I think this is a case of folks seeing what they want to see. We probably need some folks with legal background to comment, but didn't they get Wiener on "producing child porn" (or at least go after him for it) for swapping dick and tit pics with the minor? I think this is in reference to what he was originally investigated for.
Also, I think the FBI memo itself refutes the idea Wiener got child porn from Hillary or Huma. The investigating agent who authored it says
"I did not review content of these emails [from Huma and Clinton] as the warrant only authorized me to view items that would give me probably cause to believe that CP evidence may reside therein."
Since it's important we not spread fake news, I am going to flair this "Accuracy in Question".
Yes I understand, even if I am just saying "it is being reported that...", which is technically accurate.
But see my edit - the Washington Pundit may not have accurately reported what is actually on the memo, and there are names redacted from the memo after saying PRODUCERS (plural) OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. So we seem to be back at "needs further investigation."
"Producers of Child Porn" could also be a category of offender/offense. I'm going to leave the flair as is for now, since it implies a need for further investigation. Please ping me if any legal beagles chime in with additional information that would support the theory mentioned, and I will change the flair. :-)
view the rest of the comments →
Vindicator ago
@Scirel, thanks for posting this.
I think this is a case of folks seeing what they want to see. We probably need some folks with legal background to comment, but didn't they get Wiener on "producing child porn" (or at least go after him for it) for swapping dick and tit pics with the minor? I think this is in reference to what he was originally investigated for.
Also, I think the FBI memo itself refutes the idea Wiener got child porn from Hillary or Huma. The investigating agent who authored it says
Since it's important we not spread fake news, I am going to flair this "Accuracy in Question".
Scirel ago
Yes I understand, even if I am just saying "it is being reported that...", which is technically accurate.
But see my edit - the Washington Pundit may not have accurately reported what is actually on the memo, and there are names redacted from the memo after saying PRODUCERS (plural) OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. So we seem to be back at "needs further investigation."
Vindicator ago
"Producers of Child Porn" could also be a category of offender/offense. I'm going to leave the flair as is for now, since it implies a need for further investigation. Please ping me if any legal beagles chime in with additional information that would support the theory mentioned, and I will change the flair. :-)
MolochHunter ago
I think your sense it correct. A burglary can happen with a $100 heist or a $100 000 heist
If weiner solicited pix from a minor and she texted them to him, thats a $100 child pornography production 'heist'