|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 03 2016 11:22 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 09:34 Plansix wrote:On November 03 2016 09:32 xDaunt wrote:
So apparently WashPo is about to run a story stating that Comey has known about the emails on Weiner's computer since early October and refused to reopen the investigation into Hillary until he got additional evidence. Is anyone surprised? Should anyone reopen an investigation without new evidence in hand? Well it is odd to say the least, as the emails itself are the evidence. What additional evidence could he possibly get regarding those emails? I asume he could not read them because he did not have a warrant and the investigation was closed.
The article above very clearly covers that they did not have a warrant for the emails and needed one, which does not mean much on its own. The only reason we know about the emails is the letter sent by the FBI director. This could likely be nothing but a bunch of redundant emails they have already seen.
Every single PC that was used by someone that communicated with Clinton or her staff has emails on it that are part of the investigation. There are tens of thousands of email files on peoples PCs that could possibly not have been reviewed by the FBI. Every time they finds a new PC from someone who worked in the Government, they could find something. That doesn't mean it is worth claiming there is new information.
|
Andrew McCarthy with National Review wrote a really good article on what's going on with the FBI and the emails, and he sums it up with this:
Here, however, is the real outrage: Beneath all this noise, Loretta Lynch’s Justice Department is blocking the FBI from examining Clinton e-mails in connection with its investigation of the Clinton Foundation — an investigation that is every bit as serious. Were it not for the Clinton Foundation, there probably would not be a Clinton e-mail scandal. Mrs. Clinton’s home-brew communications system was designed to conceal the degree to which the State Department was put in the service of Foundation donors who transformed the “dead broke” Clintons into hundred-millionaires.
At this point, the reopened classified-information investigation is a distraction: Under the Comey/DOJ “insufficient intent evidence” rationale, there would be no charges even if previously undiscovered classified e-mails were found on the Abedin/Weiner computer. Instead, what is actually essential is that the FBI’s Clinton Foundation investigators get access to all the thousands of Clinton e-mails, including those recovered from the Mills and Samuelson laptops. The agents must also have the time they need to piece together all the Clinton e-mails (from whatever source), follow up leads, and make their case. No one seems to notice that they are being thwarted. Hillary hasn’t even been elected, but already we are benumbed by Clinton Scandal Exhaustion Syndrome.
Source.
The full piece is really interesting in that it fully explains all of the different factions and dynamics at work here.
|
President Kaine would be the best possible outcome of this election.
Gotta look for those silver linings.
|
The FBI's investigation into the Clinton Foundation that has been going on for more than a year has now taken a "very high priority," separate sources with intimate knowledge of the probe tell Fox News.
FBI agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people on the foundation case, which is looking into possible pay for play interaction between then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. The FBI's White Collar Crime Division is handling the investigation.
Even before the WikiLeaks dumps of alleged emails linked to the Clinton campaign, FBI agents had collected a great deal of evidence, law enforcement sources tell Fox News.
"There is an avalanche of new information coming in every day," one source told Fox News, who added some of the new information is coming from the WikiLeaks documents and new emails.
FBI agents are "actively and aggressively pursuing this case," and will be going back and interviewing the same people again, some for the third time, sources said.
Agents are also going through what Clinton and top aides have said in previous interviews and the FBI 302, documents agents use to report interviews they conduct, to make sure notes line up, according to sources.
Source.
So yeah, it looks like that what may have been found on Weiner's laptop has to do with the Clinton Foundation and possible corruption. SSSSHHHHHHHHHHHOCKING.
|
Saying that the private server was for the purpose of concealing a giant State/CF corruption scandal is one giant assumption. Scandal exhaustion is a function of the profit driven media that is making scandals out of innocuous emails. The only real potential instances of corruption that I'm aware of are Morocco/Mosaic, Uranium One, donors getting State jobs, and the DNC. To say we have a daily cascade of scandals or a disqualifying cybersecurity transgression is a bit biased.
|
These emails are critical to the third investigation into the democratic nominee that we have been conducting since 2012. We expect to be finished by the end of the Republic.
|
well the way its going the republic could end sooner than expected i suppose
|
I'd have to a imagine Clinton lawyers could get the wikileaks evidence thrown out pretty easily. Unless the FBI subpoenaed Podesta's gmail or something.
|
If they look at all the emails Clinton has ever written, maybe then they could find criminal charges.
|
On November 03 2016 12:06 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +The FBI's investigation into the Clinton Foundation that has been going on for more than a year has now taken a "very high priority," separate sources with intimate knowledge of the probe tell Fox News.
FBI agents have interviewed and re-interviewed multiple people on the foundation case, which is looking into possible pay for play interaction between then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. The FBI's White Collar Crime Division is handling the investigation.
Even before the WikiLeaks dumps of alleged emails linked to the Clinton campaign, FBI agents had collected a great deal of evidence, law enforcement sources tell Fox News.
"There is an avalanche of new information coming in every day," one source told Fox News, who added some of the new information is coming from the WikiLeaks documents and new emails.
