I am old, I grew up during the "cold war". Everything bad that happened back then was the fault of the Russians. No matter how stupid it was or sounded. It seems we have come full circle. How hard would it be for Reid to say she was sorry for what she said in her blog, and to say that she no longer believes those things and has grown up or evolved or what ever. But no, it was the hackers fault. Anything except, excepting responsibility for her actions/words. Give me a break! I hope they hang her out to dry!
Rod

quote:

Originally posted by pessimist:

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:

quote:

Judge Napolitano explained that a key element of the situation – if Reid is proven to have fabricated the hacker story -- is “who sent the FBI on a wild goose chase,” as it would take a formal complaint filed by Reid or a lawyer on behalf of the liberal pundit to be held accountable. He said that if Reid’s legal team filed a formal complaint “knowing that the events about which she complained were caused by herself, that’s a felony.”

Once again Napolitano shows he knows nothing about the reality of federal investigations, and prosecutions.

Enlighten us. Everything he's quoted as saying seems exactly right to me.

Sure. I've worked in federal LE, as a criminal investigator (aka Special Agent), for well over a decade.

Napolitano has a habit of making claims about the federal criminal justice system, that are simply not true.

For example, in a November 17, 2016 "Townhall" editorial, he falsely claimed that Judges will not grant search or arrest warrants, unless there is an ongoing Grand Jury investigation. That is simply not true. I've sworn to dozens of search warrants, and criminal complaints (arrest warrants), and only a handful were issued while there was also an ongoing Grand Jury investigation.

Further, in the same article he claimed all warrants are "secret," saying, "All of this is commanded by law to be kept secret . . ." However, that is also not true. Unless the prosecutor and affiant can justify sealing the warrant, the warrants are put on the court docket, and available to be viewed at the US District Court Clerk's office, or online through the Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) system.

Hell, it's obvious to most with any common sense that arrest warrants are very rarely sealed. Those warrants are almost always quickly entered into the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database, so that if the subject of the warrant is contacted by any LEO, and queried in NCIC, the officer will learn of the warrant, and arrest the subject.

Then there are Napolitano's repeated false claims the USA-Patriot Act allows FBI agents to create and serve "search warrants," without establishing probable cause to a US Magistrate Judge. The problem being there is nothing in the portion of the US Code that is known as the USA-Patriot Act, or any other portion of the US Code that allows for that.

So, here we are again with Napolitano, making ridiculous claims about "formal complaints," and liability for lying to the government.

People who communicate with the government about facts material to the government, are required to be truthful. See Title 18, Section 1001, paragraph (a), of the US Code: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

It matters not if the false statements are made verbally while sitting at table in a local coffee shop, or via a written affidavit. If the statements are false, and concern facts material to the government, the person making those false statements can be held criminally liable for the lies.

Yet, here Napolitano says, " . . . it would take a formal complaint filed by Reid or a lawyer on behalf of the liberal pundit to be held accountable." However, that's simply not true. A verbal statement in a casual, or "informal" setting, can expose the person to criminal liability, if the statement is false, and concerns a fact material to the government.

Again, based on my extensive experience, including many cases involving investigation of violations of 18USC1001, and Napolitano's track record of other ignorant claims about the federal criminal justice system, I stand by my earlier statement that, "once again Napolitano shows he knows nothing about the reality of federal investigations, and prosecutions."

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:
Yet, here Napolitano says, " . . . it would take a formal complaint filed by Reid or a lawyer on behalf of the liberal pundit to be held accountable." However, that's simply not true. A verbal statement in a casual, or "informal" setting, can expose the person to criminal liability, if the statement is false, and concerns a fact material to the government.

I took that to mean the FBI wouldn't be investigating unless Joy or her staff had made a complaint and they'd be criminally liable if they were the ones who'd filed it.

I'm pretty certain Napolitano knows lying to LE in the course of a criminal investigation can get one in hot water.

quote:

Hackers trying to ruin your career before anyone knew who you were (or cared)?

Duh... they're time traveling hackers.

Wouldn't the site have a log of what IP/hostname made the entry?

9-8-2009-1543GMT:64.23.111.45:ATTCOMCASTWHATEVER

Or however those dudes see those things...

quote:

Originally posted by zoom6zoom:

quote:

Hackers trying to ruin your career before anyone knew who you were (or cared)?

Duh... they're time traveling hackers.

Give me your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle.

Re: “Reid, a key member of the #Resistance movement, denied writing the newly unearthed batch of homophobic slurs, which include shots at her current colleague Rachel Maddow, who is MSNBC’s biggest star and cash cow.”

Yeah, Rachel Madcow.

There was no hacking. She doesn't believe she wrote it. Apologized. Move along, please. Nothing else to see here or talk about.

https://www.hollywoodreporter....teful-things-1106686

MSNBC's Joy Reid Says "I Genuinely Do Not Believe I Wrote Those Hateful Things"

On Saturday morning, five days after Joy Reid was accused of authoring a series of homophobic blog posts that were unearthed by a Twitter user, the MSNBC host apologized for the controversy but said that she still doesn't think she wrote the posts in question.

