FBI raid on Trump's home

[Astray]

The drugs you take are eating at the little intelligence you have left.

Don't you blame the drugs.

[Gelston]

For national security and secret, compartmentalized level classified information, no I don't believe a judge or any non-security cleared person gets to decide how the national defense is handled. The FBI used evidence and obtained a probable cause warrant, as is proper, but a judge trying a district court judge trying to restrict whether or not our intelligence agencies can protect national interest? Naw. Some things, like highest classification intelligence are simply out of the jurisdiction of minor federal courts.

The Constitution doesn’t care what you believe.

[Seran]

The Constitution doesn’t care what you believe.

You may want to rethink that. The government's repossession of stolen materials that Trump was the perfect example of our Republic being protected against those who would harm it as defined by the Constitution. But thanks for the low effort trolling.

[Arqueto]

You may want to rethink that. The government's repossession of stolen materials that Trump was the perfect example of our Republic being protected against those who would harm it as defined by the Constitution. But thanks for the low effort trolling.

You accusing anyone of trolling is fucking RICH.

[Parkbandit]

You may want to rethink that. The government's repossession of stolen materials that Trump was the perfect example of our Republic being protected against those who would harm it as defined by the Constitution. But thanks for the low effort trolling.

So, the Constitution still doesn't care what you believe.

Thankfully, we have a court appointed Special Master to ensure it's done properly.

[Gelston]

You may want to rethink that. The government's repossession of stolen materials that Trump was the perfect example of our Republic being protected against those who would harm it as defined by the Constitution. But thanks for the low effort trolling.

You placed executive agencies on a higher pedestal than the Constitutionally created court system. Checks and balances is the main theme of the Constitution, and the courts very much have that power over the Executive branch and its created organizations. You can disagree, but then again, it doesn't matter if you do, because as I said, the Constitution doesn't care what you think. It isn't trolling, it is pointing out that you are wrong.

[Methais]

You placed executive agencies on a higher pedestal than the Constitutionally created court system. Checks and balances is the main theme of the Constitution, and the courts very much have that power over the Executive branch and its created organizations. You can disagree, but then again, it doesn't matter if you do, because as I said, the Constitution doesn't care what you think. It isn't trolling, it is pointing out that you are wrong.

As if Seran knows what anything you just said means.

[Seran]

You placed executive agencies on a higher pedestal than the Constitutionally created court system. Checks and balances is the main theme of the Constitution, and the courts very much have that power over the Executive branch and its created organizations. You can disagree, but then again, it doesn't matter if you do, because as I said, the Constitution doesn't care what you think. It isn't trolling, it is pointing out that you are wrong.

No, it's placed multiple courts whose personal biases are in conflict with each other's rulings. We have a magistrate whose probable cause review resulted in a search and seizure of stolen items, which is proper, followed by Trump tapping a civil court appointee of his to overstep in an attempt to circumvent what the first court authorized. The Constitution didn't envision conflicts of interest or forum shopping, yet here we are pretending.

[Gelston]

No, it's placed multiple courts whose personal biases are in conflict with each other's rulings. We have a magistrate whose probable cause review resulted in a search and seizure of stolen items, which is proper, followed by Trump tapping a civil court appointee of his to overstep in an attempt to circumvent what the first court authorized. The Constitution didn't envision conflicts of interest or forum shopping, yet here we are pretending.

And yet you seem to be happy with an executive agency saying "Dude, just trust us!" to a court. That isn't how it works and I guarantee you if it were reversed and a Republican was President with a someone else as a defendant you'd be calling them the gestapo.

[Methais]

No, it's placed multiple courts whose personal biases are in conflict with each other's rulings. We have a magistrate whose probable cause review resulted in a search and seizure of stolen items, which is proper, followed by Trump tapping a civil court appointee of his to overstep in an attempt to circumvent what the first court authorized. The Constitution didn't envision conflicts of interest or forum shopping, yet here we are pretending.

Because the conflict of interest totally isn't on the DOJ's end or anything.

Stop being a retard 25/8/366.