Who do you believe?

[hollodero]

(10-04-2019, 02:24 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Hell, I was among the first to concede that Strzok was just "talking big" to get laid. I just balked at the assertion that he was referring to the "American People" when he used the term "we" as that takes away from the assertion he was merely 'talking big". He was referring to him and his.

Cool concession. And fair enough, you're certainly not too prone to absurd conspiracies, that is something. Something seldom amongst folks from your political color these days. And these conspiracy affine folks are the ones that hold up this whole Strzok saga - as if he was that one pivotal guy who hated Trump so much that he steered the whole FBI in one anti-Trump direction like this all-powerful, yet morally depraved and rage-driven mastermind. It's just nonsense, nonsense that keeps getting cooked over and over again in all the right wing media as one of the more gruesome and irrational pro-Trump talking points.

-- And while you are the first to concede this whole narrative surrounding him is nonsense, you still discuss what he meant when he said "we" in a text to his gf years back (or whatever context, it's not important, also "we" could mean the brotherhood of Cthulhu for all I care) and bring this up as if it were some kind of important thing. To refute a post that in its essence says it exactly like it is, that this whole Strzok thing is a non-topic to begin with. And well, that is strange, even stranger for someone who made "getting over things from 2016" a central point of his grown-up, annoyed message hours ago. That deserves to be said, imho.

-- And on a technical, irrelevant note, what Strzok said about "stopping it" was not even "talking big", that's just him trying to be funny, it's honestly weird for me to assume otherwise. He wasn't trying to impress her. She's not an 18-year-old California beach dummy, but an FBI agent herself, probably quite smart for all indications, she didn't grant him sexual favors because he pretended to be that powerful FBI bigshot who can make these things happen. The only serious quarrel to be had is how funny it was. That's the sad within the sad, that even if taken seriously it could seriously only boil down to that.

[6andcounting]

[fredtoast]

(12-12-2019, 07:32 PM)6andcounting Wrote:

The way the warrant was issued does not change the evidence it produced.

I have been able to suppress evidence of large amounts of illegal drugs discovered by a defective warrant.  That does not mean my client never possessed large amounts of illegal drugs.

[6andcounting]

(12-12-2019, 07:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The way the warrant was issued does not change the evidence it produced.

I have been able to suppress evidence of large amounts of illegal drugs discovered by a defective warrant.  That does not mean my client never possessed large amounts of illegal drugs.

Making mistakes in the warrant process is one thing, but how often to you catch police/prosecutors making up fake evidence? Horowitz said he hadn't seen something as blatant as changing emails and submitting the fake ones as evidence.

[fredtoast]

(12-12-2019, 08:18 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Making mistakes in the warrant process is one thing, but how often to you catch police/prosecutors making up fake evidence? Horowitz said he hadn't seen something as blatant as changing emails and submitting the fake ones as evidence.

Yes.  It was improper, and someone should be punished for it.  But they did not make up false information.  They just falsified the alleged source of the information.

Police using false information to obtain a warrant is really not that rare.  It usually involves a "citizen informant" who does not exist.

And none of it changes the actual evidence uncovered through the warrant.  If you discover a dead body using a defective warrant that does not mean no one was killed.

Like I said.  It is a red herring to dupe the rubes.

[Dill]

(12-12-2019, 07:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The way the warrant was issued does not change the evidence it produced.

I have been able to suppress evidence of large amounts of illegal drugs discovered by a defective warrant.  That does not mean my client never possessed large amounts of illegal drugs.

Sounds like a witch hunt.  Did the police hate your client?

[fredtoast]

(12-13-2019, 05:06 PM)Dill Wrote: Sounds like a witch hunt.  Did the police hate your client?

It is crazy.  The police around here act like it is their duty to enforce the law.  They are all just "out to get" drug dealers.

[Dill]

(12-13-2019, 05:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is crazy.  The police around here act like it is there duty to enforce the law.  They are all just "out to get" drug dealers.

Government overreach. Time to drain the swamp then!  Cut taxes, cut law enforcement, cut government.

[6andcounting]

(12-12-2019, 08:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote:  But they did not make up false information.  They just falsified the alleged source of the information.