New FBI Memos Drop Bombshell About the Mar-a-Lago Ransacking

[Mort Watt]

Originally Posted by texassapper

So do you believe the emails turned over to Congress are fraudulent? The FBI Washington Field Office never told the DOJ that they did not believe they had probable cause?

We already covered this. We want to see context and relevancy. From someone other than that fucking shill Grassley and those "basised" pieces of shit at Town Hall.

You should want the same.

.

[Yssup Rider]

Ransacking???

Your headline (or whomever's you cut and paste) calls the search a "ransacking?"

Can you somehow qualify that statement? Regardless of who secured the warrant and who's crying about it, the raid did not appear to be a ransacking.

Not to pick at your rhetoric in addition to your sources, TWK, but you leave us no choice. BTW - this BOMBSHELL is posted on a lot of sites that aren't what you quoted. Or Tech Dirt, lol.

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAH!

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by texassapper

So do you believe the emails turned over to Congress are fraudulent? The FBI Washington Field Office never told the DOJ that they did not believe they had probable cause?

They had a warrant. A judge signed it. Judge Aileen Cannon defended it.

Originally Posted by yeahsurewhatev

Judge Cannon's determination that this evidence does not undermine the finding of probable cause for the search warrant - https://storage.courtlistener.com/re...52.655.0_1.pdf

p.4 - "Even accepting those statements by the high-level FBI official, the Motion offers an insufficient basis to believe that inclusion in the affidavit of that official’s perspective (or of the dissenting views of other FBI agents as referenced generally in his testimony) would have altered the evidentiary calculus in support of probable cause for the alleged offenses. Nor did Defendant Trump meaningfully argue otherwise at the hearing. Further, insofar as the Motion characterizes the omitted information as a material misrepresentation in the 'request for sealing' section of the affidavit (rather than as an omission) [ECF No. 566 p. 6 (referencing ECF No. 566-2 ¶ 80)], the Court agrees with the Special Counsel that the sealing section does not undermine the probable cause set forth in the affidavit."

Just because they didn’t have probable cause at one point doesn’t mean that they didn’t get probable cause at a later point.

Again that’s why this is just a case of conspiratorial nonsense.

[Mort Watt]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

....
Just because they didn’t have probable cause at one point doesn’t mean that they didn’t get probable cause at a later point.

Again that’s why this is just a case of conspiratorial nonsense.

Very well said. Grassley released these memos with no context. Intentionally. Which makes it all very suspect. Town Hall then did what they always do: promoted this as if it was a....BOMBSHELL!!!!!!

All while major media basically ignores it. Not entirely. But they know that right now this just looks like partisan exaggeration. And deflection, of course.

.