Declassification, gunna happen or no? UPDATE, Declassified.

[steve4102]

Will, he or won’t he, declassify, if so, before the midterms or after?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/09/trump-russia-probe-fbi-fisa-application/

[fortyofforty]

Let's see how long the DOJ can drag its feet on this one.

[steve4102]

President Trump has Declassified pages from the FISA Application and ALL text messages from 

 a number of the key players in the Russia investigation "without redaction" -- including Ohr, Strzok, Lisa Page, former FBI Director James Comey and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/17/trump-orders-feds-to-declassify-key-fisa-documents-text-messages-in-fbi-russia-probe.html

[Dric902]

I may be wrong...

but if it’s declassified and released to the public......it isn’t admissible as evidence in court.

 

He may have just thrown out any prosecution related to it.

 

.

[fortyofforty]

It seems that the conspirators are not done covering up their attempted coup.  They will continue to drag their feet.  They will find excuse after excuse.  Fox News needs to stay on the issue, since no other network or newspaper seems to be interested in the most important political story in a century.

[Brown Hawk]

21 hours ago, Dric902 said:

I may be wrong...

but if it’s declassified and released to the public......it isn’t admissible as evidence in court.

 

He may have just thrown out any prosecution related to it.

 

.

Because something is publicly available is not disqualifying in itself.  That the information has prejudiced an individual juror is the job of the lawyers involved to elicit.  And a valid connection to the defendants involved has to be proven, plus motive and opportunity.  

It will be a circus any way you look at it.

Hawk

[fortyofforty]

1 hour ago, Brown Hawk said:

Because something is publicly available is not disqualifying in itself.  That the information has prejudiced an individual juror is the job of the lawyers involved to elicit.  And a valid connection to the defendants involved has to be proven, plus motive and opportunity.  

It will be a circus any way you look at it.

Hawk

You're right.  Releasing information does not invalidate it as evidence.

[Dric902]

I’m reminded of Manson showing the jury a newspaper of Nixon saying he was guilty.

jury nullification and predjucing a jury pool by media propaganda goes back a long way.

1st year law school stuff

 

.

[steve4102]

13 hours ago, Dric902 said:

I’m reminded of Manson showing the jury a newspaper of Nixon saying he was guilty.

jury nullification and predjucing a jury pool by media propaganda goes back a long way.

1st year law school stuff

 

.

What Law School did you attend?

When did you graduate and what is your field of legal expertise ?

[Dric902]

Oh, ok.

am I incorrect or just not qualified to speak on the matter?

im a vet so I guess I can think about the military and the VA as long as I’m in the “patriotic” side

im a foster parent/adopted parent so I can talk on child issues as long as it’s the republican side

im white so I can’t speak on race

im male so I can speak on sexism

 

you basically know jack about me.

 

 

So...

why don’t we just wait around and see if anybody is indicted due to the released documents. And we will see what you can’t speak on.

 

.

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Dric902

[steve4102]

13 hours ago, Dric902 said:

you basically know jack about me.

I know you did not an Attorney, I know that you did not attend law school and I know you know nothing about 

Quote

1st year law school stuff

 

[Dric902]

1 minute ago, steve4102 said:

I know you did not an Attorney, I know that you did not attend law school and I know you know nothing about 

 

I know that you did not major in English.

 

.

[fortyofforty]

I thought Manson was convicted.  I thought he was sentenced to death.  I didn't realize Manson was really let out due to, well, you know, jury nullification and stuff. 

[Dric902]

It didn’t work in his case. But it did stop the trial proceedings and required arguments and a ruling. Which was probably the point all the time as grounds for appeal.

does not mean I couldn’t post dozens of cases where it did.

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/N Disk/Nixon Richard M President Watergate Files/Manson Charles/Item 04.pdf

 

119,000,000 Results

Showing results for public information dismissed at trial.

 

.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Dric902

[steve4102]

Corruption Junction – Desperation Amid Democrat Members of The Intelligence “Gang of Eight”…

I’ve probably reviewed thousands of congressional letters, and intelligence committee letters from oversight, along with even more executive agency responses.  In fact, CTH has shared hundreds of outlines covering granular details within many of the internal memos and correspondences.  However, I have never seen anything like this before.

The combination of arrogance, hubris and desperation within a letter (pdf here) from the four Democrats on the intelligence oversight Gang of Eight, is palpable even in text format.

Legislative branch members: Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff and Mark Warner write a letter today to Director  of National Intelligence Dan Coats, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and FBI Director Christopher Wray, demanding the executive branch cabinet members withhold information from the White House.

Perhaps more stunningly, and extra-constitutionally (meaning outside the framework of constitutional separation of power), within the jaw-dropping letter the four Democrats outline previous verbal conversations and current agreements with Coats, Rosenstein and Wray where the Cabinet officers agreed to keep information away from the White House Chief Executive, the President.

That third paragraph is particularly interesting: …”the verbal assurance you provided us that DOJ and FBI would not provide the White House“…

Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot?

Why would the Trump DOJ and FBI be giving Pelosi Inc. “assurances” of their intent to withhold intelligence from the White House (Office of the President).

Why would Rosenstein and Wray be giving “assurances”? I digress.

The letter continues on page 2:

 

This letter reeks of corruption, manipulative intent, and between-the-lines admissions of gross intelligence abuses.  Additionally, the appearance of a visible alignment between corrupt executive branch officials (Wray, Rosenstein, possibly Coats) and corrupt intelligence oversight officials (Schiff, Warner, Pelosi, Schumer) is jaw-droppingly obvious.

This corrupt and self-interested alignment has always belayed our optimism that President Trump had a cabinet willing to confront institutional corruption.  Our concern has always been that these aligned officials will fight against President Trump’s sunlight requests.

Likely DNI Dan Coats will release the declassified FISA portions as requested; thankfully the FISC (Judicial Branch) supports the executive branch in this approach.

However, we should probably temper optimism -at least in timing- surrounding the emails and text messages from Ohr, Comey, Page, Strzok and McCabe.  Those bogus “declassified” releases are more dependent on the corrupt DOJ (Rosenstein) and FBI (Wray).

 

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/09/18/corruption-junction-desperation-amid-democrat-members-of-the-intelligence-gang-of-eight/#more-154239