FBI Seizes Oath Keeper Lawyer’s Phone in “Seditious Conspiracy” Investigation

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Bush Lawyer, Sep 12, 2021.

  1. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually I have. Make a relevant point if you can. Show me the law Pence would have violated if he had delayed the certification by 10 days.
     
  2. ChiCowboy

    ChiCowboy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2015
    Messages:
    23,076
    Likes Received:
    14,142
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That has to be done by a vote of both houses. That's what Pence did; shut down for debate. He cannot unilaterally delay certification.
     
    bx4 likes this.
  3. stone6

    stone6 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2019
    Messages:
    9,281
    Likes Received:
    2,780
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Title 3 U.S. Code Paragraph 15. There is a provision therein to hear objections (such as Cruz's) and to vote on those objections (which was done). There is no provision for the President of the Senate (VP Pence) to act unilaterally, on his own. This is what Pence told Trump, the day before January 6th, according to the new Woodward/Costa book.
     
  4. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,244
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Dirt FBI Agents, you mean.

    THE DIRTBAG CRIMINAL FBI IS NOT TRUSTWORTHY: The FBI Said It Busted A Plot To Kidnap Michigan’s Governor. Then Things Got Complicated. “The case seemed like a lock — until an informant and one FBI agent were charged with crimes, another was accused of perjury, and a third was found promoting a private security firm. And that wasn’t all.”

    “Those issues may well affect the course of the trial. But beyond the integrity of the case, the problems are serious and widespread enough to call into question tactics the FBI has relied on for decades — and to test the public’s trust in the bureau overall.”

    You think?

    One dirtbag "FBI agent, who had served as the case’s public face, was charged with beating his wife when they returned home from a swingers party." She complained about having to go to the party, so he choked her, beat her and bashed her head into a table. Another "agent was accused of perjury. A state prosecutor in a related case was reassigned and then retired in the face of an audit into his prior use of informants."

    "An informant whose work was crucial to the investigation was indicted on a gun charge and is now under investigation for fraud. Interviews, court records, and other documents reveal repeated instances of lawbreaking by Stephen Robeson, who, while working with the government, identified and recruited potential targets in multiple states and who organized many of the events where prosecutors say the alleged kidnapping plan was hatched. Robeson’s crimes took place under the nose of his" Dirtbag "FBI handlers."

    “I’d rather have a sister in a whorehouse than a brother in the FBI.”
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  5. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you want to call the fbi dirt, thats you, but then those would be kidnappers deserve more jail time.
     
    Hey Now likes this.
  6. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,424
    Likes Received:
    51,244
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it's the Dirt Bag FBI that's responsible for them being dirtbags. I held them in the highest respect before it became undeniable that they are criminal dirtbags. It's not my fault the the dirtbag FBI is so full of criminals that their case is falling apart, once again, that's on them.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2021
    ButterBalls likes this.
  7. mdrobster

    mdrobster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    34,177
    Likes Received:
    12,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And kidnappers are ok with Trump supporters. Ironic they call for law and order. !!!!
     
    bx4 likes this.
  8. ShadowX

    ShadowX Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2014
    Messages:
    12,949
    Likes Received:
    6,727
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Awesome the Chaz protestors should get the same right?
     
  9. FatBack

    FatBack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    52,293
    Likes Received:
    48,694
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh look at those wannabe college boys, that just screams undercover a******
     
    ButterBalls likes this.
  10. FatBack

    FatBack Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    52,293
    Likes Received:
    48,694
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And pedophiles and fans of bestiality are okay with Biden!
     
  11. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Assuming the statute is constitutional.

    You might wanna read Supreme Court holdings on extra-constitutionality since 1946.

    The principle of extra-constitutionality is simple.

    To enumerate every power the President -- as head-of-State -- has would make Article II more than 100,000 pages long. Likewise, to enumerate every power the Legislature and Judiciary have under Articles I & III respectively would be stupid.

    The men who wrote the Constitution took a more elegant approach.

    The President -- as head-of-State -- has all the powers a head-of-State has traditionally had for the last 7,000 years, except where those powers are expressly barred or limited.

    The power to wage war, levy taxes, enter into treaties, appoint cabinet members etc are traditional powers of a head-of-State but those powers are barred or limited under the Constitution (and for good reason.)

    Those men placed extreme restrictions on the Legislature, but not the Judiciary.

    Additionally, in Supreme Court rulings since 1946 from the Truman Administration to the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court has held that the powers enumerated in the Stamp Act Congress, the Declaration of Independence, the Continental Congress and the Articles of Confederation are powers that the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branch have that are not expressly barred or limited by the Constitution.

