FBI Mar-a-Lago Warrant Had ‘No Legal Basis’: Constitutional Lawyers

derek_tiger

Freshman
Dec 20, 2009
371
711
93
Two constitutional lawyers who worked in the Bush and Reagan administrations say that the warrant used to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence had no legal basis.

A former president’s right under the Presidential Records Act supersedes the statutes the Department of Justice and FBI used to carry out the raid earlier this month, wrote David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey, who both served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

“The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid,” they wrote in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

Earlier this month, federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart unsealed the warrant and property receipt, showing that it allowed FBI agents to obtain all “physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§793, 2071, or 1519.”

And the materials that could be seized are “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021,” which encompasses all of Trump’s presidential term.

As a result, the two scholars said that “virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category” but “federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them.”

“His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant,” Rivkin and Casey wrote.

“Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978,” they said, adding that a Supreme Court decision in 1974 affirms their argument. “The former president’s rights under the [Presidential Records Act] trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.”

The 1978 law, which was passed two years after former President Richard Nixon resigned, “lays out detailed requirements for how the archivist is to administer the records, handle privilege claims, make the records public, and impose restrictions on access,” they added. “Notably, it doesn’t address the process by which a former president’s records are physically to be turned over to the archivist, or set any deadline, leaving this matter to be negotiated between the archivist and the former president.”

In their opinion piece, the authors stated that because the FBI and Justice Department were satisfied with an additional lock being installed on a Mar-a-Lago storage room, the federal agencies “could and should have sought a less intrusive” method than a search warrant.

The former president, in a legal complaint filed earlier this week, wrote that agents visited his home in early June—about two months before the raid—and appeared to approve the installation of another lock.

After one FBI agent saw the storage room, they told Trump’s team: “Thank you. You did not need to show us the storage room, but we appreciate it. Now it all makes sense,” according to the filing.

“Counsel for President Trump then closed the interaction and advised the Government officials that they should contact him with any further needs on the matter,” it added.
 

David_Dennison

All Conference
Jul 13, 2020
4,770
1,444
113
Two constitutional lawyers who worked in the Bush and Reagan administrations say that the warrant used to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence had no legal basis.

A former president’s right under the Presidential Records Act supersedes the statutes the Department of Justice and FBI used to carry out the raid earlier this month, wrote David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey, who both served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

“The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid,” they wrote in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

Earlier this month, federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart unsealed the warrant and property receipt, showing that it allowed FBI agents to obtain all “physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§793, 2071, or 1519.”

And the materials that could be seized are “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021,” which encompasses all of Trump’s presidential term.

As a result, the two scholars said that “virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category” but “federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them.”

“His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant,” Rivkin and Casey wrote.

“Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978,” they said, adding that a Supreme Court decision in 1974 affirms their argument. “The former president’s rights under the [Presidential Records Act] trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.”

The 1978 law, which was passed two years after former President Richard Nixon resigned, “lays out detailed requirements for how the archivist is to administer the records, handle privilege claims, make the records public, and impose restrictions on access,” they added. “Notably, it doesn’t address the process by which a former president’s records are physically to be turned over to the archivist, or set any deadline, leaving this matter to be negotiated between the archivist and the former president.”

In their opinion piece, the authors stated that because the FBI and Justice Department were satisfied with an additional lock being installed on a Mar-a-Lago storage room, the federal agencies “could and should have sought a less intrusive” method than a search warrant.

The former president, in a legal complaint filed earlier this week, wrote that agents visited his home in early June—about two months before the raid—and appeared to approve the installation of another lock.

After one FBI agent saw the storage room, they told Trump’s team: “Thank you. You did not need to show us the storage room, but we appreciate it. Now it all makes sense,” according to the filing.

“Counsel for President Trump then closed the interaction and advised the Government officials that they should contact him with any further needs on the matter,” it added.

