HarveyKlinger ago

There is a reoccurring rumor every month or so that the FBI and/or NYPD is going to prosecute Hillary Clinton for underage sexual allegations due to Wiener's laptop. It never happens and I can't figure out where the stories originated from. But every month, it's published by some website as if it were brand new news 5 minutes ago.

Examples:

NYPD: http://yournewswire.com/nypd-hillary-clinton-child-sex-scandal/

FBI: https://conservativedailypost.com/breaking-fbi-confirms-evidence-of-huge-underground-clinton-sex-network/

KittyTigerlily ago

Remember when Julian was going to dump that big one and didn't? Hillary came out and was very scared, saying there's going to be some lies coming out about me, etc. So I'm thinking that it's real. Or something is going on with this.

KittyTigerlily ago

DCAGE ago

Can someone archive?

Millennial_Falcon ago

They are releasing (a redacted version of) the warrant, not evidence. Flairing "accuracy in question."

CrackerJacks ago

The judge only wanted to see the warrant . Not to release the emails.

As a result of a recent Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Justice by Los Angeles attorney E. Randol Schoenberg, the FBI must now provide “immediate disclosure of the FBI search warrant for the e-mails of Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin on Anthony Weiner’s laptop.”>

bdmthrfkr ago

The warrant was released yesterday, nothing (not redacted) was really in it.

Dead end.

Banned4Truth ago

This thread from another site says different http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1152685/pg1

So 81 email chains contained classified info all the way to Top Secret at the time they were sent with 68 of them remaining classified to this day according to the warrant.

bdmthrfkr ago

That was already known from the original 35000 emails released from the Clinton server, if I am not mistaken. I could be wrong about that but either way it wasn't significant, and unless that article 5 that was redacted in full has something interesting (I am sure it did) then nothing really significant happened.

Sorry.

ThruTheHaze ago

Can anyone confirm that we already had these numbers? If not, I would totally consider this release relevant and news worthy. We all knew she was negligent, but this much seems shocking.

bdmthrfkr ago

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/22-hillary-clinton-emails-declared-top-secret-218420

and some of the emails are SAP top secret (normally hosted on air-gapped systems which can only be viewed in a specially shielded room). This most certainly is news, but it's been around for awhile.

ThruTheHaze ago

Ok, so only a little more detail. Thanks for the link.

I think the real worth is keeping this info visible and relevant. They like to bury stuff like this.

AreWeSure ago

There's really nothing new from the warrant. It's basically restated what was already known to provide probable cause to seize/search the new emails.

We knew about the Top Secret SAP emails and we even know what was discussed on them back in June.

The emails were sent or fowarded to Hillary and they were sent from nonsecure government servers. That is to say, if a crime had been committed it would have gone well beyond Hillary. The private server is a separate issue in this case.

The "Top Secret" in question is something that is not actually very secret. It regards the CIA drone program which even though POTUS has talked about publicly still cannot be discussed by anyone at State. If the NY Times prints an article about a drone strike, you cannot attach that article to an email and say, "Hey, look at this." on a nonsecure government account like a @state.gov email address. You would have to move to the secure system.

The 22 emails with the highest classification were basically vague references about the drone program. This article is from June and confirmed reporting from Jan/Feb

At the center of a criminal probe involving Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information is a series of emails between American diplomats in Islamabad and their superiors in Washington about whether to oppose specific drone strikes in Pakistan.

The 2011 and 2012 emails were sent via the “low side’’—government slang for a computer system for unclassified matters—as part of a secret arrangement that gave the State Department more of a voice in whether a Central Intelligence Agency drone strike went ahead, according to congressional and law-enforcement officials briefed on the Federal Bureau of Investigation probe.

The vaguely worded messages didn’t mention the “CIA,” “drones” or details about the militant targets, officials said.

The still-secret emails are a key part of the FBI investigation that has long dogged Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, these officials said.

The State Department protest to the intelligence community that they were often given only like 20-30 minutes to weigh in on a drone strike and if they used the most secure system, no would be able to read the email if they were out of the office, so it was take many hours to reply. What they did was to use the "low side" system, but be extremely vauge about what the emails were about.

lukynumbrkevin ago

And you got downvoated for being correct, wtf is wrong with people that they dont even bother to verify if what you say is correct, they just insta downvoat. This post is a day late and a dollar short.

bdmthrfkr ago

I really don't care cause if you don't pay you can't play.

SheSaidDestroy ago

The ego is the number one weakness, those who are more terrified of turning out to be mistaken sometimes, than they are determined to find the truth, those who are terrified of being human, in essence. The narcissist is the favored prey of the psychopath, so easy to control. Upvotes are a tool that can be used to help something important make it onto the first page of "Hot" which is what those who have been programmed to only skim headlines will see. Beyond that votes are meaningless, so don't sweat it.

srayzie ago

Are you saying the poster only posted this because they were hungry for upvotes? I don't think it's right for you to say that. There is obviously a news article. Rather the news article is true or not remains to be seen. But to judge someone's reason for posting this as possible narcissistic isn't nice. I've stood up for you before too I believe. You have anxiety attacks? I'm just saying...

Keltoi ago

That would be amazing but I'll believe it when I see it. Not sure I can trust a website that has a ticker at the top with a headline that states "Exact Date Of Biblical Apocalypse Revealed".

AreWeSure ago

Literally a fake news site.

AreWeSure ago

Wow. Just read the article. The article take the hook of something real that happened. The judge unsealed the warrant and it gets that info from the legitimate site lawnewz.com and wraps it up in a lot of fake news bullshit.

A judge has ordered the FBI to publish evidence relating to its investigation of Hillary Clinton and a child sex ring in Washington. Nonsense. This is about the closed case of her emails. And no "evidence" is being published just the warrant. Last November, a State Department official confirmed that the FBI were investigating Hillary Clinton’s connection to an elite Washington pedophile ring This is complete BS. If you follow the link, it's not "a State Department official" who did anything. It's a private citizen who used to work in government. Someone with no official capacity whasoever.

According to sources, files found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop showed evidence of a political pedophile ring operating within Washington, implicating Washington’s elite as well as Clinton and her aides. This a common fake news tactic. This site does no reporting. They use real news reports from other sites and write up a lot of BS and pretend to have their own anonymous sources.

Folks, you need critical reading skills and genuine skepticism.

MolochHunter ago

DYNAMITE! - that court order looks legit, doesnt it? Any lawyers on site, what are they referring to in the Conclusion 'right to unseal' does that effectively mean there's no obstruction in them exposing/examining the emails on the laptop?

This judge has really kicked Clinton in the Cankle: " the judge determined Clinton essentially waived her privacy right arguments that the uncharged subject of an investigation typically can rely on. In the words of the judge, Clinton has “little remaining privacy interest in the release of documents identifying her as the subject of the investigation.”"

AreWeSure ago

You're missing the point. This warrant has already been executed. The emails were reviewed and the case was closed a second time.

This is only about the warrant itself. Right to unseal is to unseal the warrant. And the bit about Clinton's privacy rights seems to be aimed at the FBI who were trying to keep this warrant sealed.

The guy who brought the case to unseal the warrant was arguing and still argues today that there is no probable cause here.

srayzie ago

Cankle lol. I hope this is legit!