Active Users:1186 Time:22/11/2024 08:23:52 PM
I fher ex husband is carrying a laptop with claddified infomration it doesn't matter if they are new *NM* random thoughts Send a noteboard - 31/10/2016 08:17:33 PM

View original postYou might want to calm down before you start attacking other people's math skills.




View original postAs of Sunday morning Comey did not know anything what so ever about e-mails and what the e-mails consisted of on Anthony Weiner's laptop that may possibly be connected to Clinton. This is because the warrant that the Justice Department got 5 weeks (edit: I said months by accident in the original message, I mean 5 weeks ago) ago involved Anthony Weiner and not Huma Abedin (Anthony Weiner's wife, they are separated and getting a divorce Huma is a long time Clinton Aide).


View original postWhen the laptop was seized in early October it was seized in Anthony Weiner's sexting case. During the investigation it became obvious that Huma also used this laptop but the FBI is not allowed to read her e-mails for the warrant only covers Anthony Weiner and not Huma. As an analogy if you were investigating someone and you got a warrant to search the house of a drug dealer, the warrant may allow you to open and read a person's mail but this does not allow you to read mail that has the suspect's wife name on the mail.


View original postYou know mail exists but you can't read the mail for you do not have a warrant to read other people's mail just because you feel it may be relevant for other investigations.


View original postOrin Kerr, a conservative law professor (he is definitely not a liberal) who blogs for years on the Volokh Conspiracy (a libertarian blog) explains some of the issues involved. Orin Kerr actually specializes in 4th amendment cases involving warrants and stuff like criminal procedure, computers, data surveillance, etc.


View original posthttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/10/30/was-it-legal-for-the-fbi-to-expand-the-weiner-email-search-to-target-hillary-clintons-emails/?utm_term=.561f2c944f7d


View original postNote that Orin Kerr link I gave above is from Sunday morning, the time is very relevant for let me bring up the next bit of news.


View original postSunday Evening the FBI got the warrant to read Huma's e-mails.


View original posthttp://www.vox.com/2016/10/30/13473844/fbi-warrant-clinton-emails


View original postThere is up to 650,000 emails and there is no way they are going to read all of them in 9 days. Most likely these e-mails are just going to be duplicates for previously turned over e-mails that Huma did for other devices and so on.


View original postBut the point is this anyone who was speculating 11 days out that Comey KNOWS THINGS AND IT IS BAD FOR CLINTON, was just widely speculating since Comey did not know anything on the following days


View original post* Thursday - Comey first learns of the laptop)


View original post* Friday - Comey writes a letter to the Justice Committee saying there may be more info and since he promised earlier to keep them updated he says there may be more info and we do not know any significance of said more info just that there may be something relevant to the case. People start speculating


View original post* Saturday - Comey still knows nothing more


View original post* Sunday Morning - Comey still knows nothing more


View original post* Sunday Evening the warrant is now in place and the FBI can now see if any new information is somehow involved with this case.


View original postSo I repeat, anybody that was speculating that Clinton is a known crook and this proves it, since Comey knows X is just full of it. Comey was letting Congress known for he promised Congress (under oath) that he will keep them up to date if something new develops.


View original postNow it is actually against Justice Department policy to do the promise that Comey did for you are not supposed to inform people outside the investigation of changes that are occurring during an investigation until an investigation is complete for it causes all forms of wild speculation such as we are seeing here.




View original postLet me object once again for you attacking Legolas Math Skills, that is a personal attack that should not be done, just like it is not cool to talk about a man's mother you should not attack someone ability to do math

Reply to message
So, uh, we're just not gonna talk about H. Clinton being back under FBI investigation, huh? *NM* - 30/10/2016 02:37:33 AM 698 Views
Until Comey clarifies, there's nothing to talk about - just speculate. - 30/10/2016 10:00:56 AM 547 Views
Nods *NM* - 30/10/2016 04:46:35 PM 244 Views
Do the math, Hillary is a known crook..... - 31/10/2016 02:21:40 AM 606 Views
You are bringing your biases and projections into this - 31/10/2016 02:17:21 PM 624 Views
I fher ex husband is carrying a laptop with claddified infomration it doesn't matter if they are new *NM* - 31/10/2016 08:17:33 PM 351 Views
being an ex-House member, he *IS* allowed classified information if it's meant for him - 31/10/2016 08:53:43 PM 541 Views
Being a CURRENT House memebr does not automatically give you a security clearance... - 01/11/2016 11:28:50 AM 504 Views
neither does having "claddified infomration" automatically presume criminal activity - 01/11/2016 04:43:24 PM 676 Views
This is where you are actually wrong.... - 01/11/2016 06:04:57 PM 485 Views
More interesting then anything.... - 01/11/2016 06:08:19 PM 508 Views
so you have read the contents of the emails in question? that is the larger point here - 02/11/2016 08:05:53 PM 539 Views
In theory, I agree with you... - 03/11/2016 03:48:58 PM 530 Views
Re: In theory, I agree with you... - 04/11/2016 06:01:55 PM 526 Views
I do love how, for the Dems, he went from... - 31/10/2016 02:17:42 PM 528 Views
Ewww. *NM* - 04/11/2016 04:06:37 PM 207 Views
she's not under any investigation whatsoever - 31/10/2016 06:00:14 PM 502 Views

Reply to Message