The Hillary-thread

[Forty Two]

"Your damn emails" are media tool to keep race a race:
Thus, when Clinton’s lead increases, making it seem more likely that she will decisively defeat Trump, news outlets seeking to sustain the horse-race narrative find it opportune to reexamine what has consistently proven to be the most damaging story line for the Clinton campaign. Conversely, when her lead shrinks and the horse race appears competitive, the email story loses some of its luster — at least absent a new revelation, like Comey’s letter to Congress.
WP

It's damaging, because it clearly demonstrates patently improper activities on her part. It's damaging because it shows her to be corrupt and a liar.

[Tero]

I take it you are not a lawyer?

No, you cannot look at everything on a computer. If you find terrorists on a pedophile's computer, you cannot go after them based on that.

[Forty Two]

I take it you are not a lawyer?

No, you cannot look at everything on a computer. If you find terrorists on a pedophile's computer, you cannot go after them based on that.

If the terrorist gives you the computer and says "here" and you happen to find a video showing Donald Trump raping a 13 year old on the computer, it's not inadmissible. This is basic stuff. Likewise, if you find a file with evidence that Donald Trump embezzled money or bribed a Congressman, then you don't need a warrant to look at that, if the computer was given to you to look at, or if you had a warrant for the computer in the first place.

If you get a warrant for a pedophile's computer, and as you're clicking through the files you see a folder marked "life insurance" and you click on it, and see what's in there, and in there is a series of communications between someone the pedophile knows and a terrorist group in Saudi Arabia..... you don't need a warrant to act on that information and the information is not inadmissible.

Here, apparently Weiner gave the FBI permission to search the laptop which he owned. That also impacts the analysis, because once the owner gives permission to search, anything found can be used. Like, if you give the cops permission to search your house, and they find drugs you thought they'd not be able to locate, you're fucked, even if if they were searching specifically for illegal guns.

Your understanding of law of search and seizure and warrants is incorrect.

[Tero]

Anything can be used...against Weiner. Not Huma or Hillary.

And you are still not a lawyer.

[Sean Hayden]

It’s as if the police had a warrant to search Weiner’s closet, but then decided to snoop around his bedroom as well.

I can't believe there are people this clueless. It's the police idiot.

[Tero]

It’s as if the police had a warrant to search Weiner’s closet, but then decided to snoop around his bedroom as well.

I can't believe there are people this clueless. It's the police idiot.

The courts. Not cops. If Huma signed something they can read her emails and charge her. Not Hillary, who has no legal deal with Weiner laptop and FBI.

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi ... ntext=bjcl

[Sean Hayden]

If I had a dime for every time I've heard what the police can't do...

[Forty Two]

Anything can be used...against Weiner. Not Huma or Hillary.

And you are still not a lawyer.

On what basis do you say that? If they found evidence on Weiner's computer that implicated Trump in a crime, or some mafia kingpin, or whatever, they could use it. What planet are you on?

You think if you have evidence of a murder or drug dealing on your computer - for example - and you give it to the FBI to search for evidence of alleged improper pictures of young girls you may have taken, that they can't use the evidence of murder and drug dealing against those folks?

Your position on this is absurd, to say the least.

[Forty Two]

It’s as if the police had a warrant to search Weiner’s closet, but then decided to snoop around his bedroom as well.

I can't believe there are people this clueless. It's the police idiot.

The courts. Not cops. If Huma signed something they can read her emails and charge her. Not Hillary, who has no legal deal with Weiner laptop and FBI.

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi ... ntext=bjcl

Look, you're wrong, but the fact is they DID get a warrant to search for the Hillary/Huma emails. What they found when they searched the Weiner case is the probable cause to get the warrant. So, to rid the case of any argument that they can't use the evidence because they needed a warrant, they got a warrant.

So, assuming they got warrant, which nobody is disputing, on what basis are you saying they can't use the evidence?

[Forty Two]

New York Police Department detectives and prosecutors working an alleged underage sexting case against former Congressman Anthony Weiner have turned over a newly-found laptop he shared with wife Huma Abedin to the FBI with enough evidence “to put Hillary (Clinton) and her crew away for life,” NYPD sources told True Pundit.

NYPD sources said Clinton’s “crew” also included several unnamed yet implicated members of Congress in addition to her aides and insiders.

The NYPD seized the computer from Weiner during a search warrant and detectives discovered a trove of over 500,000 emails to and from Hillary Clinton, Abedin and other insiders during her tenure as secretary of state. The content of those emails sparked the FBI to reopen its defunct email investigation into Clinton on Friday.

But new revelations on the contents of that laptop, according to law enforcement sources, implicate the Democratic presidential candidate, her subordinates, and even select elected officials in far more alleged serious crimes than mishandling classified and top secret emails, sources said. NYPD sources said these new emails include evidence linking Clinton herself and associates to:

Money laundering
Child exploitation
Sex crimes with minors (children)
Perjury
Pay to play through Clinton Foundation
Obstruction of justice
Other felony crimes
NYPD detectives and a NYPD Chief, the department’s highest rank under Commissioner, said openly that if the FBI and Justice Department fail to garner timely indictments against Clinton and co- conspirators, NYPD will go public with the damaging emails now in the hands of FBI Director James Comey and many FBI field offices.

