It's becoming more and more clear that the Dems are VERY worried about Trump running again (and winning) and they are going to stop him by any means necessary.

This may have something to do with how they have deployed the Gestapo against Trump now, they must be in an absolute panic their little circus isn't working:

The J6 Hearings Had Virtually No Impact On Changing Public Views, New Poll Finds

Kind of a loaded question, in that nobody that supports Trump bought into the process to begin with and nobody who believed he caused it would change their minds to support Trump, no matter if the hearings were valid or not.

Hate Trump- zero influence
Like Trump- zero influence

The hearings were done simply to keep the J6 story alive nothing more...

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:
Wellp, Trump has gone and involved the fifth.

Can you elaborate?

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:
Wellp, Trump has gone and involved the fifth.

New York Attorney General Letitia James'

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:
Wellp, Trump has gone and involved the fifth.

Can you elaborate?

Trump invoked the 5th Amendment during a deposition today with regards to the NY attorney general's civil investigation into his real estate business.

Taking the 5th is more Presidential than telling them to go pound sand.

Plus, it's a legal defense.

FNC said today her law suit involves the fact that a water tower, water cooler, water something on top of Trump Tower was misrepresent dimensionally (i.e. it was measured incorrectly) on the tax return for the state and this constituted an effort to defraud NY of taxes. If this is indeed the case, he should have just told them to pound sand.

Reportedly the Trump legal team has asked the courts for the affidavit, the warrant and inventory of the items taken by fbi.

All legit.

Probably a chilling tower for the building HVAC. How in the hell does the square footage of that have any bearing on frigging taxes?

https://justthenews.com/accoun..._campaign=newsletter

The federal magistrate judge who authorized this week's FBI raid on Donald Trump's home and office in Florida six weeks earlier recused himself from the former president's lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and other Democrats in the Russia collusion scandal, citing concerns he couldn't be impartial.



U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce W. Reinhart in West Palm Beach, Fla.,who was appointed in 2018, filed the recusal document on June 22, a few weeks after presiding over the start of the civil litigation. Reinhart signed the search warrant authorizing the Mar-a-Lago search on Aug. 5, court records show.

"The undersigned Magistrate Judge, to whom the above-styled cause has been assigned, hereby recuses himself and refers the case to the Clerk of Court for reassignment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455," Reinhart wrote in his order or recusal in the Trump v. Clinton case.

The statute that the magistrate cited for his recusal states in part a judge "shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned" and then describes the various circumstances that could trigger such concerns.

They include "a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts" or prior work as a lawyer for a party involved in the case.

Reinhart's order did not specify the conflict or source of his concern for recusal.

Trump's lawsuit accuses Clinton, Democrat allies and current and former government officials of engaging in a racketeering conspiracy to falsely portrayTrump as colluding with Russia during the 2016 election. The sweeping nature of the suit involves numerous parties and public figures.

The recusal filing emerges as numerous media reports have surfaced about the magistrate's prior work, including donations before he was judge to President Barack Obama and Jeb Bush and work for figures associated with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The Daily Wire also raised questions about Reinhart's impartiality toward Trump, reporting that in a 2017 Facebook social post -- a year before he was named a magistrate -- he challenged the 45th president's moral character after Trump attacked the late Rep. John Lewis, a civil rights icon.

“I generally ignore the President-elect’s tweets, but not this one. John Lewis arguably has done more to ‘make America great’ than any living citizen,” Reinhart posted, according to the Daily Wire. “Last August, I took my son to the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma so he could understand the kind of courage and sacrifice required to live in a democratic society. John Lewis embodies that spirit. Although I’ve never met him, he is one of my heroes.”

“Thank you, Robert Reich, for saying what many of us feel, ‘John Lewis is the conscience of America. Donald Trump doesn’t have the moral stature to kiss John Lewis’s feet,’” Reinhart's post added, according to the news site. “Or, as Joseph Welch said to Joseph McCarthy, ‘At long last, have you left no sense of decency?’”

Can someone explain to me, how these assholes can just kick Trump's attorneys out to the curb then did whatever they did inside the resort? Sure they had their warrant, but doesn't the other side have the right to be present and observe what transpires?

why in the hell did his protective detail just not shoot the bastards on sight?

who the hell are they working for?

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Can someone explain to me, how these assholes can just kick Trump's attorneys out to the curb then did whatever they did inside the resort? Sure they had their warrant, but doesn't the other side have the right to be present and observe what transpires?

In my nearly four decades as a LEO writing and serving search warrants on a local, state (Washington) and even a federal level when sub-assigned to DEA on a gang task force ... the other side does not have the right of having an observer present to observe. A search warrant return of what was taken in detail is required to be left at the scene.

quote:

Originally posted by old dino:

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Can someone explain to me, how these assholes can just kick Trump's attorneys out to the curb then did whatever they did inside the resort? Sure they had their warrant, but doesn't the other side have the right to be present and observe what transpires?

In my nearly four decades as a LEO writing and serving search warrants on a local, state (Washington) and even a federal level when sub-assigned to DEA on a gang task force ... the other side does not have the right of having an observer present to observe. A search warrant return of what was taken in detail is required to be left at the scene.

So, if they're crooks and want to "get" you, they can plant anything inside your place? Or, have I been watching too much TV?

Q read my mind. They could "find" anything they want then....no matter how incriminating.

It’s the FBI. They do not need to tell the truth. They’re masters at fabricating and planting evidence. Their job is to smear and destroy. Their cover is that they’re ‘law enforcement’ but they conveniently manage to ignore the law.

As mother would say, "It's all as crooked as a dog's hind leg."

FJB
FJB
FJB
FJB
.
.
.
FJB~

I would never speak to the FBI under any circumstances other than to say “lawyer”. Their primary game is locking people up for lying to them. Why give them the chance to parse things you say.

+

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by old dino:

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Can someone explain to me, how these assholes can just kick Trump's attorneys out to the curb then did whatever they did inside the resort? Sure they had their warrant, but doesn't the other side have the right to be present and observe what transpires?

In my nearly four decades as a LEO writing and serving search warrants on a local, state (Washington) and even a federal level when sub-assigned to DEA on a gang task force ... the other side does not have the right of having an observer present to observe. A search warrant return of what was taken in detail is required to be left at the scene.

So, if they're crooks and want to "get" you, they can plant anything inside your place? Or, have I been watching too much TV?

Q ... I am on the same page with you regarding your concern about evidence being planted. I am fortunate being an honest cop, as well as those I worked with, that we never considered stooping down to that level. Are there bad cops on local, state and federal levels who would do this ? I believe so. And this makes me sick to my stomach.

Did it happen during this search warrant ? I don't know, but I have my concerns as I do not trust the feds no matter the organization. Reflecting back as a result of your question, I would not have any concern having an observer. All of my investigations involved violent crimes and keeping all away was for officer safety. What I find odd is that frankly in my opinion this was an administrative warrant ... meaning to recover documents only with no evidence of violence involved.

No, you have not watched too much television. This search warrant should of been just a knock and talk ... and taking what they needed based on the search warrant and not treating it as having the potential of a gun battle.

Oh, and I have a huge problem of this search warrant going through his wife's closet ... unless he was hiding classified documents in her underwear but that needed to be articulated in the search warrant affidavit.