    In other words, the test the Supreme Court uses is this:

    1) Is the power a traditional power for a head-of-State?
    2) If it is not, was that power granted by the Stamp Act Congress, Declaration, Continental Congress, or Articles?
    3) If it was not, then is it expressly barred or limited by the Constitution?

    If not, then the President has that power. Lather, Rinse, Repeat for Congress and the Judiciary.

    Note the Supreme Court has also applied that test to Cabinet Officers like the Secretary of Defense (see the decisions issued during the Clinton and Bush Administrations.)

    It also applies to the States, and the People.

    Q: Do the people have the power to overthrow a government
    A: Yes, that is a traditional power held by the People for the last 7,000 years and which is granted to the People via the Stamp Act Congress, Declaration and Continental Congress and which is not expressly barred by the Constitution.

    That would make the offense of "seditious conspiracy" unconstitutional in whole or in part.

    When should they have held the rally?

    Did you make your calendar available to them so that they could select a date and time convenient for you?

    You can get a warrant for damn near anything.

    All you need is probably cause.

    No, it isn't.

    It's only a felony if the warrant was "sealed" making it like a sealed grand jury or secret grand jury indictment, or if the warrant was issued by FISA.

    The only problem is one you've manufactured.

    Yes, they are. You need only ask to see the warrant for a search, seizure or arrest. There's no law that bars it.

    It's called a "fishing expedition."

    Correct.

    Attorney-Client Privilege stands unless a 3rd Party is present, or unless the attorney is discussing a future crime that has not yet been committed, or the attorney is a participant or facilitator in the crime.
     
    Condor060 likes this.
  12. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,629
    Likes Received:
    11,202
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They are not told what the exact reasons were, or shown evidence.

    It would be like if I barged into your home and started sifting through all your belongings with the claim that I was "looking for stolen property", but I did not provide any details to you, like what type of property I was looking for, who this alleged property had belonged to, the reasons why I thought that stolen property might be in your house, etc.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2021
  13. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,075
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They can read the search warrant.

    The standards in the US legal system are:

    1) Beyond a reasonable doubt -- for criminal prosecution only
    2) Clear and convincing evidence -- used in some States for certain types of civil suits
    3) A preponderance of the evidence -- used in most States for civil actions. Legally, a "preponderance" is greater than 50% meaning 50.000000001%
    4) Probably cause
    5) Reasonably articulated suspicion (Terry stop: see Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968)) -- used by police only

    As everyone can see, probable cause is less than a preponderance.

    That's because probable cause only requires a loose causal connection from which one can draw inferences.

    Regarding evidence, it is not needed for a search/arrest warrant, and there is no legal obligation to reveal evidence until discovery.

    The process is:

    1) Initial hearing
    2) Bail hearing
    3) Arraignment
    4) Discovery phase or plea negotiations
    5) Pre-trial phase
    6) Trial (plea negotiations can continue up until the jury renders a verdict)

    A warrant can be issued by any judge or magistrate and the arraignment is a check/balance because the prosecution has to demonstrate probable cause to continue.

    Yes, some States combine the initial/bail hearing or the bail/arraignment and some States combine all three, but they're allowed to do that.

    Once you've been arraigned, then you're entitled to see the evidence.
     
  14. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,629
    Likes Received:
    11,202
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sometimes not all of the evidence is presented, and the evidence that is actually presented may not be enough to actually justify the charges.

    Prosecutors just throw an overwhelming list of "facts" against the accused all the time. Sometimes the judge might not even notice the critical discrepancy between what they have prior read about the case (reality is the judge has usually already made their decision before they walk into the courtroom) and what is actually being said during that hearing.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2021
  15. JET3534

    JET3534 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    13,350
    Likes Received:
    11,517
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did you ever think you as an Australian might not know Jack Sh** about the American Justice system. Maybe you should do a little research about a program called COINTELPRO before making assumptions about the FBI.
     
  16. Bush Lawyer

    Bush Lawyer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2018
    Messages:
    15,034
    Likes Received:
    9,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Tell me all about it.
     
  17. JET3534

    JET3534 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2014
    Messages:
    13,350
    Likes Received:
    11,517
    Trophy Points:
    113
  18. Bush Lawyer

    Bush Lawyer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2018
    Messages:
    15,034
    Likes Received:
    9,493
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I could not see any reference in that to a bugging/seizing of a lawyer's phone to intercept/infiltrate lawyer/client communications.
     
  19. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,328
    Likes Received:
    39,000
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Were you so outraged when they tried to stop the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice or just shrugging indifferently perhaps even supporting?
     
    JET3534 likes this.
  20. HB Surfer

    HB Surfer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    34,707
    Likes Received:
    21,899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh yeah! They nearly took over the government!

    [​IMG]

    The FBI needs to be disbanded. We need to start over. They are a corrupt organization from the very top.
     
    JET3534 and ShadowX like this.

Share This Page