so we can all put that expectation to bed, finally, for ever, seriously.
https://twitter.com/TheHoneybee_/status/997760278187073536
(relevance to pizzagate for newbies, Eric Prince claimed that NYPD had weiners laptop and that it had an 'insurance' folder of dirt on Hillary / Huma Abedin that horrified NYPD staff)
view the rest of the comments →
migratorypatterns ago
Sorry got interrupted. So my other comment confirmed that Weiner turned his iphone, laptop, etc. over to Granite on September 23, 2016. Then on September 26, 2016, the FBI seized possession. That's when Clinton's emails were discovered. Now this is where i'm confused about Honeybee's claim.
The NYPD was investigating the sexting claim. To investigate, they HAD to have at least a partial viewing of said evidence. We know they did because charges were brought against Weiner, and he was sentenced to two years in prison. So the NYPD HAD to have had access to some part of the electronic material. Here's proof of that assertion:
Again, this story was on September 22, 2016. The FBI seized the electronics on September 23. There was a trial, there was evidence presented, so the NYPD HAD to have seen something and been in possession of files.
Now the unsourced comment of an NYPD officer who viewed the files is unconfirmed. That's up-in-the-air as far as it being truthful, but the story of NYPD having viewed files is true. There has to be discovery and an evidenciary listing so perhaps that would tell what was recorded in the trial, but whether there were other things not pertinent to the case that were viewed, we don't know.
I tend to think the FBI seizure was a way of keeping a lid on the investigation, and why the records were sealed in the first place. Clinton's emails may have been Confidential and, therefore, not to be disseminated to anyone without clearance to view. It's why Comey reopened the email probe.
I'm still not clear as to why anyone would think the NYPD did not have the evidence in their possession. No, they didn't have the laptop because of the complications, but a viewing of the subpoena might help nail down what was turned over.
Are_we_sure ago
You are making an assumption here. This is not a fact. Lawyers call this "Assuming facts not in evidence."
You are doing the same thing here
In fact, in this case, you seem to be drawing an usupported conclusion. First to start with Weiner did not have a trial. He plead guilty before a trial. He plead guilty in May and was sentence in September without a trial. Secondly, he plead guilty to federal charges and was sentence in federal court. The NYPD would not be involved here. He has never been charged with local crimes that would involve the NYPD. So all we know is the NYPD opened an investigation. That investigation could be open or that investigation can have been closed when he pled guilty in federal court.
Again this here is unsupported.
There's simply no independent evidence that points to it. There's just these claims of the FBI ripped the case and the laptop away from the NYPD. We know now those claims to be false.
Since many of these assumptions are unsupported, let's lay out what we do know.
Is there any other known evidence that is missing from this?
Conclusions/Questions
Could the FBI have allowed NYPD to view the evidence? Certainly possible. I think the NYPD would need a warrant. Otherwise they would not be entitled. If we find the NYPD had a warrant, that would be
Could have the FBI have given the laptop to the NYPD? I doubt this. I think they would have kept possession and let the NYPD review evidence.
Another possibility that is less secure would be they let make a disk image give the image to NYPD. I think if many people were reviewing evidence on the laptop and we know they were with the emails, they can't all be working on the same laptop. I think they would have loaded an image on to a secure network and had many people review at the same time.
I would also think this secure access would be READ ONLY. No editing or copying or saving locally. This is my assumption.
But in all this scenarios, I see nothing that supports the Erik Prince TruePundit versions.
So far I have seen no evidence the NYPD ever saw any contents of the laptop, in a secure setting or not. However, when the guilty plea was announced, the justice department said
But what that work or effort was is unclear.
urbanmoving ago
https://steemit.com/clinton/@urbanmoving/anthony-weiner-s-labtop-phone-electronic-devices-and-granite-intelligence Lies AWS thats all you spew NYPD got the warrant before the FBI warrant, and executed the search probably same day 9/26/2016, 2-3 days or 72 hours roughly after Weiner attempted to obstruct justice in a ACS/NYPD/SVU investigation. You can't even get the facts right NYPD had their warrant and executed it, the FBI had to wait until the NYPD handed over the devices which they did later...the FBI didn't go into Granite Intel.