Garland orchestrated the classified docs case and MAL raid. He advised the National Archives guy about what he should be asking for and the right things to say.

To be honest, any person looking at that case and the raid could see the junior grade setup. It's only Trump delusionment that let people believe it was a legit case.

The PRA and SCOTUS rulings were pretty clear that former presidents had great authority over their records. And Trump was never trying to destroy records which is what the PRAs purpose was / is, he was simply possessing them. And he had every ****ing right to possess them.

I see Peter Strzok deleted his entire X history - and now he likes to be called Pete, not Peter - lol

— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) July 28, 2025

Add to that the national archives actually had the documents Trump had, he just had copies of them. Oh, and more shenanigans about re-classifying them under Biden (through 2091) after Trump had declassified them;

The FBI/DoJ raided Pres Trump's home and took away the documents he already declassified to prevent him from using documents in the election campaign, and for Durham to bring prosecutions.
They reclassified the documents on May 25, 2022--before the raid--until 2091. That's… https://t.co/TCm41uchiu

— Svetlana Lokhova (@RealSLokhova) July 28, 2025

Interesting;

What if I told you there was a straight forward way to indict Obama in connection with the Russia Collusion Hoax and it was based on a long-established Supreme Court sanctioned precedent -- and his POTUS immunity would not prevent it.

Behind a paywall. Seven day free trials are… pic.twitter.com/Tmhxt7V6Ss

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) July 27, 2025

The "Pinkerton Test."

Quote:

---

The Pinkerton Doctrine

The "Pinkerton Doctrine" is a legal principle derived from this Supreme Court decision. It establishes that a co-conspirator can be held responsible for substantive offenses committed by other members of the conspiracy. This liability applies even if the co-conspirator did not directly participate in or even know about the specific offenses.

For the doctrine to apply, the offenses must have been committed in furtherance of the conspiracy and must have been reasonably foreseeable. The doctrine's rationale is rooted in the concept of agency, viewing each conspirator as an agent for the others in carrying out the criminal plan. This means that an overt act by one conspirator can be considered the act of all, without requiring a new agreement for each specific act.

Elements of Pinkerton Liability

For Pinkerton Doctrine liability, the prosecution must prove several key elements. These include: a conspiracy among two or more individuals, criminal acts committed by a co-conspirator, and that these acts were in furtherance of the conspiracy and reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, the substantive crime must have been committed while the defendant was a member of the conspiracy, as there is no vicarious liability for acts committed before one joins a conspiracy or after a true withdrawal from it.

---

BREAKING: Sources tell me in 2018 former Trump Nat'l Security Adviser John Bolton received a classified memo summarizing the explosive report exposing how Brennan cooked up Putin-Trump intel, but Bolton stuck it in an NSC safe and never briefed Trump, believing the Brennan intel.

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 27, 2025

Source: https://t.co/leNWm29vK5

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) July 30, 2025

We're supposed to just take him at his word after the Epstein files balk?

Might want to read the article, hoss.

This is not an Epstein thread.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

This is not an Epstein thread.

---

Of course it's not. But we're supposed to believe they've found thousands of hidden docs regarding Russia Gate after the claims and then retractions about Epstein? Please.

Then don't believe him. Seems simple.

You aren't exactly refuting the information are you?

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Might want to read the article, hoss.

---

Sources claim...

Did I miss something else?

I personally don't care where they get the files from. Let them out into the light so we can finally see what we have known for years and maybe just maybe the MSM will report on the biggest political scandal is US historu(doubtful).

flown-the-coop said:

---

Then don't believe him. Seems simple.

You aren't exactly refuting the information are you?

---

What info? It's a claim they've found thousands of hidden files.

93MarineHorn said:

---

We're supposed to just take him at his word after the Epstein files balk?

---

He mentioned this room on the Rogan interview.

"Burn bags" makes for a great headline, but it's the norm for classified documents.

Patel is not claiming these documents were "hidden" either.

Im Gipper said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

We're supposed to just take him at his word after the Epstein files balk?

---

He mentioned this room on the Rogan interview.

"Burn bags" makes for a great headline, but it's the norm for classified documents.