The usual bet? Or best restaurant of your choice? I will sweeten the deal by wearing a MAGA hat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes

Menace Sockeyes

Varsity
Apr 7, 2021
1,780
299
83
200.gif
 

David_Dennison

All Conference
Jul 13, 2020
4,770
1,444
113
Im clearly taking the bet of a couple of no-names (David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey) ,over the sitting AG, FBI Director and Director of Archives ( and Federal Judge appointed by Trump) who laid their careers on the line in examining the law and procedures regarding this search of Cult leader.
 

ZosoDawg

Varsity
May 29, 2001
1,859
2,879
113
Im clearly taking the bet of a couple of no-names (David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey) ,over the sitting AG, FBI Director and Director of Archives ( and Federal Judge appointed by Trump) who laid their careers on the line in examining the law and procedures regarding this search of Cult leader.
Can you tell us more about this federal judge appointed by Trump? Like why he recused himself from the lawsuit Trump filed against Clinton, yet weeks later was able to sign off on a warrant to invade Trumps home? What changed?
 

David_Dennison

All Conference
Jul 13, 2020
4,770
1,444
113
Can you tell us more about this federal judge appointed by Trump? Like why he recused himself from the lawsuit Trump filed against Clinton, yet weeks later was able to sign off on a warrant to invade Trumps home? What changed?
You are confusing the original magistrate who authorized the warrant with the Federal Judge ( Aileen Cannon) who ordered the release. Her opinion was the appeal grounds were dogshit and dumped it. He’s fvcked. what’s that 30 straight GOP judges have bitch slapped him now?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/23/jud...details-about-mar-a-lago-warrant-lawsuit.html
The Magistrate who authorized the warrant reviewed the final DOJ redactions And released. . Read more outside the bubble.
 
Last edited:

Pops Masterson

All Conference
Jan 8, 2004
4,258
8,450
113
You are confusing the original magistrate who authorized the warrant with the Federal Judge ( Aileen Cannon) who ordered the release. Her opinion was the appeal grounds were dogshit and dumped it. He’s fvcked. what’s that 30 straight GOP judges have bitch slapped him now?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/23/jud...details-about-mar-a-lago-warrant-lawsuit.html
The Magistrate who authorized the warrant reviewed the final DOJ redactions And released. . Read more outside the bubble.
Literal lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZosoDawg

GwinnettDawg

Varsity
Aug 7, 2001
2,966
4,078
113
Im clearly taking the bet of a couple of no-names (David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey) ,over the sitting AG, FBI Director and Director of Archives ( and Federal Judge appointed by Trump) who laid their careers on the line in examining the law and procedures regarding this search of Cult leader.
You’re taking the words of guys whose asses are on the block and will say and do anything to justify their actions. But no one here is surprised.
 

ZosoDawg

Varsity
May 29, 2001
1,859
2,879
113
You are confusing the original magistrate who authorized the warrant with the Federal Judge ( Aileen Cannon) who ordered the release. Her opinion was the appeal grounds were dogshit and dumped it. He’s fvcked. what’s that 30 straight GOP judges have bitch slapped him now?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/23/jud...details-about-mar-a-lago-warrant-lawsuit.html
The Magistrate who authorized the warrant reviewed the final DOJ redactions And released. . Read more outside the bubble.
Uh, no I’m not.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ff-search-warrant-trump-mar-lago/10293403002/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...w-Judge-Reinhart-recused-Clinton-lawsuit.html

so again, what changed ?
 

Menace Sockeyes

Varsity
Apr 7, 2021
1,780
299
83
I know it hurts but your 7 years of chasing the orangeman and coming up fruitless is coming to an end. It will dry up in Nov and then we can chase Humper and Dementia... it will be great fun.
Proof once again that it’s not about right or wrong, legal or illegal, moral or unethical. It’s always just political theater and tit for tat. Couldn’t possibly be that their cult leader is ACTUALLY criminal. Too brainwashed. Thanks for confirming exactly what we’ve been saying. 👍
 
