Comments by "Hal Bleavy" (@halbleavy9900) on "Trump attorney speaks out on the Mar-a-Lago raid" video.

  1. A lawyer does not have to be present for a house search by warrant, i.e. Breonna Taylor. However, feel free to fact-check me.
    44
  2.  Repent and believe in Jesus Christ  Relevance here?
    2
  3.  @joannetrivignobozik6218  No I'm saying the fact that a Lawyer was not "present" is not a violation of trump's 4th Amendment right. Will you folks please read the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution before you reply to a comment of mine...please, because I get tired of schooling all of you.
    2
  4.  @f.alexscott8393  The "no knock" is a very bad thing and the Democrat or republican who backs it needs to resign.
    2
  5.  @TC-kf9zw  Someone is and it's Blam man. That's why I replied to his comment. "No having the attorneys present". What does that imply?
    1
  6.  @seadonkey6913  You insulting a dead person does not troll me. Sorry to be the one to have to tell it to you.
    1
  7.  @BuckeyeFan-ty4vr  So why can't other people get the same expansion of the 4th Amendment? The U.S. Constitution applies to us all.
    1
  8.  @sharkyssite7492  Your first sentence conformed what I said in my reply. I never said the could not observe.
    1
  9.  @anon2427  I support a search warrant because it's actual purpose and reason for becoming part of the Bill of Rights was to protect us, not a law enforcement tactic as people have made the "no knock" warrant into. So...there...I made the distinction right in your face, also legislators have gotten rid of "no knock" warrants but you can't get rid of the 4th Amendment so easily.
    1
  10.  @leojablonski2309  People here have brought their opinions and feeling here but trumps 4th Amendment rights were not violated. Calling me Gomer is not changing that fact.
    1
  11.  @stevewillms9406  No sh!t. Can you please do me a favor and show me in the 4th Amendment where it's stated a witness has to be present because I love to learn. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    1
  12.  @seadonkey6913  Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. My hike was through the U.S. Constitution.
    1
  13.  @seadonkey6913  Sound like it was okay until one of your own got served.
    1
  14.  @ericdole1879  I know how to read so therefore I know more than you. Also, I hear a bunch on non-lawyers running their mouth about the 2nd Amendment so go play.
    1