Disclosing Mar-a-Lago affidavit could be risky for prosecutors: Rep. Schiff

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Source: New York Daily News

Revealing details of the affidavit for the search of Mar-a-Lago could put Justice Department sources at risk, giving prosecutors good reason to want it kept sealed, a top House Democrat said Sunday.

A federal judge has asked the Justice Department to suggest cuts for the public version, saying it is up to the prosecutors to show why the affidavit for the Aug. 8 raid of former President Donald Trump’s Florida home should be kept secret.

“You could learn a lot from the affidavit,” Rep. Adam Schiff said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “That’s just the problem, though, for the Justice Department.

“If this affidavit is revealed, it will put … sources of information at risk,” he said. “We’ve seen the president retaliate against anyone he considered a whistleblower, accuse them of treason.”

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/disclosing-mar-a-lago-affidavit-could-be-risky-for-prosecutors-rep-schiff/ar-AA10TPtC

[Beakybird]

1. I think the judge approved the redacted disclosure because his life was threatened.

And his synagogue already had to cancel an event. I think the MAGAs are again being rewarded for their execrable behavior.

[getagrip_already]

3. More likely

He feels it important for people to see that tfg is likely guilty of crimes.

If anything, it may force the doj to charge him.

[reACTIONary]

7. +10 nt

[bahboo]

2. please call him trump...not the president....

asshole doesn't deserve the courtesy....

[Karma13612]

4. Are affidavits usually made public?

If not, then why isn’t there a push-back on this demand.

I am tired of this constant “doxing” and threats of retaliation from ‘the worst among us’.

Tell them to go pound sand and explain clearly that the law is being followed.

If they are usually made public, then sure, I guess we don’t have a choice. But in this instance, with an ongoing investigation, we shouldn’t be allowing this pressure campaign.

I just don’t know anymore. Sigh…

[Novara]

5. No, affidavits are not made public until charges are filed.

I learned that from Barb McQuade, a law professor and former US attorney:

Link to tweet

This is bullshit.

[Karma13612]

6. Thank you Novara!

I appreciate your efforts! Also glad to see some push-back.

There needs to be lots more. MAGA-land is just taking over the narrative as always.

[Novara]

9. You're welcome. I've learned so much about the law since 2016.

It's kind of pathetic. I look this stuff up all the time because that corrupt piece of shit keeps breaking laws and I want to have real facts to argue.

It's pissing me off. If they unseal - even partially - the affidavit, that would be handing the orange fuck a victory by throwing out precedent of settled law. And I suspect the reason the judge is even considering it is because his life has been threatened. My hope is that he doesn't really intend to unseal any of it but is playing along to try to mitigate the death threats. But if he gives in, that means the terrorists win.

[Karma13612]

11. I agree completely!!! Eom

[reACTIONary]

8. I don't have an opinion one way or another...

... but in this case it is news outlets (WaPo) who are requesting the release due to the exceptional public interest in this case.

And there is push back, from the DOJ.

[Captain Zero]

10. Well then redact it all except the page numbers for the WAPO

Then they can explain again to the trumptards why it can't be seen until there is an indictment.