It’s impossible to ignore the uptick in pedo arrests of notable people. So the question is, is this just their bad luck, or is this the ghost? They have been doing it for years, and now all of a sudden they are getting caught one after another. And it’s not localized. This is a national issue. Reading the articles, it appears at face value to be sheer chance, as these people get caught by typically local jurisdictions. They don’t mention some nationwide link. But there is a link as far as the timing goes. We track the news like hawks. And by far, this year, I have seen the most arrests of political figures in memory.
Which leads me to the sealed indictments. I can’t think of any single issue that could create 500k+ sealed indictments other than pedo behavior, or illegal immigration. It is entirely possible that 99% of child pornography is tainted and honeypotted, and the distribution and sharing of this bait is what is generating the sealed indictments. They could have been doing this for years, it increases exponentially as the distribution increases. The more it’s shared, the more it’s shared. That would also explain the decentralized nature of the indictments across the US.
My other guess is that the sealed indictments are the first wave of the deportation operation. I think they could be automatic indictments of aliens who skip their hearings. That would explain the never ending increase in numbers. Of course this doesn’t represent all of the illegals. But you have to start somewhere. And starting with the illegals already on paper but skipping court is an easy place.
Either way, the pedo arrests are a win. I personally believe the arrests are linked and this is yet another piece of evidence that operations are active. Especially as they seem to be shrinking closer and closer to DC insiders.
It could just all be coincidence that politicians and leftists all over the country are getting nailed for being pedos, but I simply don’t believe much in coincidences of this nature anymore.
Well you kinda have me but you kind of don't. It sounds like ABC and their sources are using the same technique bad boys is: look at the dockets and make a guess.
Bad boys does list their underlying cases if you do a search, so wouldn't the piece of evidence that would ice your argument be a sample or two of the cases they are misclassifying?
Continuing my earlier search, do you see any in Dallas that they misclassified?
My argument is the entire list is massively mis-classiffied.
Following up on the 36 sealed indictments. This was listed as a very high number.
DC is one of 93 federal court districts. If we spread that over all 93 districts, that's less than 3600 sealed indictments total. So the claim of 500,000 is off by a factor of over 100.
There are not using the same technique. Because they are not looking at these the same way, if you're a lawyer who practices in the that court district, you have different access from a regular citizen using PACER, you can see "sealed indictments" and not just sealed proceedings.
And looking the badboys data. This used to be on a site called qmap.pub. They moved it over to badboys, I don't know why, but the folks running https://bad-boys.us/ KNOW by now there are not 500,000 indictments, (About three years ago they changed their count from indictments to "cases" because of all the criticism. I think they are still trying to deceive people....and this is why they use some of the worst data visualization I've ever seen.
Here's https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kVQwX9l9HJ5F76x05ic_YnU_Z5yiVS96LbzAOP66EzA/edit#gid=343822464spreadsheet.
Scroll to the bottom and see if you can figure out which number represents possible sealed indictments.
All solid points fren. You're saying that based on the ABC story we have an order-of-magnitude discrepancy, and that bad-boys is getting their data through the civilian level PACER as opposed to whatever access other people have. The first claim is plausible and maybe you can help me with the second one.
If I go to their top level document that you linked, and then scroll to "Northern District of Texas" (to continue with the Dallas example). I see their most recent data pull for that is August and available here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dgy3FvD9bsZCp7ILJLjhZBV75HFkbY3lAP7MqKKN_pA/edit#gid=0
They say there's 142 cases filed sealed for this district, 139 "MJ" and 3 "CR" (I don't know the difference). If I go into the csv file I can see a case id and case number for each of these. Just grabbing the first few of these:
1930359 23-100 1930361 23-101 1930366 23-102 1930368 23-103 1931068 23-1032 1931098 23-1033 1931110 23-1034 1931146 23-1036
Is there a way you can help me understand how each of these items should be interpreted and why they wouldn't be considered cases?
Thank you for being willing to assist me in better understanding PACER and bad-boys data.
This is like the only federal report about counting sealed cases. It came out in 2009 and analyzes cases from the 2006, the analysis was done in 2008. So they ignored cases that were sealed and then unsealed quickly.
Basically the people who started counting indictments misunderstood this report.
https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/sealed-cases.pdf
to answer your question
You ask about this
So from this. Only 3 are criminal cases. So does that mean we have 3 sealed indictments. NO.
There can 3 or 2 or 1 or zero sealed indictments among these three sealed criminal cases. We have no way of knowing. It could be 3 defendants under 18.
If you look at the table of content of that PDF I linked to, you can see the many, many reasons a case can be sealed.
They have misled a lot of people
Thank you fren. The bad boys data is treated as a given by many people. You've delivered a great counterpoint. I'll need some time just to process the ramifications of this.
Is it likely that the MJ cases related to family court?