddie Diddler" on the other?

 

[Sixties Fan]

Asked a judge or had the little Goebbels run a propaganda piece?

Regardless - no judge DID "unseal" it and the Oberfuhrer released nothing - nor would he ever have.

Yet the warrant was released - and not to a Reich propaganda outlet, but to the legitimate press, to Breitbart who would not cover up the facts on behalf of the party. Which means the Trump team released it.

After all, Garland can make all the noise he wants, he NEVER intended for the warrant to be released, or he would have just done it instead of a bullshit cover story about asking a judge (darn, the judge turned me down, I really wanted to release it instead of orchestrating leaks, but the judge just wouldn't let me..)

Trump outsmarted you Nazi vermin, yet again.

Is this what you are talking about?
----------

On Friday, Breitbart, the far-right news site, was neck-and-neck with the Wall Street Journal on a huge scoop when they released details about the search warrant that was issued for Mar-a-Lago — former President Donald Trump's Florida estate — earlier this week.

But Breitbart completely butchered their scoop.

Rather than focusing on the specific details of the warrant, or the itemized list of property that federal agents seized from Trump's home on suspicion of potentially serious crimes (the outlet obtained both documents and only laterpublished them in full), author Matthew Boyle initially chose to write about when the warrant was issued. Specifically, Boyle reported that the warrant was signed by a federal judge three days before the FBI raided Trump's home.

Why does that matter? It doesn't, really, unless you're Breitbart:

"Why the authorities waited several days to execute service of the warrant if the matter rose to such a serious national security issue is unclear," Boyle wrote. "If what federal agents intended to obtain from the raid was such a risk to national security, the fact they decided to linger and wait for several days before executing is likely to become a major point of contention as this debate plays out in front of the public."

Yep, that's right. The possibility that Trump left office in possession of documents that could present a threat to national security got less attention from Breitbart — the first publication to get the genuinely newsworthy scoop — than the fact that it took federal authorities three days to raid Trump's home after a search warrant was signed.

As expected, the outlet was roundly criticized online for its editorial choices. That led to Boyle amending the original piece to include several long-winded updates, including more specifics about the documents the outlet obtained. However, those additional updates only provided more fodder for criticism.

For example, an update at 2:25 p.m. ET reads: "Attachment B to the warrant delineates the three statutes which agents are pursuing evidence under. They are: 18 USC 793, 2071, and 1519."

What Boyle initially failed to mention in that update is that 18 U.S. Code 793 is a statute that's part of the Espionage Act. That specific law makes it a crime to remove or misuse information related to national defense, a serious offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Federal agents had enough reason to believe Trump violated the Espionage Act that they raided his home to search for evidence, but Boyle at first floated it as a passing detail.

Boyle later outlined each of the three federal statutes (18 USC sections 793, 2071 and 1519) that federal authorities believe Trump potentially violated in an update at 2:37 p.m., but again downplayed their seriousness. With relation to to section 793, the Breitbart site now reads: "The first statute is the one that has likely provoked media speculation about so-called 'nuclear' documents: it applies to a broad range of defense 'information,' from code books to ordinary photographs."

Then, in an update posted six minutes later: "All of this is technically irrelevant anyway because Trump —who as president has original and absolute declassification authority — said he declassified all of these documents."

As the afternoon wore on, other publications obtained the same documents and reported them in far greater detail, essentially squashing Breitbart's big get. And as of early evening Eastern Time on Friday, Breitbart appears to have finally ceased with the incessant, piecemeal updates.

Breitbart gets huge scoop about Trump search warrant, butchers it

Breitbart published a copy of the search warrant issued to Donald Trump before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago. True to form, they butchered it.

www.sfgate.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Reinhart provided legal counsel for the Epstein team - fact.

Lie all you like. It's not like you have to worry about sullying your reputation...

I wonder if Bruce has a shirt with "I View attachment 683414 Bill Clinton" on one side and "Team Kiddie Diddler" on the other?

Where does it say that Reinhart provided legal counsel for Epstein team.

For what case, because it could not be the one we posted about. Make it clear which case it was, and when.

 

[jc456]

And that is....like 2020 election fraud?

It’s been confirmed

 

[Faun]

Reinhart provided legal counsel for the Epstein team - fact.

Lie all you like. It's not like you have to worry about sullying your reputation...

I wonder if Bruce has a shirt with "I View attachment 683414 Bill Clinton" on one side and "Team Kiddie Diddler" on the other?

Says you citing you.

Meanwhile, you've been shown Epstein had his own team of lawyers. You've been shown Reinhart didn't represent Epstein. And you claimed Reinhart was Epstein's lawyer.

You're batshit insane, Fruitcake.