“What’s in the emails is staggering and as a father, it turned my stomach,” the NYPD Chief said. “There is not going to be any Houdini-like escape from what we found. We have copies of everything. We will ship them to Wikileaks or I will personally hold my own press conference if it comes to that.”

The NYPD Chief said once Comey saw the alarming contents of the emails he was forced to reopen a criminal probe against Clinton.

“People are going to prison,” he said.

Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said.

“If they don’t cooperate they are going to see long sentences,” a federal law enforcement source said.

NYPD sources said Weiner or Abedin stored all the emails in a massive Microsoft Outlook program on the laptop. The emails implicate other current and former members of Congress and one high-ranking Democratic Senator as having possibly engaged in criminal activity too, sources said.

Prosecutors in the office of US Attorney Preet Bharara have issued a subpoena for Weiner’s cell phones and travel records, law enforcement sources confirmed. NYPD said it planned to order the same phone and travel records on Clinton and Abedin, however, the FBI said it was in the process of requesting the identical records. Law enforcement sources are particularly interested in cell phone activity and travel to the Bahamas, U.S. Virgin Islands and other locations that sources would not divulge.

The new emails contain travel documents and itineraries indicating Hillary Clinton, President Bill Clinton, Weiner and multiple members of Congress and other government officials accompanied convicted pedophile billionaire Jeffrey Epstein on his Boeing 727 on multiple occasions to his private island in the U.S Virgin Islands, sources said. Epstein’s island has also been dubbed Orgy Island or Sex Slave Island where Epstein allegedly pimps out underage girls and boys to international dignitaries.

Both NYPD and FBI sources confirm based on the new emails they now believe Hillary Clinton traveled as Epstein’s guest on at least six occasions, probably more when all the evidence is combed, sources said. Bill Clinton, it has been confirmed in media reports spanning recent years, that he too traveled with Epstein over 20 times to the island.

Laptop Also Unveiled More Classified, Top Secret Breaches

According to other uncovered emails, Abedin and Clinton both sent and received thousands of classified and top secret documents to personal email accounts including Weiner’s unsecured campaign web site which is managed by Democratic political consultants in Washington D.C.

Weiner maintained little known email accounts that the couple shared on the website anthonyweiner.com. Weiner, a former seven-term Democratic Congressman from New York, primarily used that domain to campaign for Congress and for his failed mayoral bid of New York City.

At one point, FBI sources said, Abedin and Clinton’s classified and top secret State Department documents and emails were stored in Weiner’s email on a server shared with a dog grooming service and a western Canadian bicycle shop.

However, Weiner and Abedin, who is Hillary Clinton’s closest personal aide, weren’t the only people with access to the Weiner’s email account. Potentially dozens of unknown individuals had access to Abedin’s sensitive State Department emails that were stored in Weiner’s email account, FBI sources confirmed.

FEC records show Weiner paid more than $92,000 of congressional campaign funds to Anne Lewis Strategies LLC to manage his email and web site. According to FBI sources, the D.C.-based political consulting firm has served as the official administrator of the anthonyweiner.com domain since 2010, the same time Abedin was working at the State Department. This means technically Weiner and Abedin’s emails, including top secret State Department emails, could have been accessed, printed, discussed, leaked, or distributed by untold numbers of personnel at the Anne Lewis consulting firm because they can control where the website and it emails are pointed, FBI sources said.

According to FBI sources, the bureau’s newly-minted probe into Clinton’s use and handling of emails while she served as secretary of state, has also been broadened to include investigating new email-related revelations, including:

Abedin forwarded classified and top secret State Department emails to Weiner’s email
Abedin stored emails, containing government secrets, in a special folder shared with Weiner warehousing over 500,000 archived State Department emails.
Weiner had access to these classified and top secret documents without proper security clearance to view the records
Abedin also used a personal yahoo address and her Clintonemail.com address to send/receive/store classified and top secret documents
A private consultant managed Weiner’s site for the last six years, including three years when Clinton was secretary of state, and therefore, had full access to all emails as the domain’s listed registrant and administrator via Whois email contacts.
Because Weiner’s campaign website is managed by the third-party consultant and political email guru, FBI agents are burdened with the task of trying to decipher just how many people had access to Weiner’s server and emails and who were these people. Or if the server was ever compromised by hackers, or other actors.

Abedin told FBI agents in an April interview that she didn’t know how to consistently print documents or emails from her secure Dept. of State system. Instead, she would forward the sensitive emails to her yahoo, Clintonemail.com and her email linked to Weiner.

Abedin said, according to FBI documents, she would then access those email accounts via webmail from an unclassified computer system at the State Dept. and print the documents, many of which were classified and top secret, from the largely unprotected webmail portals.

Clinton did not have a computer in her office on Mahogany Row at the State Dept. so she was not able to read timely intelligence unless it was printed out for her, Abedin said. Abedin also said Clinton could not operate the secure State Dept. fax machine installed in her Chappaqua, NY home without assistance.

