FNC reporting the Hilary's Email contained a "Top Secret" labeled message

SIGforum

This topic can be found at:
https://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/320601935/m/9250013683

October 30, 2016, 01:46 PM

JALLEN

FNC reporting the Hilary's Email contained a "Top Secret" labeled message

It's hard to spin in the dark, and risky, too.

Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown

October 30, 2016, 01:47 PM

Il Cattivo

Then Hillary & Co. need to get on Lynch to get the warrant. If the FBI/DOJ absolutely have to negotiate with Abedin's lawyers (it may theoretically be easier that way in most cases, but is it absolutely necessary now?), then Hillary & Co. need to get on Abedin to give whatever consent may be needed.

After all, they've demanded the FBI act knowing that the FBI cannot do so. Doesn't it look suspicious if they don't call on Lynch and Abedin to take whatever action they have to in order to make the emails public?

October 30, 2016, 01:48 PM

JALLEN

quote:
Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
Then Hillary & Co. need to get on Lynch to get the warrant. If the FBI/DOJ absolutely have to negotiate with Abedin's lawyers (it may theoretically be easier that way in most cases, but is it absolutely necessary now?), then Hillary & Co. need to get on Abedin to give whatever consent may be needed.

Chris Wallace just announced that Bret Baier has e-mailed in that he has two sources that say that Anthony Weiner is cooperating in the investigation. No warrant may be needed.

October 30, 2016, 01:49 PM

Il Cattivo

Nuts. It'd be fun to roast Hill over this little conundrum (for her, I'm guessing) like a chestnut in an iron skillet.

October 30, 2016, 01:49 PM

Balzé Halzé

The news is that Weiner has been cooperating with the investigation and willingly turned over the laptop so no warrant was necessary to view its contents.

ETA: As JALLEN pointed out.

Though Fox News Sunday was filmed much earlier this morning so this is not exactly new news.

~Alan

Acta Non Verba
NRA Life Member (Patron)
God, Family, Guns, Country

Men will fight and die to protect women... because women protect everything else. ~Andrew Klavan

October 30, 2016, 01:51 PM

Il Cattivo

As JALLEN pointed out earlier, it's possible that getting Abedin to go along would obviate problems (or potential lines of defense) down the road. On the other hand, I don't ever want to hear about a negotiated interrogatory or negotiated anything in this investigation ever again.

October 30, 2016, 01:53 PM

Gustofer

Is there some spousal privilege involved with this though?

If it was a shared computer, perhaps she has some say in whether or not it is released without a warrant.

________________________________________________________
"Great danger lies in the notion that we can reason with evil." Doug Patton.

October 30, 2016, 01:53 PM

Il Cattivo

It actually works the other way as well. If both of them can use it, either can consent to give the FBI access to it. The potential problems occur if Abedin can somehow argue that this should be an exception to the rule, or if the DOJ "negotiates" away FBI access to some or all of the information on the laptop.

October 30, 2016, 01:59 PM

Mainframe Coder

quote:
Originally posted by JALLEN:
No warrant may be needed.

That's great news! It does sound a bit familiar, though. I think someone posted that a while back in the thread. Maybe earlier today? Let me browse back through the thread and see if I can find it.

Nonetheless, it's great news.

October 30, 2016, 02:22 PM

Veeper

quote:
Originally posted by amals:
^^^ Keep 'em coming, JALLEN. I always appreciate your reasoned legal perspective in threads like this.

+100

I greatly appreciate JALLEN's contributions.

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it.”—H.L. Mencken

October 30, 2016, 02:33 PM

slosig

I can't help wondering if there are a few democrats out there thinking, "Oh CRUD! Wish we had Bernie instead." If this goes like we all hope and Trump buries Mrs. Clinton at the polls, I wonder if there will be an internal revolt in the Democratic Party? After all that talk about how Mr. Trump was tearing the Republican party apart, it would sure be nice to watch the Dems shred themselves in the aftermath of the election.

October 30, 2016, 02:35 PM

Andyb

Being associated with the democrats at this point is tantamount to being associated with traitors. It reflects very poorly on the person.

"Pickin' stones and pullin' teats is a hard way to make a living. But, sure as God's got sandals, it beats fightin' dudes with treasure trails."

"We've been tricked, we've been backstabbed, and we've been quite possibly, bamboozled."

October 30, 2016, 02:43 PM

dgwiggans

quote:
Originally posted by Il Cattivo:
It actually works the other way as well. If both of them can use it, either can consent to give the FBI access to it. The potential problems occur if Abedin can somehow argue that this should be an exception to the rule, or if the DOJ "negotiates" away FBI access to some or all of the information on the laptop.

Hopefully just negotiate to lesser charges & fines rather than any get out of jail free card. I wouldn't be surprised that Ex-Mrs Weiner reaped some of the dirty pay for play monies herself, for her efforts. Mr. Weiner certainly needs to do time for his sexting exploits.

October 30, 2016, 02:47 PM

Flashlightboy

NY Family Law question:

Is NY one of those states where either spouse holds the privilege and keep the other from talking or is it one where, if one spouse waives the other can't assert it?

Depending on the answer, it might make access to the laptop easier.

October 30, 2016, 02:57 PM

sigfreund

The spousal privilege question is interesting. I’m no expert, but I believe it applies only to testimony per se, and not something like reporting or handing over physical evidence. If my wife found a chopped up body in our freezer, reported it to the police, and let them in to seize the evidence, I don’t believe that would be a violation. What she couldn’t do would be testify in court that I came home one night covered in blood and said, “I killed that bastard.”

I would be interested, though, in real legal opinions.

► 6.0/94.0

I can tell at sight a Chassepot rifle from a javelin.

October 30, 2016, 03:01 PM

sigfreund

quote:
Originally posted by getupatree:
Does the fact that State emails are in fact government property change anything warrant-wise?

I doubt it. The Fourth Amendment protection arises from the fact that they are in the suspect’s “papers” that are secure from unreasonable search. It would be no different than saying it wasn’t necessary to get a warrant to search someone’s house for stolen property—government or otherwise. By definition stolen property belongs to someone other than the possessor.