Everyone please note: regardless of what this may/may not reveal about Horowitz, there is a good chance that this is one of their "ol' reliable" tricks to protect the fact that we don't need the physical phones to rebuild the information. Other targets may have had second phones. Finding one, means finding them all. This little paragraph may be intended only to signal to the other targets that WE HAVE IT ALL.
But consider the possibility that Durham has used the “crime-fraud exception” to compel disclosure of information otherwise subject to privilege and to help elicit testimony. “Under the crime-fraud exception, communications are not privileged when the client consults an attorney for advice that will serve him in the commission of a fraud or crime.”
Isn't that how the law works though? From the Rittenhouse trial, I learned that the prosecution is legally compelled to turn over all material that will be used as evidence against the defense.
During the trial. These people haven't even been officially charged yet, let alone arrested and put on trial. Making strange references online to what evidence you have against them would not count anyway. It has to be submitted as evidence before a Judge and read into the official trial proceedings. . Until that happens, you don't have to turn over anything.
Yes, there are no surprises. At least, there shouldn’t be if discovery is done correctly/the parties don’t try to pull Law and Order shenanigans during the trial with surprise witnesses/documents/etc. Legally, there should be no surprises.
I don’t know if that’s how it works in military trials, though.
That's not how you prosecute criminals at a trial. If you have the evidence, you have the evidence. Arrest them and be done with it. You don't have to trick them into committing more crimes. We have the evidence to convict them 100 times over. Like Q said, they already have it all. The grasping at straws we do to try to make the littlest thing fit the Q narrative has gotten to be absolutely ridiculous. This is why no one takes us seriously.
The article lays out some hard truths for those willing to actually comprehend it. Past performances are a good indicator for future actions. Business as usual in the swamp.
I assume that’s why the “found” the phones. Someone came to them with a come to Jesus moment and said give us the phones we know you have them, we have it all anyway.
Why else would they hand them over if someone isn’t forcing them to? I don’t think anyone is dumb enough to believe they are just handing it over for justice. That’s an unbelievable scenario.
Everyone please note: regardless of what this may/may not reveal about Horowitz, there is a good chance that this is one of their "ol' reliable" tricks to protect the fact that we don't need the physical phones to rebuild the information. Other targets may have had second phones. Finding one, means finding them all. This little paragraph may be intended only to signal to the other targets that WE HAVE IT ALL.
And this was particularly heartwarming also
Except you don't typically tell your targets what information you have against them beforehand. That would just be really really stuipid.
Isn't that how the law works though? From the Rittenhouse trial, I learned that the prosecution is legally compelled to turn over all material that will be used as evidence against the defense.
During the trial. These people haven't even been officially charged yet, let alone arrested and put on trial. Making strange references online to what evidence you have against them would not count anyway. It has to be submitted as evidence before a Judge and read into the official trial proceedings. . Until that happens, you don't have to turn over anything.
"Judge" - more like a black-robed tyrant.
Ah I gotcha. Just sharing what I learned. That makes sense that it would be something that occurs WITHIN legal precedings
Yes, there are no surprises. At least, there shouldn’t be if discovery is done correctly/the parties don’t try to pull Law and Order shenanigans during the trial with surprise witnesses/documents/etc. Legally, there should be no surprises.
I don’t know if that’s how it works in military trials, though.
It's called the Brady Rule.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule
Once someone is formally indicted, yes.
That's not how you prosecute criminals at a trial. If you have the evidence, you have the evidence. Arrest them and be done with it. You don't have to trick them into committing more crimes. We have the evidence to convict them 100 times over. Like Q said, they already have it all. The grasping at straws we do to try to make the littlest thing fit the Q narrative has gotten to be absolutely ridiculous. This is why no one takes us seriously.
The article lays out some hard truths for those willing to actually comprehend it. Past performances are a good indicator for future actions. Business as usual in the swamp.
Unless you were trying to flush out and get confessions from co-conspirators, then you might.
Is that why the FBI issued a review of their nonrecord information and information expiry policy?
Declassified this month.
I assume that’s why the “found” the phones. Someone came to them with a come to Jesus moment and said give us the phones we know you have them, we have it all anyway.
Why else would they hand them over if someone isn’t forcing them to? I don’t think anyone is dumb enough to believe they are just handing it over for justice. That’s an unbelievable scenario.