Perhaps more alarming, according to the FBI’s 302 Report detailing its interview with Abedin, none of the multiple FBI agents and Justice Department officials who conducted the interview pressed Abedin to further detail the email address linked to Weiner. There was never a follow up, according to the 302 report.

But now, all that has changed, with the FBI’s decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation and the husband and wife seeking immunity deals to testify against Clinton and other associates about the contents of the laptop’s emails.

http://truepundit.com/breaking-bombshel ... y-perjury/

[Tero]

You think if you have evidence of a murder or drug dealing on your computer - for example - and you give it to the FBI to search for evidence of alleged improper pictures of young girls you may have taken, that they can't use the evidence of murder and drug dealing against those folks?

They would need to have some evidence other than the computer to get a warrant and then search the computer. In the Huma case, she gave permission but only AFTER their fishing expedition.

If they had approached the court with "we found emails to or from to Huma or Hillary on the Weiner computer, we would like to get a warrant to READ them" then it would be admissible.

The Fourth Amendment plain view standard doesn’t allow a seizure of emails based on a mere we-hope-to-later-determine standard. The government can’t seize the emails just because the Clinton investigation is extra important and any possible evidence is worth considering. Rather, the Fourth Amendment requires the initial look at the emails to generate “immediate” probable cause that they are evidence of a crime first, before their seizure is permitted and used to get a second warrant.
In other words, even if the FBI did find something incriminating about Clinton in Abedin’s emails, a judge would have to suppress the evidence because it would amount to what legal scholars call “fruit of the poisonous tree.” (As Kerr notes, it would be up to Abedin to make such a request as it is her privacy rights at stake).

[pErvinalia]

I thought it was Trump who was rooting underage girls with this paedophile guy. Is he implicated with this guy?

[Forty Two]

You think if you have evidence of a murder or drug dealing on your computer - for example - and you give it to the FBI to search for evidence of alleged improper pictures of young girls you may have taken, that they can't use the evidence of murder and drug dealing against those folks?

They would need to have some evidence other than the computer to get a warrant and then search the computer.

No, they wouldn't because you, the owner of the computer, gave them permission to search the computer. it's like when a cop stops you and says he can smell marijuana and asks you if he can look around in the car. If he finds heroin or an illegal gun, he can prosecute you. If the illegal gun belongs to your friend Bill, they can prosecute Bill./

In the Huma case, she gave permission but only AFTER their fishing expedition.

They don't need HER permission. They had Weiner's permission. They used the metadata to get probable cause to issue another warrant, which they got. So, the reality here is that they got a warrant to get the material. Our debate is whether they needed the warrant. I say they did not. You say they did. You're wrong, but they took that issue off the table by getting the warrant.

If they had approached the court with "we found emails to or from to Huma or Hillary on the Weiner computer, we would like to get a warrant to READ them" then it would be admissible.

That's what they did. Hence the bit last week weekend where the FBI was waiting for a warrant. They had the metadata, which showed the information you're talking about.

The Fourth Amendment plain view standard doesn’t allow a seizure of emails based on a mere we-hope-to-later-determine standard. The government can’t seize the emails just because the Clinton investigation is extra important and any possible evidence is worth considering. Rather, the Fourth Amendment requires the initial look at the emails to generate “immediate” probable cause that they are evidence of a crime first, before their seizure is permitted and used to get a second warrant.
In other words, even if the FBI did find something incriminating about Clinton in Abedin’s emails, a judge would have to suppress the evidence because it would amount to what legal scholars call “fruit of the poisonous tree.” (As Kerr notes, it would be up to Abedin to make such a request as it is her privacy rights at stake).

There's no poisonous tree here. That's why they got a warrant - to foreclose any argument that the tree was poisonous.

And, that's not even considering if Abedin is cooperating voluntarily or to get/preserve immunity.

[Tero]

pErvin, No.

Different guy: Trump and Epstein.

[Forty Two]

I thought it was Trump who was rooting underage girls with this paedophile guy. Is he implicated with this guy?

Bill Clinton is on the flight logs to Epstein's orgy island. I was surprised in this article at the mention of Hillary actually having gone there. I had never heard that before and I would love to see how they know that.

My understanding is that Trump's presence on orgy island is predicated on the decades old allegations in that twice dismissed federal lawsuit, where the anonymous plaintiff claims Trump was there, and raped her. However, I have not seen any suggestion that the flight logs showed Trump went there. It was confirmed that the flight logs show Bill Clinton was there more than 20 times. I have not seen any suggestion, until the article I linked, that Hillary went there, and I grant it no credence until there is something there to corroborate the allegation, and it would have to be something more than 20+ year old allegations in an election year civil suit.

the article I just linked makes some serious, and seriously specific allegations, claimed to be based on statements from New York City Police Department personnel. However, it's anonymous and not corroborated with hard evidence. So, I remain skeptical about the truth. Them's some really specific and really direct allegations, though. Not much wiggle room - either the documents support the allegations or they don't. It's not just some subtle, implication or innuendo - they come right out and make specific factual allegations.