---

It's the norm for classified documents that have been approved for destruction as opposed to retention. If they were approved for destruction, there should be a record of that decision because classified documents are kept in "inventory" from the time of creation. If they weren't approved for destruction and weren't listed in inventory the it implies that they were being hidden or illegally destroyed without a paper trail. That's the implication here.

93MarineHorn said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Then don't believe him. Seems simple.

You aren't exactly refuting the information are you?

---

What info? It's a claim they've found thousands of hidden files.

---

Ok, then what is your point other than to derail to Epstein?

It should surprise no one they kept the files stored in a non-standard location (this appears to be the case but maybe they had reason). Gipper points out that it would be standard to be stored in burn bags. Another poster says not if marked for deletion. Seems like it needs to be fleshed out a bit more.

So what is suspicious on this reporting?

ETA: If I am remembering correctly, the FBI compartmentalized the Russiagate document to where only 5-10 people in the whole of government had access to the files.

So there were Russia Hoax documents found in burn bags at FBI HQ.

Hmmmm.

Seems to me that I recollect every FBI office I've ever known about had burn bags for classified documents. They didn't rely on shredders.

Nearly all docs are kept in electronic case file databases…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) July 30, 2025

So you think that they put these documents into a burn bag, hoping no one would find out they were burning them, but then forgot to burn them?

Ship spot on as usual

Quote:

---

This is click bait from people who know nothing about how federal law enforcement works.

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

93MarineHorn said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Then don't believe him. Seems simple.

You aren't exactly refuting the information are you?

---

What info? It's a claim they've found thousands of hidden files.

---

Ok, then what is your point other than to derail to Epstein?

It should surprise no one they kept the files stored in a non-standard location (this appears to be the case but maybe they had reason). Gipper points out that it would be standard to be stored in burn bags.

So what is suspicious on this reporting?

---

Ffs, this isn't about the Epstein case itself. It's about whether or not to believe people who very recently held up binders and claimed they had the goods; and then completely retracted everything and claimed there was nothing to see here. Forgive me if I don't believe Patel when he makes these kinds of claims without proof.

It’s all going to come out.
Kash Patel on Joe Rogan telling about former FBI Director Comey’s secret room being uncovered.
Fox News reporting seized burn bags held key evidence. pic.twitter.com/9fGfC5As9S

— Big Fish (@BigFish3000) July 30, 2025

Im Gipper said:

---

So you think that they put these documents into a burn bag, hoping no one would find out they were burning them, but then forgot to burn them?

---

That's my interpretations of burn bags being stored in a "secret room." These documents were within the scope of many previous subpoenas from Grassely and FOIA requests (that would have been redacted) but their existence was apparently never acknowledged, even to Congress, Horowitz, or Durham. That's why they were in a secret room.

1. The documents in the Classified Annex came to the CIA.
2. How/when they got to the FBI -- either as part of the Annex or via some other route -- is not known.
3. Durham got his hands on them, and created the Annex.
4. The Classified version of Durham's report makes reference to their contents.
5. Durham's Classified Report went to the AG.
6. The AG sent the report to the Cong. Intel Committees.

And, don't forget, the CIA got the docs from a friendly foreign ally -- suspected of being the Dutch.

So -- AGAIN -- the idea that the one and only copy of the "Classified Annex" was in a burn bag in a secret room of the FBI, and Patel and MAGA might have never known it existed if it had been timely destroyed ....

Is conspiratorial garbage being fed to the masses for clicks and giggles.

To all the "What about"ers in the comments:

1. The documents in the Classified Annex came to the CIA.
2. How/when they got to the FBI -- either as part of the Annex or via some other route -- is not known.
3. Durham got his hands on them, and created the Annex.
4. The… https://t.co/uO1OI1ZT1H

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) July 30, 2025

Ulysses90 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

So you think that they put these documents into a burn bag, hoping no one would find out they were burning them, but then forgot to burn them?

---

That's my interpretations of burn bags being stored in a "secret room." These documents were within the scope of many previous subpoenas from Grassely and FOIA requests (that would have been redacted) but their existence was apparently never acknowledged, even to Congress, Horowitz, or Durham. That's why they were in a secret room.