Last edited:

billywayneluck

All District
Dec 28, 2009
6,912
7,380
113
Proof once again that it’s not about right or wrong, legal or illegal, moral or unethical. It’s always just political theater and toy for tat. Couldn’t possibly be that their cult leader is ACTUALLY criminal. Too brainwashed. Thanks for confirming exactly what we’ve been saying. 👍

images
 
  • Like
Reactions: dustinator

Pops Masterson

All Conference
Jan 8, 2004
4,258
8,450
113
Proof once again that it’s not about right or wrong, legal or illegal, moral or unethical. It’s always just political theater and toy for tat. Couldn’t possibly be that their cult leader is ACTUALLY criminal. Too brainwashed. Thanks for confirming exactly what we’ve been saying. 👍
Calm down, little fairy. None of your witch hunts have provided any substance yet, and I don’t anticipate this being the first.
 

billywayneluck

All District
Dec 28, 2009
6,912
7,380
113
The silly little freak was actually scolding us for being partisan?
LOL at ZERO self awareness he has. What’s he gonna do for an encore, call out the monkey pox victims for taking it up the ass?
Was telling a friend about this the other day. I was at the local Publix the other day and saw a guy that had TWO MASKS.. Said he was wearing it to protect from...Monkey pox.

I wanted to say "bro you're doing it wrong" but decided I didn't have a dawg in that fight, so I stayed out of it.
 

Reasoned

All Conference
Oct 25, 2017
3,978
3,967
113
Was telling a friend about this the other day. I was at the local Publix the other day and saw a guy that had TWO MASKS.. Said he was wearing it to protect from...Monkey pox.

I wanted to say "bro you're doing it wrong" but decided I didn't have a dawg in that fight, so I stayed out of it.
I don’t know, he may have been on the right track, who knows where he was planning to put his mouth.
 

David_Dennison

All Conference
Jul 13, 2020
4,770
1,444
113
Which gender is Melania in this one. You pick the pronoun . One thing is for sure…She’s definitely licked more high quality poon than most here.

Personally I think the FLOTUS pics in the WH should be replaced.
 

David_Dennison

All Conference
Jul 13, 2020
4,770
1,444
113
Two constitutional lawyers who worked in the Bush and Reagan administrations say that the warrant used to search former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence had no legal basis.

A former president’s right under the Presidential Records Act supersedes the statutes the Department of Justice and FBI used to carry out the raid earlier this month, wrote David Rivkin Jr. and Lee Casey, who both served under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.

“The judge who issued the warrant for Mar-a-Lago has signaled that he is likely to release a redacted version of the affidavit supporting it. But the warrant itself suggests the answer is likely no—the FBI had no legally valid cause for the raid,” they wrote in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

Earlier this month, federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart unsealed the warrant and property receipt, showing that it allowed FBI agents to obtain all “physical documents and records constituting evidence, contraband, fruits of crime, or other items illegally possessed in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§793, 2071, or 1519.”

And the materials that could be seized are “any government and/or Presidential Records created between January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2021,” which encompasses all of Trump’s presidential term.

As a result, the two scholars said that “virtually all the materials at Mar-a-Lago are likely to fall within this category” but “federal law gives Mr. Trump a right of access to them.”

“His possession of them is entirely consistent with that right, and therefore lawful, regardless of the statutes the FBI cites in its warrant,” Rivkin and Casey wrote.

“Those statutes are general in their text and application. But Mr. Trump’s documents are covered by a specific statute, the Presidential Records Act of 1978,” they said, adding that a Supreme Court decision in 1974 affirms their argument. “The former president’s rights under the [Presidential Records Act] trump any application of the laws the FBI warrant cites.”

The 1978 law, which was passed two years after former President Richard Nixon resigned, “lays out detailed requirements for how the archivist is to administer the records, handle privilege claims, make the records public, and impose restrictions on access,” they added. “Notably, it doesn’t address the process by which a former president’s records are physically to be turned over to the archivist, or set any deadline, leaving this matter to be negotiated between the archivist and the former president.”

In their opinion piece, the authors stated that because the FBI and Justice Department were satisfied with an additional lock being installed on a Mar-a-Lago storage room, the federal agencies “could and should have sought a less intrusive” method than a search warrant.