"Here's what I know: I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things," she said on AM Joy. "But I can definitely understand based on things I have said and have written in the past that some people don't believe me.

On Monday, when Mediaite asked Reid about the blog posts, she said "an unknown, external party accessed and manipulated material from my now-defunct blog." On Wednesday night, her lawyer confirmed the FBI was investigating "potential criminal activities surrounding several online accounts" belonging to Reid.

But, on Saturday, Reid admitted that the posts don't appear to have been the result of hacking or tampering.

"When a friend found them in December and sent them to me, I was stunned," she said "Frankly, I couldn't imagine where they'd come from or whose voice this was. The reality is they have not been able to prove it."

To further get across the message, Reid convened a panel of gay rights advocates to discuss the controversy.

While she didn't take credit for the blog posts, she admitted that she's written and tweeted hurtful, anti-gay things in the past, and pledged to do better. "I looked back on some of the ways I've talked casually about sexual gender and orientation and I wonder who that even was," she said.

Reid continued: "I'm heartbroken that I didn't do better back then. The reality is I have to own the things I've written and tweeted and said."

Now that Reid has admitted that she doesn't appear to have been hacked, it's unclear what will happen to the FBI investigation into the matter.

So in other words, she doesn't want to admit that she was and still is a complete asshole.

So she doesn't self identify with what that person said several years ago?

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:
Yet, here Napolitano says, " . . . it would take a formal complaint filed by Reid or a lawyer on behalf of the liberal pundit to be held accountable." However, that's simply not true. A verbal statement in a casual, or "informal" setting, can expose the person to criminal liability, if the statement is false, and concerns a fact material to the government.

I took that to mean the FBI wouldn't be investigating unless Joy or her staff had made a complaint and they'd be criminally liable if they were the ones who'd filed it.

I'm pretty certain Napolitano knows lying to LE in the course of a criminal investigation can get one in hot water.

Then he could have said that, instead of this nonsense about only being liable if she had filed a "formal complaint." Any false statement, about a fact material to the government, can result in criminal liability, and the person doesn't have to "file" anything.

I knew someone would want to rationalize his nonsense, which is why I provided some examples of his track record (and used those two because they were discussed extensively on this forum). He is clearly NOT the expert he claims to be.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
MSNBC's Joy Reid Says "I Genuinely Do Not Believe I Wrote Those Hateful Things"

On Saturday morning, five days after Joy Reid was accused of authoring a series of homophobic blog posts that were unearthed by a Twitter user, the MSNBC host apologized for the controversy but said that she still doesn't think she wrote the posts in question.

"Here's what I know: I genuinely do not believe I wrote those hateful things," she said on AM Joy. "But I can definitely understand based on things I have said and have written in the past that some people don't believe me.

Oh, this is more delicious than I could ever have hoped.

Yeah, when you set yourself up as an official arbiter of society and condemn people with your piety (hey, that rhymes!), then it's damn near impossible to take your medicine when it's revealed that you're no better than anyone else.

Ain't that right, you self-righteous commie twit? Even after being fully exposed and even after having your lying excuses shown to be what they are, you still can't own up, because it would destroy the con you've been pulling. Well, too bad, you arrogant bitch. Everyone knows the truth.

Sounds like "I didn't do it, but if I did, I apologize."

WTF, over?

quote:

Originally posted by tgtshuter:
Sounds like "I didn't do it, but if I did, I apologize."

WTF, over?

Kinda like a defendant in court pleading guilty, but then saying that he really didn't do it. You know, "I'm just pleading guilty to put this behind us, but I'm really innocent."

Sorry, sweetheart. It doesn't work that way.

quote:

Originally posted by tgtshuter:
Sounds like "I didn't do it, but if I did, I apologize."

WTF, over?

More of the "my evil twin got drunk and posted it in my name" apology.

Foresight - Liberals don't have it.

This reminds me of the Paula Deen controversy. She was accused of racist language from years earlier. She apologized and said "But that's just not a word that we use as time has gone on. Things have changed since the '60s in the south."
Dean suffered for this: "Deen had cookery programs, publishing deals and endorsement contracts cancelled by Food Network,Smithfield Foods, Walmart,Target, QVC, Caesars Entertainment, Novo Nordisk, J.C. Penney, Sears, Kmart and her then-publisher Ballantine Books."
If there is any fairness in these things, Joy Reid will receive the same treatment. However, I doubt it.

Lots of black people PUBLICLY are against homosexuality. There are quite a few on the "down-low," though.

Doesn't Rachel Dolezal truly believe she is black? Now Joy truly believes she is not a bigoted hypocrite.

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
Doesn't Rachel Dolezal truly believe she is black? Now Joy truly believes she is not a bigoted hypocrite.

One makes as much sense as the other.