FBI agents are "actively and aggressively pursuing this case," and will be going back and interviewing the same people again, some for the third time, sources said.
Agents are also going through what Clinton and top aides have said in previous interviews and the FBI 302, documents agents use to report interviews they conduct, to make sure notes line up, according to sources. Source. So yeah, it looks like that what may have been found on Weiner's laptop has to do with the Clinton Foundation and possible corruption. SSSSHHHHHHHHHHHOCKING.
The people being interviewed are not gonna take the fall for clinton. She's going to end up in prison. Also 5 different actors hacked her private server.
|
United States41991 Posts
Er, Doodsmack, Uranium One isn't a scandal. Literally no part of it is a scandal. The guy who gave money wasn't Russian, no uranium was exported to Russia, the decision wasn't in Clinton's power to make, Clinton didn't help him after getting money, Bush was the President when he donated to the Clinton Foundation, no American assets changed hands, Russia didn't get more nuclear material, the US didn't get less nuclear material, no national security interests were at stake and the guy who bribed Clinton wasn't related to the company at the time of the sale. The Uranium One narrative is that this guy bribed Clinton during the Bush presidency in order to have a dozen departments not related to Clinton sign off on a deal that was completely fine for a company he had no stake in.
|
On November 03 2016 12:10 Doodsmack wrote:
I'd have to a imagine Clinton lawyers could get the wikileaks evidence thrown out pretty easily. Unless the FBI subpoenaed Podesta's gmail or something.
A lot of the Podesta emails have cryptographic signatures that prove they were sent from his account.
|
On November 03 2016 12:07 Doodsmack wrote:
Saying that the private server was for the purpose of concealing a giant State/CF corruption scandal is one giant assumption. Scandal exhaustion is a function of the profit driven media that is making scandals out of innocuous emails. The only real potential instances of corruption that I'm aware of are Morocco/Mosaic, Uranium One, donors getting State jobs, and the DNC. To say we have a daily cascade of scandals or a disqualifying cybersecurity transgression is a bit biased.
Much of this information is coming from "FBI sources" (whatever that means), so I wouldn't count it out as being speculative or a "giant assumption." Fox is also reporting that FBI sources are telling them that an indictment is likely. I'm thinking that it's more and more likely that Comey was forced to write that letter to Congress to save his own ass.
|
On November 03 2016 12:12 Buckyman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2016 12:10 Doodsmack wrote:
I'd have to a imagine Clinton lawyers could get the wikileaks evidence thrown out pretty easily. Unless the FBI subpoenaed Podesta's gmail or something. A lot of the Podesta emails have cryptographic signatures that prove they were sent from his account.
They would be better off getting them from his PC rather than using the wikileaks stuff, evidence wise.
|
On November 03 2016 12:10 Doodsmack wrote:
I'd have to a imagine Clinton lawyers could get the wikileaks evidence thrown out pretty easily. Unless the FBI subpoenaed Podesta's gmail or something.
Criminal law isn't my forte, but my recollection seems to be that the Fourth Amendment would not bar the Wikileaks evidence because the State wouldn't have done anything wrong to acquire it. I'm not even sure that the State would need a subpoena to acquire the emails independently.
|
The woman who filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump alleging he raped her when she was 13 years old was scheduled to speak out publicly Wednesday, but the press conference was called off just as it was scheduled to start.
Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, told members of the media that the accuser—who is still going by her identity in court documents, Jane Doe—had received numerous death threats throughout the day and decided against revealing her identity.
The accuser alleges that Trump raped her repeatedly at a series of 1994 parties thrown by billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who has since been convicted and served 13 months for solicitation and procurement of minors for prostitution. Epstein was "widely known to throw wild parties with young women and girls," according to The Huffington Post, which also found Trump admitted to knowing Epstein in a New York Magazine article: "I've known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy...He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it—Jeffrey enjoys his social life."
A court date has been set for December 16 of this year, when Trump is scheduled to have a "status conference" with a judge. According to HuffPost, the story has so far received minimal mainstream media coverage for a number of reasons, including that the accuser has remained anonymous and her public backers were heavily criticized in the press.
Trump's defenders will likely point out that Bill Clinton has also been linked to Jeffrey Epstein.
Source
|
The wikileaks stuff wouldn't get attacked under the 4th Amendment very successfully as it applies almost exclusively to evidence obtained at first hand by government actors. There are a host of FRE tactics that'd likely work though, as legitimately authenticating the emails would likely turn into an expert witness battle. Similarly, the entity responsible for the hack that gave rise to original suspicions would likely be unavailable for court proceedings, meaning the emails could also be attacked on Confrontation Clause grounds.
|
I feel like it would be highly illegal and potentially violating the Hatch Act, not to mention pointless and nonsensical, to write a letter about how you need permission to access emails to use for review in one case while secretly planning to use them for review in another case.
|
I wonder how it would have played out if Hillary just up and released all the emails on her own and embraced the "transparency" angle. It would have buried the story under a mountain of emails months ago, removed the power the Russians have over her, and get her the only positives she can get out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