 

[jc456]

Is this what you are talking about?
----------

On Friday, Breitbart, the far-right news site, was neck-and-neck with the Wall Street Journal on a huge scoop when they released details about the search warrant that was issued for Mar-a-Lago — former President Donald Trump's Florida estate — earlier this week.

But Breitbart completely butchered their scoop.

Rather than focusing on the specific details of the warrant, or the itemized list of property that federal agents seized from Trump's home on suspicion of potentially serious crimes (the outlet obtained both documents and only laterpublished them in full), author Matthew Boyle initially chose to write about when the warrant was issued. Specifically, Boyle reported that the warrant was signed by a federal judge three days before the FBI raided Trump's home.

Why does that matter? It doesn't, really, unless you're Breitbart:

"Why the authorities waited several days to execute service of the warrant if the matter rose to such a serious national security issue is unclear," Boyle wrote. "If what federal agents intended to obtain from the raid was such a risk to national security, the fact they decided to linger and wait for several days before executing is likely to become a major point of contention as this debate plays out in front of the public."

Yep, that's right. The possibility that Trump left office in possession of documents that could present a threat to national security got less attention from Breitbart — the first publication to get the genuinely newsworthy scoop — than the fact that it took federal authorities three days to raid Trump's home after a search warrant was signed.

As expected, the outlet was roundly criticized online for its editorial choices. That led to Boyle amending the original piece to include several long-winded updates, including more specifics about the documents the outlet obtained. However, those additional updates only provided more fodder for criticism.

For example, an update at 2:25 p.m. ET reads: "Attachment B to the warrant delineates the three statutes which agents are pursuing evidence under. They are: 18 USC 793, 2071, and 1519."

What Boyle initially failed to mention in that update is that 18 U.S. Code 793 is a statute that's part of the Espionage Act. That specific law makes it a crime to remove or misuse information related to national defense, a serious offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Federal agents had enough reason to believe Trump violated the Espionage Act that they raided his home to search for evidence, but Boyle at first floated it as a passing detail.

Boyle later outlined each of the three federal statutes (18 USC sections 793, 2071 and 1519) that federal authorities believe Trump potentially violated in an update at 2:37 p.m., but again downplayed their seriousness. With relation to to section 793, the Breitbart site now reads: "The first statute is the one that has likely provoked media speculation about so-called 'nuclear' documents: it applies to a broad range of defense 'information,' from code books to ordinary photographs."

Then, in an update posted six minutes later: "All of this is technically irrelevant anyway because Trump —who as president has original and absolute declassification authority — said he declassified all of these documents."

As the afternoon wore on, other publications obtained the same documents and reported them in far greater detail, essentially squashing Breitbart's big get. And as of early evening Eastern Time on Friday, Breitbart appears to have finally ceased with the incessant, piecemeal updates.

Breitbart gets huge scoop about Trump search warrant, butchers it

Breitbart published a copy of the search warrant issued to Donald Trump before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago. True to form, they butchered it.

www.sfgate.com

Boring

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is this what you are talking about?
----------

On Friday, Breitbart, the far-right news site, was neck-and-neck with the Wall Street Journal on a huge scoop when they released details about the search warrant that was issued for Mar-a-Lago — former President Donald Trump's Florida estate — earlier this week.

But Breitbart completely butchered their scoop.

Rather than focusing on the specific details of the warrant, or the itemized list of property that federal agents seized from Trump's home on suspicion of potentially serious crimes (the outlet obtained both documents and only laterpublished them in full), author Matthew Boyle initially chose to write about when the warrant was issued. Specifically, Boyle reported that the warrant was signed by a federal judge three days before the FBI raided Trump's home.

Why does that matter? It doesn't, really, unless you're Breitbart:

"Why the authorities waited several days to execute service of the warrant if the matter rose to such a serious national security issue is unclear," Boyle wrote. "If what federal agents intended to obtain from the raid was such a risk to national security, the fact they decided to linger and wait for several days before executing is likely to become a major point of contention as this debate plays out in front of the public."

Yep, that's right. The possibility that Trump left office in possession of documents that could present a threat to national security got less attention from Breitbart — the first publication to get the genuinely newsworthy scoop — than the fact that it took federal authorities three days to raid Trump's home after a search warrant was signed.

As expected, the outlet was roundly criticized online for its editorial choices. That led to Boyle amending the original piece to include several long-winded updates, including more specifics about the documents the outlet obtained. However, those additional updates only provided more fodder for criticism.

For example, an update at 2:25 p.m. ET reads: "Attachment B to the warrant delineates the three statutes which agents are pursuing evidence under. They are: 18 USC 793, 2071, and 1519."

What Boyle initially failed to mention in that update is that 18 U.S. Code 793 is a statute that's part of the Espionage Act. That specific law makes it a crime to remove or misuse information related to national defense, a serious offense punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Federal agents had enough reason to believe Trump violated the Espionage Act that they raided his home to search for evidence, but Boyle at first floated it as a passing detail.

