Judge Tees Up Affidavit Showdown

[applegrove]

Judge Tees Up Affidavit Showdown

August 16, 2022 at 1:09 pm EDT By Taegan Goddard 9 Comments

https://politicalwire.com/2022/08/16/judge-tees-up-affidavit-showdown/

"SNIP......

Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart scheduled a hearing for Thursday at 1 p.m. to determine whether to unseal the affidavit underpinning the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago last week.

Playbook: “Several news outlets have requested to make it public, while the Justice Department argued in a Monday filing that doing so could compromise its criminal investigation. In addition to the media’s push for the affidavit, many Republicans have called for it to be released amid the conservative backlash to the FBI search.”

Donald Trump also weighed in: “I call for the immediate release of the completely Unredacted Affidavit pertaining to this horrible and shocking BREAK-IN.”

.....SNIP"

[wryter2000]

1. Is this the judge who ordered the search warrant?

After the crap he's had to endure, I can't imagine he'll do what Trump wants. It would be lunacy to release all that information.

[Effete Snob]

2. "The crap he's had to endure" has nothing to do with how he will rule

I'm always amazed by the general tendency to believe that federal judges issue rulings based on their feelings of personal pique.

[wryter2000]

7. I know that

It ought to inform him of the serious danger of releasing other people's names, though. I imagine that's part of the DOJ argument.

[dsc]

9. In this case the crap he had to endure is directly relevant

it gives him a front row seat to the danger of releasing the names of those witnesses.

[H2O Man]

10. +1

[msfiddlestix]

15. We do often AMAZE see you of our ignorance of how "things work" in courts

well, some of us are as old dirt and have seen a lot of things happen in the legal system, and that means COURTS with BIASED judges, who rule based on their "feelings" and pretend it's a legally sound and based decision.

yeppers, ALOT OF TIMES through out this nation's history.

Maybe that should amaze you a whole lot more.

just sayin...

Yes, you have mentioned that you've been around a lot of years, but somehow you missed all of the outrageous decisions made by judges over the years. It is rather puzzling how that could have happened. but whatever.

[Effete Snob]

16. They attract attention because they are the exception

Federal judges issue hundreds of rulings every day. The ones that get reported in the news as bad decisions are "news" for a reason.

Relying on the news for a picture of what is "normal" is itself a trap.

[msfiddlestix]

18. Guess I missed the descriptor "Normal"...

It happens all the time, but yes I would agree just because it happens all too frequently, nevertheless, it should't be construed as "Normal". On the other hand, we would naturally forgive the perception regarding judges bias and rulings based on feelings instead of actual law or proper procedures occur most frequently in cases involving the underclass, people of color, women, and the powerful and wealthy, a class many judges have shown to be inclined to protect.

Throughout our entire history and all over this land, right up to the current Supreme Court of the United States we see this time and time again.

[Chainfire]

3. Release it!

With everything redacted but the heading and the signature. Maybe leave the conjunctions...

[Raven]

4. Indict him. Then release it.

[kentuck]

5. Of course, Trump could care less if national security is exposed. He stole the documents!

But the judge might be more accommodating than he expects. He could redact out all the national security information and information related to open criminal investigations and give the people a little taste of what Trump was up to. Be careful what you wish for, Donald.

[EndlessWire]

6. I'd be surprised if

the Judge allowed this and exposed the agents to harm. Trump only wants it so he can fan up violence by his supporters.

[Whiskeytide]

8. There are a dozen good and compelling reasons ...

… to keep it sealed. The only reason I can think of for unsealing it is so Sean, Laura and Stucker will know who to vilify.

[Orrex]

11. First, let's see trump's unredacted tax return

Then let’s see the complete and unredacted Mueller report.

Then we can talk about whether the release of the affidavit, with the guaranteed danger it poses to those involved, is justified.

[SharonClark]

13. K&R

[kentuck]

12. Release it to the Senate Inel Committee first....

Then, when he is indicted, release it to the Grand Jury.

[TheBlackAdder]

22. Republicans would just release it or pass a copy along.

[WarGamer]

14. Redact out names... release it.

The public deserves accurate insight into potential crimes...

[Effete Snob]

17. That may not be sufficient

If an affidavit said, "[redacted] heard WarGamer snoring at 3AM at night", then I think you'd have a pretty good idea who [readacted] was.

The DoJ already filed their brief that said the necessary redactions would render it unintelligible.

I believe them.



Do you think they are making that up?

[WarGamer]

19. ok... yeah I hear ya.

[Effete Snob]

20. Although, just to cover their bases

...right after that paragraph they say, "But if you want to unseal it, we want the first crack at redacting it."

[allegorical oracle]

21. Of course TFG would release it -- he's shown us that he doesn't give a hoot about

classified info or sources and methods. Lock him up.

[TheBlackAdder]

23. Trump will get his unredacted copy when criminal charges are filed. Until then, let him sweat it.