It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

12 sealed indictments now.....

page: 22
119
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 03:56 PM
link   
At 33 as the number for just the Dist Court (and using the given 56 prior to Manaforte on 30 Oct) that means more than a third of the sealed indictments filed in toto in the Dist Court this calendar year were filed since 30 Oct and today. 56 in ten months and 33 in ten days.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Looks like a rush to indictments might cause people to walk..

Evidence seized at Manafort's home was outside the scope of the search warrant.
Popadopolis was arrested at the airport when he landed without an indictment or arrest warrant.

DOJ Says Manafort Could Walk; Mueller’s Disastrous Error on Search Warrant Could Wreck High-Profile Indictment


Why is this important?

For starters if the dossier was used to obtain the FISA search warrants then anything seized is not admissible in court. I am getting the impression an initial FISA warrant was requested and denied. The dossier then was "created" and misrepresented to obtain the FISA warrant.

Assuming the FISA warrants stick the evidence seized from Manafort would be inadmissible. Info suggests Podesta's criminal case was based off of Manafort's. That would end any prosecutions against Manafort and the Podesta's.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Then where would that leave Popadopolous? He was big news for 48 hours...and then POOF..gone.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Xcathdra

Then where would that leave Popadopolous? He was big news for 48 hours...and then POOF..gone.



It would mean he could walk even though he plead guilty. His lawyers could argue the arrest was invalid and any evidence collected could be challenged. Given the nature of his case jeopardy is attached.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Is it possible that the FEMA camps were never intended for civilian but instead for Politicians and Hollywood elites?



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   
You don't need an arrest warrant or indictment to arrest someone. It'd only be an issue if they arrested him and didn't immediately go to work to file a probable cause statement in the relevant court.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: antar
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Is it possible that the FEMA camps were never intended for civilian but instead for Politicians and Hollywood elites?


They need bids to open up for "Political Prison" contractors.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 05:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

You have a vivid imagination. It doesn't matter whether the evidence found was not specified on the warrant. Police obtain warrants for child support cases, then bust the the perp for drug possession. Manafort's lawyer will probably argue the evidence is inadmissible, but it's not going to fly. This is a racketeering investigation as well as espionage investigation!



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Ever here of Fruit of the poisonous tree?

If the basis for any warrants/legal action was the dossier, then the statement is likely correct - he could walk due to the grievous error of using the document as evidence vs political propaganda paid for by the DNC against Trump. A document created by conspiring with a foreign entity.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Eh, it likely won't go that far for Manafort, but being warned they may be violating privilege puts a high standard on the FBI to make sure they do everything possible to avoid that conflict in the search. It's not a get out of jail free card unless they didn't act with due caution. And we don't know any details giving us reason to believe they did not. Like I said though, it does make the FBI in is case tiptoe through the daisies on collection.

The biggest scandal in this to me, might be that the DNC paid for a garbage dossier and the Democratic administration potentially used it as the basis of a FISA warrant to surveil an opposing candidate's campaign. That's a very BIG deal. If true.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

You have a vivid imagination. It doesn't matter whether the evidence found was not specified on the warrant.


Yes, it matters. Why do you think there are specified limits on search warrants?

BTW, here is a case from June where a federal judge suppressed ALL evidence seized because SOME of it was outside of the scope of the search warrants: www.reuters.com...

Ultimately the feds had to drop the charges because so much of the evidence had been suppressed.


ETA-
And Manafort's attorneys filed this notice in response to the indictment:


At this time, the defense anticipates that pretrial motions will be filed concerning the legal basis for and sufficiency of the charges, the suppression of evidence improperly obtained by search warrant, subpoena or otherwise (including the application of exceptions to common law privileges), as well as motions in limine based on discovery to be provided by the Government in preparation for trial.


So he does plan to use it in his defense.

***

ETA2-
In Manafort's case, all I had heard about was that there were attorney-client privilege protected materials seized. If there was more improper than that...it's news to me.
edit on 11/9/2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

We have zero actual information on the scope of the warrant. If they really screwed up the wording of the warrant that was awarded and executed, then it could be an issue.
ETA: your edit also alludes to the common privilege defense anticipated. We'll see what the FBI actually did as it unfolds. Should be interesting, but isn't a get out of jail free card.
edit on 9-11-2017 by RadioRobert because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
a reply to: MotherMayEye

We have zero actual information on the scope of the warrant. If they really screwed up the wording of the warrant that was awarded and executed, then it could be an issue.


As I said in my edit above, we do know that the feds seized attorney-client privilege protected materials. That much has been reported on. And that is definitely outside the scope. Depending on how that went down and was handled, it may taint the prosecutor's case AND any case the NY AG (Schneiderman) may be building if Mueller shared any of that evidence with him. Consider it was only a couple of weeks after Manafort's home was raided that it was reported Mueller was coordinating and "sharing evidence' with Schneiderman.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: RadioRobert
Should be interesting, but isn't a get out of jail free card.


And that is all I was getting at, too.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: RadioRobert
Should be interesting, but isn't a get out of jail free card.


And that is all I was getting at, too.




posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

This, exactly.

If you are serving a search warrant on a suspected car thief, you can't start looking through drawers/kitchen cabinets/jewelry boxes/safes/etc and still claim you were within the scope of the warrant. Since a car cannot fit in any of those aforementioned locations, it is unreasonable to think the suspected thief may be hiding it there.

Of course if that same warrant specifies something like "evidence of car theft including papers, keys, cell phones" then that obviously changes things.

That is certainly an issue, but more important (I think) is that this dossier may have been used to obtain FISA warrants for political purposes (because the dossier was for political purposes). If that is the case, it may very well be ruled poisonous fruit and be suppressed. Depending on the extent of evidence collected as a result of that specific error (if it is ruled an error, although I don't see why it wouldn't be) it could result in charges being dismissed.


edit on 11/9/2017 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Totally agreed RR

I think the seriousness of such an event is just now sinking in for most. This was an egregious violation of the 4th amendment IMO of the target of the FISA warrant(s). Intentional violation of civil rights is a federal crime, and any person involved should be charged and prosecuted.

This was political surveillance by a Democratic administration aimed at attacking the [then] Candidate/eventually President-elect and individuals in his campaign. The FBI was used as a tool, and the legitimacy of our entire FISA court system is tarnished yet again. This sets a horrifying precedent for future administrations. The hyperbole against Trump has caused so many terrible precedents to be set, some we may not realize for decades or more.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Too bad thread subjects can't be modified as additional info is learned.

It is suspected that these 294 sealed Indictments are related to a multi-state Clinton Foundation "sting" that is being put together.
inteldinarchronicles.blogspot.com...



edit on 11/9/2017 by carewemust because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
This sets a horrifying precedent for future administrations. The hyperbole against Trump has caused so many terrible precedents to be set, some we may not realize for decades or more.


I have been warning of this very thing since I joined these boards....in RL, long before.

We are seeing the bottom end of the slippery slope we started with going back several administrations.



posted on Nov, 9 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

And just think.. If President Trump had lost, none of this would ever be known. Republican lawmakers would not have investigated, because they were anti-Trumpers themselves.




top topics



 
119
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join