The former president, in a legal complaint filed earlier this week, wrote that agents visited his home in early June—about two months before the raid—and appeared to approve the installation of another lock.

After one FBI agent saw the storage room, they told Trump’s team: “Thank you. You did not need to show us the storage room, but we appreciate it. Now it all makes sense,” according to the filing.

“Counsel for President Trump then closed the interaction and advised the Government officials that they should contact him with any further needs on the matter,” it added.
Bump for update on this… it has not aged well- as Kraken and Durham crime of the century LOLOLOLOL

Neither of the two judges involved have ruled against the search or the evidence photographed in his “45
play POTUS desk.

The sworn affidavits from eye witnesses see seem to have been dead on based on photos taken. Why do you think Trumpsky is now fighting release of his own CCTV tapes.

I did see where long time Trumpanzee Carl Rove said he was pretty much fvckd live on Fox.

Everyime he makes a defiant statement requesting “transparency” DOJ are happy to disclose more info. You should advise him to STFU.
 

derek_tiger

Freshman
Dec 20, 2009
371
711
93
Bump for update on this… it has not aged well- as Kraken and Durham crime of the century LOLOLOLOL
Neither of the two judges involved have ruled against the search or the evidence photographed in his “45
play POTUS desk.
The sworn affidavits from eye witnesses see seem to have been dead on based on photos taken. Why do you think Trumpsky is now fighting release of his own CCTV tapes.
I did see where long time Trumpanzee Carl Rove said he was pretty much fvckd live on Fox.
Everyime he makes a defiant statement requesting “transparency” DOJ are happy to disclose more info. You should advise him to STFU.
You can argue to your heart's content with the TWO CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS who wrote that... I'm not one of them. Just like with the LAWYER who claimed she would release the Kraken and the esteemed Dr. Durham and his revelations. I'm not either of them to boot.

Unlike you, I'm normal. I don't drown myself in a daily dunking of all things Orange. I honestly don't care that much. I find occasional articles of interest that are quite opposite of the biased Project Diddler you provide (WSJ? LOL!).

You've been wrong so much and so many times, I think you have battered wife syndrome looking for any shred of info that might actually come to fruition. Keep trying... Your worst nightmare will probably come true regardless. Enjoy!
 

Reasoned

All Conference
Oct 25, 2017
3,978
3,967
113
Just like with the LAWYER who claimed she would release the Kraken and the esteemed Dr. Durham and his revelations. I'm not either of them to boot.
You know, I always forget about that guy, he just keeps on billing the federal government and dragging this gig out as long as possible (yet another reason to support a bipartisan swamp drainage)
 

dustinator

Freshman
Jan 10, 2006
543
1,034
93
Trump is able to have special master to review docs. What strikes me as concerning, is that the POTATUS said he knew jackshit about the raid beforehand, but reading the legal docs it appears the White House was involved since May 12, 2022.

joe biden... been a lair for his whole life. From dodging the Vietnam war faking asthma, to cornpop, to not knowing his son business' dealings and huge piece of shit all while playing golf and having dinner with them, being caught plagiarizing political speeches, being a hair sniffing PEDO and just a gigantic Chinese boot licking piece of shit.

But he does not send out mean tweets. Anyone that voted for this piece of shit is a more a member of a cult and not the other way around.


see page 2 of the document in the article.
 

GwinnettDawg

Varsity
Aug 7, 2001
2,966
4,078
113
Trump is able to have special master to review docs. What strikes me as concerning, is that the POTATUS said he knew jackshit about the raid beforehand, but reading the legal docs it appears the White House was involved since May 12, 2022.

joe biden... been a lair for his whole life. From dodging the Vietnam war faking asthma, to cornpop, to not knowing his son business' dealings and huge piece of shit all while playing golf and having dinner with them, being caught plagiarizing political speeches, being a hair sniffing PEDO and just a gigantic Chinese boot licking piece of shit.

But he does not send out mean tweets. Anyone that voted for this piece of shit is a more a member of a cult and not the other way around.


see page 2 of the document in the article.
Preach
 
  • Like
Reactions: dustinator