The Hillary-thread

[Forty Two]

Hillary may be under investigation now, via her Clinton Global Initiative, for violation of the RICO Act, which would be non-pardonable. Stay tuned.

As Carl Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein Watergate fame, said -- Comey would not have done this announcement if there wasn't something significant in there.

We shall see.

Didn't he make his statement/letter before they had a warrant to look at them??

The warrant step was not "necessary" because Weiner gave up the computer voluntarily. They don't need warrants to look at copies of documents on a laptop handed over voluntarily. That warrant was sought out of an abundance of caution, to make sure the "warrant" issue couldn't be raised at all.

Suggesting that a warrant is needed is like saying if a drug dealer turns over his computer, and there are emails about a money laundering scheme that they need a separate warrant to read the money laundering emails. They don't need that warrant. They would get it, though, if it was a high profile, highly powerful, lawyered up to the hilt suspect, to make sure they can't muck up the litigation with spurious warrant claims.

But, yes, Bernstein made that statement, I think, on Friday or Saturday.

[Forty Two]

Hillary may be under investigation now, via her Clinton Global Initiative, for violation of the RICO Act, which would be non-pardonable. Stay tuned.

As Carl Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein Watergate fame, said -- Comey would not have done this announcement if there wasn't something significant in there.

We shall see.

so so so

Just ask yourself what you'd be thinking about these very same allegations, were they leveled at Trump or a Bush. Are they boring to you because you just assume they must be bunk?

[pErvinalia]

No, I meant the statement by the FBI dude. What's the legality of Weiner having these emails (if some of them didn't include him as a recipient)? Do they perhaps need a warrant because he is illegally(?) in possession of them? I wonder what the value of them would be as evidence in court. You'd need the actual server records I'd imagine for an email to be admitted as evidence. A text copy on a random computer could be totally invented.

[Forty Two]

No, I meant the statement by the FBI dude. What's the legality of Weiner having these emails (if some of them didn't include him as a recipient)?

I suppose that depends on the email. But, even if he did not legally have them, that doesn't mean they aren't relevant to an investigation. Fruit of the poisonous tree law generally applies when the government does something to illegally obtain evidence. If they find illegally obtained evidence without them having any hand in illegally obtaining it, then that's admissible.

Do they perhaps need a warrant because he is illegally(?) in possession of them?

Nope. If Weiner gave them permission to look at the laptop, they need no warrant. They don't know what's in documents until they open them.

I wonder what the value of them would be as evidence in court. You'd need the actual server records I'd imagine for an email to be admitted as evidence. A text copy on a random computer could be totally invented.

Could be and it's up to the State to prove they are admissible and trustworthy.

[rainbow]

Hillary may be under investigation now, via her Clinton Global Initiative, for violation of the RICO Act, which would be non-pardonable. Stay tuned.

As Carl Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein Watergate fame, said -- Comey would not have done this announcement if there wasn't something significant in there.

We shall see.

so so so

Just ask yourself what you'd be thinking about these very same allegations, were they leveled at Trump or a Bush. Are they boring to you because you just assume they must be bunk?

I've yet to see anything vaguely incriminating in any email. There are a bunch of technicalities, but nothing that would actually make me care.
...and no. I'm not really interested in Trump's porn collection, or Bush's Disney comic books.

Cheney, that is something else. Wouldn't we all like to know how much was kicked back from the invasion of Iraq?

We are unlikely ever to get to the bottom of that one, since he had a team of professional bum-wipers looking after him.

[Tero]

This just in: Huma email from sex mail laptop reveals Hillary gefilte fish conspiracy

[Forty Two]

Hillary may be under investigation now, via her Clinton Global Initiative, for violation of the RICO Act, which would be non-pardonable. Stay tuned.

As Carl Bernstein, of Woodward and Bernstein Watergate fame, said -- Comey would not have done this announcement if there wasn't something significant in there.

We shall see.

so so so

Just ask yourself what you'd be thinking about these very same allegations, were they leveled at Trump or a Bush. Are they boring to you because you just assume they must be bunk?

I've yet to see anything vaguely incriminating in any email. There are a bunch of technicalities, but nothing that would actually make me care.
...and no. I'm not really interested in Trump's porn collection, or Bush's Disney comic books.

Cheney, that is something else. Wouldn't we all like to know how much was kicked back from the invasion of Iraq?

We are unlikely ever to get to the bottom of that one, since he had a team of professional bum-wipers looking after him.

Even Politifact couldn't find a way around finding Hillary a big fat liar about the emails -- http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... email-def/ And, same with Factcheck.org http://www.factcheck.org/2016/08/clinto ... falsehood/

So, the key here is Comey's original finding - "I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can't establish is that she acted with the necessary criminal intent," he insisted. "'Should have known,' 'must have known,' 'had to know' does not get you there. You have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they knew they were engaged in something that was unlawful."