---

I'm with ImGipper. The ONLY reason I could see for these to be physical documents is if they weren't in the digital system, which would make this whole deal even worse for them. They wouldn't need hardcopies as the info was so compartmentalized that only a handful of people actually had access to the information.

If they WERE in the digital system there is no reason to have them hard copy.

will25u said:

---

Ulysses90 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

So you think that they put these documents into a burn bag, hoping no one would find out they were burning them, but then forgot to burn them?

---

That's my interpretations of burn bags being stored in a "secret room." These documents were within the scope of many previous subpoenas from Grassely and FOIA requests (that would have been redacted) but their existence was apparently never acknowledged, even to Congress, Horowitz, or Durham. That's why they were in a secret room.

---

I'm with ImGipper. The ONLY reason I could see for these to be physical documents is if they weren't in the digital system, which would make this whole deal even worse for them. They wouldn't need hardcopies as the info was so compartmentalized that only a handful of people actually had access to the information.

If they WERE in the digital system there is no reason to have them hard copy.

---

Why would they even keep the physical copies? Even them why did the Dem friendly prior administration and FBI/DOJ not get rid of them before Trump came to office? There is no reason these should have existed as long as they did other than hubris or people plain forgot about them.

Maybe a whistleblower hid them.

DECLASSIFICATION: John Brennan's 15-member "Fusion Cell" that secretly investigated the Trump campaign for "colluding" w/ Russia began sending written reports to Obama's NSC in Aug 2016. These reports were also sent to FBI, NSA and ODNI. Where are these reports? ...developing ...

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 30, 2025

Sham Special Council is a sham...

FIX WAS IN: Special Counsel Robert Mueller never interviewed John Brennan or James Clapper &just treated their sham, politicized ICA as the gold standard. Worse, Mueller commissioned Brennan's handpicked ICA author Susan Miller (a fellow Trump hater) to help author his own report

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 30, 2025

NEW: FBI investigators+DOJ prosecutors weighing conspiracy-to-commit-perjury charges vs John Brennan +James Clapper aren't just examining their oral testimony, sources say. They're also looking @ written answers they gave to dossier questions from the House Intelligence Committee

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 30, 2025

NEW: The DOJ-FBI Strike Force investigating the Russiagate conspiracy of corruption is dusting off "a dozen" criminal referrals sent several yrs ago by the House Intelligence Committee to investigate Obama officials who potentially perjured themselves during closed-door hearings.

— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) July 30, 2025

Note the date. Here the FBI is organizing an investigation into “Trump’s Russia connections” on THE VERY SAME DAY, July 28 2016, that Hillary Clinton approved “a proposal to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.” https://t.co/t140XidpAJ pic.twitter.com/NSKdZeXRbQ

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) July 30, 2025

Not that easy. I am sure there are many other ways to get around answering questions.

Has a trap been set for Barack Obama? 👀

John Solomon points out that if Obama is summoned in front of a grand jury, he cannot take the 5th Amendment because he has immunity from prosecution, meaning he HAS TO tell the truth.

However, if he LIES, he no longer has that immunity… pic.twitter.com/Myu0D0TmRx

— Patri0tsareinContr0l (@Patri0tContr0l) July 30, 2025

will25u said:

---

Not that easy. I am sure there are many other ways to get around answering questions.

Has a trap been set for Barack Obama? 👀

John Solomon points out that if Obama is summoned in front of a grand jury, he cannot take the 5th Amendment because he has immunity from prosecution, meaning he HAS TO tell the truth.

However, if he LIES, he no longer has that immunity… pic.twitter.com/Myu0D0TmRx

— Patri0tsareinContr0l (@Patri0tContr0l) July 30, 2025

---

Yup, it will be a series of "I don't recall" and that will be that.

It would be funny, however, if he pulled a "You're *******ed right I did" to the question of "did you order the crossfire hurricane?"

Hussein is above the law.

Eric Holder committed contempt of Congress and nothing happened. Barack doesn't live by our rules. He won't testify.

Solomon is "click farming."

He knows there is no chance in hell Obama ever has to testify in front of anyone.