Boyle later outlined each of the three federal statutes (18 USC sections 793, 2071 and 1519) that federal authorities believe Trump potentially violated in an update at 2:37 p.m., but again downplayed their seriousness. With relation to to section 793, the Breitbart site now reads: "The first statute is the one that has likely provoked media speculation about so-called 'nuclear' documents: it applies to a broad range of defense 'information,' from code books to ordinary photographs."

Then, in an update posted six minutes later: "All of this is technically irrelevant anyway because Trump —who as president has original and absolute declassification authority — said he declassified all of these documents."

As the afternoon wore on, other publications obtained the same documents and reported them in far greater detail, essentially squashing Breitbart's big get. And as of early evening Eastern Time on Friday, Breitbart appears to have finally ceased with the incessant, piecemeal updates.

Breitbart gets huge scoop about Trump search warrant, butchers it

Breitbart published a copy of the search warrant issued to Donald Trump before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago. True to form, they butchered it.

www.sfgate.com

Wow, now THOSE are some sour grapes from getting scooped.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Boring

Oh, I found it hilarious.

SF Gate, perhaps the most leftist daily in the nation, is absolutely shitting themselves.

The come off like a two-year old screaming that the new toy their sibling got is stupid and poo-poo head.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Oh, I found it hilarious.

SF Gate, perhaps the most leftist daily in the nation, is absolutely shitting themselves.

The come off like a two-year old screaming that the new toy their sibling got is stupid and poo-poo head.

You all wish.

If that is the weed that makes you happy keep on smoking it.

 

[Sixties Fan]

Right, Uncensored laughs but as usual will not give the information he so boasts about.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You all wish.

If that is the weed that makes you happy keep on smoking it.

Seriously, that has to be the sour grapes tantrum of all time.

I suspect the author - who no one has ever heard of - tried to hit on Matt Boyle and got turned down. I think Boyle is an Orthodox Jew, so the the advances of this poofter would fall on deaf ears.

 

[otto105]

What about relevance, otter?



You're so dumb yet so deliciously stupid....

How so?

 

[otto105]

I'm not a democrat, otter.

What is the difference between "Mein Kampf" and the "2022 democrat party platform?"

Trick question, there is none.

Okay, I happen to want to know what you believe is that same.


Can we go line by line?

 

[otto105]

Reinhart provided legal counsel for the Epstein team - fact.

Lie all you like. It's not like you have to worry about sullying your reputation...

I wonder if Bruce has a shirt with "I View attachment 683414 Bill Clinton" on one side and "Team Kiddie Diddler" on the other?

Reinhardt contracted for the services of the pilots who flew flights.


Not the trump/Einstein young girl bois.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How so?

There is a word, "Malapropism."

I'm going to petition to have it renamed "otterism."

 

[otto105]

There is a word, "Malapropism."

I'm going to petition to have it renamed "otterism."

How so?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Okay, I happen to want to know what you believe is that same.


Can we go line by line?

LOL

One of the central themes of that earlier Nazi's screed was his use of a scapegoat. Now Hitler wasn't the first to use a scapegoat to focus hatred in order consolidate power, in fact Hitler gave credit to American Democrats for showing him the way. Still Hitler had a level of hatred for his scapegoat, the Jews, that is only matched by the level of hate leveled at your scapegoat, the whites - today.

 

[otto105]

LOL

One of the central themes of that earlier Nazi's screed was his use of a scapegoat. Now Hitler wasn't the first to use a scapegoat to focus hatred in order consolidate power, in fact Hitler gave credit to American Democrats for showing him the way. Still Hitler had a level of hatred for his scapegoat, the Jews, that is only matched by the level of hate leveled at your scapegoat, the whites - today.

Okay, does that include sycophancy to the state? Like defunding the FBI because…


Or the labeling of any opposition as RINO or leftists?


Also, how many nationalities did the Nazi movement include?

I think they lived white privilege…

 

[Billy000]

No board Dimwinger can explain all the secrecy and cover ups?

Any answer we would come up with you would dismiss so what is the point? Hard to say why exactly without speculating like some armchair critic. It seems pretty standard, however, that critical details are kept from the public for the sake of the integrity of the investigation. I am reminded of the prosecutor investigating the Ulvade police response being grilled by the parents about details that day or what specifically being looked at as far as investigating those officers. She said she couldn’t divulge details because it would undermine the case that would eventually be discussed in court.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Reinhardt contracted for the services of the pilots who flew flights.


Not the trump/Einstein young girl bois.

You think Albert Einstein was one of the clients of the democrat pedophile pimp Jeff Epstein?

Nein, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Robert DiNero, Matt Daemon, Kevin Spacey, Prince Andrew, Katie Couric (kinky)

But Professor Albert and Donald Trump were never guests of the democrat pedophile island,