So, what is in the new batch of emails? Well, for it to be important, it would have to be something to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hillary knew they were engaged in something that was unlawful.

If they found emails that she deleted/scrubbed/wiped/bleached (and used a hammer on devices), saying they turned over everything, and it turns out there were work-related emails (particularly with classified info) that were among the deleted items, then Hillary has a big problem. That would be proof she lied to the FBI, and was actively covering something up. You don't cover up something that you didn't think was wrong.

So, we'll see what comes of the Weiner documents. But, as Carl Bernstein noted, it would never have been announced this way unless they thought there was something significant there.

And, lastly, doesn't the fact that they physically took hammers to the relevant devices tell you anything at all about what they're doing? Does it at least send up a smoke signal?

I get not liking Trump. I get preferring Hillary. What I don't get is the complete and utter unwillingness of Hillary supporters to acknowledge even the smell of something fishy here.

[Forty Two]

"If this story gets out, we're screwed." http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-3 ... re-screwed

[Forty Two]

Dirty Donna Brazille has been fired from CNN because she was sharing debate questions with the Clinton campaign. She not only shared the question from the March 13 town hall meeting, but she shared a question or questions the previous week, too.

Fucking scumbags, every last one of them.

No, wait....Hillary won the primaries against Bernie Sanders "fair and square." She's an honorable person, and all the allegations against her and her campaign is part of the vast right-wing conspiracy to hinder her in her good offices.

[Tyrannical]

No, I meant the statement by the FBI dude. What's the legality of Weiner having these emails (if some of them didn't include him as a recipient)? Do they perhaps need a warrant because he is illegally(?) in possession of them? I wonder what the value of them would be as evidence in court. You'd need the actual server records I'd imagine for an email to be admitted as evidence. A text copy on a random computer could be totally invented.

Weiner probably didn't know the emails were there. 650k emails implies the laptop was synching / downloading them from the mail server silently in the background.
Hillary turned over how many emails under subpoena? Then deleted the rest. Hello half a million more emails lol

[Tero]

500 000 of those mails are just Wiener sexting.

As for the Huma emails, he stole them
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/bl ... -leverage/

[Brian Peacock]

There's going to be some sackings in the FBI when Hillary gets in.
So there should. This is no chance event.
It's a plot to steal the election.

Because the Obama Administration's Department of Justice is in Trump's pocket....

That says nothing about the legitimacy or appropriateness of Mr Comey’s action : http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 2#p1683532

Of course it doesn't. And, when Comey declined to prosecute, he was defending democracy and doing his job. Now, he's interfering with the election. All depends on whose ox is being gored.

The key is, is there evidence that Comey is conspiring against the Clinton campaign?

With respect, that's not the issue. Mr Comey’s action contravenes State Department guidance and the standing orders of Attorney Generals past and present.

[Brian Peacock]

You can't trust her, because she lies so much. While a person's pattern and practice of making stuff up may be a very weak way to judge their trustworthiness, it is one of the only things we have to go on....

Donald Trump made 27 false claims on Sunday Oct. 30, said 35 false things on Tuesday Oct. 25 and 37 false things on Monday Oct 24, while calling fact checkers ‘scum’. The list continues. ..

Daniel Dale, the Washington correspondent for the Toronto Star, has fact checked everything Trump has said for the last 10 months. His conclusion: Trump is 'factually-challenged', uttering falsehoods, of both the wilful and ignorant kind, between 20-30 times a day. Not only that, when challenged on his false claims and assertions he often doubles-down and not only repeats them, but backs them up with more stuff he seems to make up on the spot.

Here's the shorter list of lies on the Toronto Star website...

https://www.thestar.com/news/donald-tru ... facts.html

[pErvinalia]

So, we'll see what comes of the Weiner documents. But, as Carl Bernstein noted, it would never have been announced this way unless they thought there was something significant there.

Unless Comey is intent on politicising this and supporting Trump (or punishing Clinton).

And, lastly, doesn't the fact that they physically took hammers to the relevant devices tell you anything at all about what they're doing? Does it at least send up a smoke signal?

Not at all. Personal information is a valuable commodity, not least if you are a famous public figure.

[pErvinalia]

No, I meant the statement by the FBI dude. What's the legality of Weiner having these emails (if some of them didn't include him as a recipient)? Do they perhaps need a warrant because he is illegally(?) in possession of them? I wonder what the value of them would be as evidence in court. You'd need the actual server records I'd imagine for an email to be admitted as evidence. A text copy on a random computer could be totally invented.

Weiner probably didn't know the emails were there. 650k emails implies the laptop was synching / downloading them from the mail server silently in the background.
Hillary turned over how many emails under subpoena? Then deleted the rest. Hello half a million more emails lol

It sounds like it was Weiner and Huma's joint laptop, so it probably has her email account on it too.

edit: hang on, just saw Tero's post.