I thought about that, and there’s no way to PROVE that they did. This story says that they have a secret rating for documents. Without a list of those documents defense can’t PROVE that they hid info. And they seemingly can’t be compelled to honestly produce any documentation on any case. If you attempted to compel them, they’d just say “We’ve gotten 4,000,000 requests for exculpatory info, and only a few people have have enough clearance/access to be able to search for that info, so it’ll take us YEARS to be able to confirm/deny that we have anything”. (Hoping that the president will switch back to being a DEM, and they can just ignore all the requests).
Is the burden of proof on the defendant, to prove that they didn’t receive exculpatory evidence? Or is it on the prosecution to prove that they DID? The responsibility of providing it is a Constitutional demand for the prosecution to do. If it can be proven that they did not search all the databases that is all the proof it would take. If they did search the Forbidden database then they should have a record of that search.
It should be pretty easy to determine whether they did due diligence in searching all their databases. If there are so few who can search the Forbidden database, then they must have records of when it was done.
I’m wondering if the “hidden” room that Bongino says they were not allowed to know even exists has those records that are in the Forbidden database, and if that is the room where all the dirty secrets have gone to die.
The Deep State doesn’t believe in resurrection. But I do.