I’m very pleased with the Trump team’s response to DoJ’s attempt to prevent review of the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago Raid. Readers will recall that back on Friday, Status Of The MAL Raid In Court, I summarized the Deep State’s attempted assertion of its supremacy:
>>>Cannon's appointment of Dearie came alongside a separate ruling that denied the Department of Justice's request to continue its own review of the documents.
>>>>"The Court does not find it appropriate to accept the Government’s conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion," Cannon wrote in her ruling denying the DOJ further review of the seized documents.<<<<
The DOJ has already appealed that matter to the 11th Circuit. <<<
So permanent employees of the US government are not accountable to the elected executive of that government or the officials appointed by that executive by the advice and consent of the elected officials of the legislative branch of that government. Why are we shocked they’d argue their actions aren’t reviewable by the judicial branch of that government?
Clarice Feldman apparently liked your analysis as well, since she mentioned you and it in her Sunday American Thinker post; the one Donald Trump gave a thumb's up to later in the day. Reading her post, one might think her entire write-up was based on your prior post where you posit the intelligence community believes it 'trumps' the courts when it comes to classified material. I use the term 'classified material' guardedly given Trump's legal response today.
My understanding is that general warrants are impermissible under the 4th Amendment. If I recall correctly, the warrant stated that the FBI could take possession of any and every document dated 1/20/17 through 1/20/21 and, if a "classified" document was found in any box, the FBI could take possession of the entire box.
I surmise that that is how the FBI justified taking clearly personal items such as clothing, framed magazine covers, newspaper and magazine articles, passports, medical records and tax records.
Further, the warrant stated that the FBI had the right to search any space in the residence where "classified" documents might be found - ergo, the tossing of Melania's closet and Barron's room.
I'm curious as to how the FBI knew to take a safecracker with them. Was it because they had seen the safe on one of their previous forays (unlikely because the safe was empty, leading me to believe it had only been recently delivered - after the FBI's June visit, when they advised President Trump to procure a stronger lock for the room), they guessed that he might have a safe somewhere in the residence (Melania's closet perhaps), or they had inside information that the president had recently acquired a safe? The last alternative is chilling.
>>>Cannon's appointment of Dearie came alongside a separate ruling that denied the Department of Justice's request to continue its own review of the documents.
>>>>"The Court does not find it appropriate to accept the Government’s conclusions on these important and disputed issues without further review by a neutral third party in an expedited and orderly fashion," Cannon wrote in her ruling denying the DOJ further review of the seized documents.<<<<
The DOJ has already appealed that matter to the 11th Circuit. <<<
>> https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/judge-names-special-master-trump-fbi-case <<
....And a very well deserved one it is.
So permanent employees of the US government are not accountable to the elected executive of that government or the officials appointed by that executive by the advice and consent of the elected officials of the legislative branch of that government. Why are we shocked they’d argue their actions aren’t reviewable by the judicial branch of that government?
Clarice Feldman apparently liked your analysis as well, since she mentioned you and it in her Sunday American Thinker post; the one Donald Trump gave a thumb's up to later in the day. Reading her post, one might think her entire write-up was based on your prior post where you posit the intelligence community believes it 'trumps' the courts when it comes to classified material. I use the term 'classified material' guardedly given Trump's legal response today.
For those may not religiously read Ms. Feldman's Sunday posts: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/09/the_doj_argues_that_the_intelligence_community_overrides_the_judiciary.html
My understanding is that general warrants are impermissible under the 4th Amendment. If I recall correctly, the warrant stated that the FBI could take possession of any and every document dated 1/20/17 through 1/20/21 and, if a "classified" document was found in any box, the FBI could take possession of the entire box.
I surmise that that is how the FBI justified taking clearly personal items such as clothing, framed magazine covers, newspaper and magazine articles, passports, medical records and tax records.
Further, the warrant stated that the FBI had the right to search any space in the residence where "classified" documents might be found - ergo, the tossing of Melania's closet and Barron's room.
I'm curious as to how the FBI knew to take a safecracker with them. Was it because they had seen the safe on one of their previous forays (unlikely because the safe was empty, leading me to believe it had only been recently delivered - after the FBI's June visit, when they advised President Trump to procure a stronger lock for the room), they guessed that he might have a safe somewhere in the residence (Melania's closet perhaps), or they had inside information that the president had recently acquired a safe? The last alternative is chilling.