Judge That Signed the FBI Mar-A-Lago Raid Warrant Used to Work For Jeffrey Epstein.

US 24 News: Judge That Signed the FBI Mar-A-Lago Raid Warrant Used to Work For Jeffrey Epstein.

Judge Bruce E. Reinhart from the Southern District of Florida reportedly signed off on the warrant to raid President Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago on Monday night.

Joe Biden’s DOJ sent the FBI to raid President Trump’s home in a fishing exhibitin[.]

Well it has now been revealed that Reinhart previously defected from the U.S. Attorney’s office to work for convicted sex offender and notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Reinhart reportedly betrayed the prosecution against Epstein, and used information the government had to then help the criminal dirtbag.

From Politico:

Accused of leveraging “inside information about Epstein’s investigation to curry favor with Epstein,” in 2011, he was named as a prosecutor who allegedly violated the rights of an underage girl whom Epstein solicited sex from in the Crime Victims’ Rights Act lawsuit.

Reinhart suddenly resigned from the South Florida U.S. Attorney’s Office on New Year’s Eve 2008 and went to work for Epstein the following day.

In 12 years as a federal prosecutor, according to his official biography, Reinhart “managed a docket that covered the full spectrum of federal crimes, including narcotics, violent crimes, public corruption, financial frauds, child pornography and immigration.”

And it wasn’t as if Reinhart didn’t know what Epstein had been up to… he left in the middle of a Federal case against the notorious pedophile[.]

US 24 News Archived

Oh, but it's just lurid conspiracy talk about a worldwide, globalist child-sex trafficking ring for the Elites.

Mar A Lago raided by The Feds.

FT (Archived): Trump says FBI agents have raided his Mar-a-Lago residence.

Former US president Donald Trump said on Monday that his residence at the Mar-a-Lago golf club in Florida was being raided by a “large group” of FBI agents.

In a statement posted on Twitter by an affiliated account, Trump said his Florida residence “is currently under siege, raided and occupied by a large group of FBI agents. Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before.”

He added that the “unannounced raid was not necessary or appropriate” since he had been “working and co-operating” with the relevant government authorities, although he did not specify on what topic.

“They even broke into my safe!” he wrote.

The US Department of Justice declined to comment.

The Libs think actions like this is going to help them in the 2022 and 2024 elections? LMAO!

Dems are terrified of Trump and his supporters in the 2022 midterms and the 2024 presidential election.

-

Found this, I kind of agree with the thinking of this Anon I found on a board:

"We are so close to winning this.
understand this move is not coming from a position of strength.
Mara Lago was raided out of desperation.

"Trump will get indicted.
The charges will not stick.
just keep your heads a little while longer, NO VIOLENCE, and we win. guaranteed." 

Hennepin County Minnesota judge approves search warrant seeking the Google search history of anyone who "googled" the name of an ID Theft Victim

The crime: Identity Theft

The search warrant:  Requested by the police and signed by a judge permitting the police to obtain Google search histories of anyone who "googled" the name of the victim, Douglas Junker.

This is happening in Edina, MN - an affluent suburb south of Minneapolis.

From KMSP TV, Fox 9 News

A search warrant requested by Edina Police and approved by a Hennepin County Judge this past February is raising privacy concerns.

The warrant seeks the Google search history of anyone in Edina who googled the name “Douglas Junker” between December 1 and January 7.

Junker, an Edina resident, was a victim of identity theft that court documents allege cost him $28,000. The thieves allegedly used a photo obtained through a Google search to forge his passport.

From U.S. Courts.gov and the Fourth Amendment:

Whether a particular type of search is considered reasonable in the eyes of the law, is determined by balancing two important interests.  On one side of the scale is the intrusion on an individual's Fourth Amendment rights.  On the other side of the scale are legitimate government interests, such as public safety.

How great is the scale of intrusion seeking the entire internet search history of anyone who searched on the name of the victim? This is a no-brainer. This search warrant cannot possibly be Constitutional.