Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

Logical reasoning implies that this pic is true in the lefts POV and why many see all these witch hunts as nothing burgers.

A reasonable, logical person can see this.

Based on what evidence?

Based on what evidence?

What was the warrant based on? Oh yeah, much like the emails about rapback between HPD and the FBI, 95% redacted.

Think deep.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

What was the warrant based on? Oh yeah, much like the emails about rapback between HPD and the FBI, 95% redacted.

Think deep.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

If you have to explain what's "reasonable, logical" to someone, you're wasting your time.

He wants you to spoon-feed him details that the DOJ is refusing to make public.  He can't seem to comprehend that refusing to disclose that information is an admission that their decision can't stand up to public scrutiny.

The warrant was issued and executed by people without proper clearance or need to know *IF* the redacted information is classified.  Seems like that's a bigger breach of national security than having the papers sitting in boxes undisturbed.

If you have to explain what's "reasonable, logical" to someone, you're wasting your time.

He wants you to spoon-feed him details that the DOJ is refusing to make public.  He can't seem to comprehend that refusing to disclose that information is an admission that their decision can't stand up to public scrutiny.

The warrant was issued and executed by people without proper clearance or need to know *IF* the redacted information is classified.  Seems like that's a bigger breach of national security than having the papers sitting in boxes undisturbed.

That's why I didn't get into details. I know whataboutism will be used and the conversation will just go in circles.

Is EEF a cleared professional? EEF handled classified documents?

What was the warrant based on? Oh yeah, much like the emails about rapback between HPD and the FBI, 95% redacted.

Think deep.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

So just because the FBI won't share all the details of an ongoing investigation with the public, that proves to you that that they have no evidence justifying their search warrant and therefore the judge is corrupt? That is a huge non-sequitur and it is also not how things work.

Maybe I am wrong though, what do I know about police investigations. I guess law enforcement has to hand over all evidence of an ongoing investigation just because the target/suspect demands it. 

Keep in mind the burden of proof is on you, you are making a claim that the judge is corrupt so its your job to support your claim. If you can back it up then do so but if not don't act like its my fault you wont answer.

So just because the FBI won't share all the details of an ongoing investigation with the public, that proves to you that that they have no evidence justifying their search warrant and therefore the judge is corrupt? That is a huge non-sequitur and it is also not how things work.

Maybe I am wrong though, what do I know about police investigations. I guess law enforcement has to hand over all evidence of an ongoing investigation just because the target/suspect demands it. 

Keep in mind the burden of proof is on you, you are making a claim that the judge is corrupt so its your job to support your claim. If you can back it up then do so but if not don't act like its my fault you wont answer.

Yes

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Yes

Damn.  You had to quote him so I can see it, didn't you?!   

So just because the FBI won't share all the details of an ongoing investigation with the public, that proves to you that that they have no evidence justifying their search warrant and therefore the judge is corrupt?  [snipped b/c there's already enough suffering in the world!]

Nobody is asking for EVERY DETAIL in an ongoing investigation to be released publicly.

I believe the ONLY thing requested to be released to the public was a copy of the warrant and the initiating affidavit -- not a 38-page document with 86% of it blacked out from view.

In total, 11 of the pages in the affidavit were completely redacted when it was made public,
while substantial portions of 23 other pages were blacked out.

https://nypost.com/2022/08/26/affidavit-behind-trump-mar-a-lago-raid-finally-released/

For those who failed Math 101, that's a total of 33 pages completely or significantly blacked out -- out of 38 pages.

Every detail?  How about MOST of the details?

Damn.  You had to quote him so I can see it, didn't you?!   

Maybe I'm working with him so you can see all his post. #tinfoil

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

is that Karl Rhodes?

I believe the ONLY thing requested to be released to the public was a copy of the warrant and the initiating affidavit -- not a 38-page document with 86% of it blacked out from view.

The affidavit would usually contain large amount of information about the case up until that point. Making the whole affidavit public would mean the FBI would be showing most of their hand. It may not contain every single bit of evidence in the case but it would contain a lot. There would be no reason that the affidavit be made public in the middle of the investigation and it isn't a standard practice. Trump is getting special treatment, most other targets or suspects would not get any of the affidavit made public in the middle of the investigation.

Publishing an unredacted affidavit would not only shoot their investigation in the foot because Trump could predict their next move but it would also risk the identity of witnesses.
Why do you think Trumps request to see the affidavit supersedes those concerns?

Yes

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Like I said, non sequitur and it isn't how things work.