FOIL (like FOIA) for WEINER Laptop Info Denied & Closed by NYPD

NYPD | 8/8/2018 | NYPD

[Conservative Gato]

Very good info bump!

CG

[rodguy911]

Once again, personally, I don't care when or where they got it or if they got it first or last. All that matters to me is that they have the laptop or a copy and can hold at bay anyone who tried to keep the info from being used in a prosecution.

The NYPD seems to have people that genuinely care about what is contained on the laptop and are concerned that it will be covered up.I share their concern.

By the way great job in getting something from them.We question whether or not the higher ups would bury the laptop if given half a chance.

[rodguy911]

Maybe it already has and we just were not told about it:

[rodguy911]

You never know how it has been or is being used.Did Hillary and McCain get a boot because their feet hurt or did some info from the laptop inspire an arrest we were never told about? Was there a deal with hillary? I don’t know. But, we do have the boot photos indicating an ankle bracelet. Inquiring minds.

[rodguy911]

Reporters following FBI’s role in the Weiner incident wrote FBI seized Weiner’s devices. Yes and No. FBI was called when NYPD found Hillary emails with other notable persons nationwide/worldwide, jurisdiction went beyond city/state. Reporter was writing to the higher level enforcement body which would be the FBI.

FBI left laptop with NYPD for their criminal investigation and prosecution of Weiner. FBI took CDs/DVDs of files related to Hillary emails. FBI retained authority to access and inspect laptop at any time. (Im buying this. I think the NYPD never let the FBI have the computer because "they knew the feds were corrupt") NYPD had to go to complete radio silence because possible high-level classified material on Weiner laptop.

NYPD was adamant that truth about Hillary come out and threatened to go public if Comey did not reopen Hillary email investigation.

(makes perfect sense if you think FBI is corrupt)

This latter statement is important. NYPD had properly ceded jurisdiction of Hillary emails to FBI. NYPD’s focus was pedophilia, child trafficking. Why then did they threaten Comey regarding Hillary emails?

One plausible answer is they weren’t threatening to go public with Hillary ‘emails’. There were other materials on the laptop involving Hillary that were incriminating that they threatened to go public with. They thought Hillary should be stopped in the election because of what they saw. They knew Comey had the Hillary emails from Weiner’s laptop and appeared to be doing nothing with them in the final two weeks before the election. FBI had ordered NYPD to keep all matters under seal.

Otherwise, why should NYPD stick their nose in matters where FBI had control and jurisdiction?

[rodguy911]

Great post thanks!

[Right Wing Assault]

That Laptop has long been DESTROYED!!

And buried next to Jimmy Hoffa.

[Bigg Red]

Interesting. Thanks for working it, and thanks for posting for us.

[stylin19a]

Thanks.
I am looking for documentation.
I have that document you provided and I could not find in it where the laptop is housed.

As far as anyone knows, the laptop is housed at the FBI NYO field office 26 Federal Plaza, NY,NY, 10278, as of 10/30/2016, per attachment A of this Fed warrant: https://www.scribd.com/document/334943811/FBI-Search-Warrant-for-Anthony-Wiener-s-Laptop.

I could find no documentation that the laptop was transferred from this site.

Also note this - The 10/30/2016 warrant is limited to the clinton emails though the agent affidavit #6 admits to finding other emails out side of scope.
Now, if those emails were the pedophile stuff (who knows with the redactions), would they have acted on to ? or refer it to NYPD ? or both ?

It could play out as you envision it, but remember: Weiner went to jail on a Federal rap for sexting with a minor . Was the laptop used in the sexting ? who knows

The warrant is always addressed to “any authorized law enforcement officer” and in this case, via Section II of attachment “A” about who is authorized to review the devices.
It would seem NYPD would be authorized.

Should be interesting. I’ll keep plugging away.

[afterhoursarmory]

I would think if there is “high level - classified” (meaning Federal) information on that laptop, it was already seized. I can’t see the FIB’s leaving highly classified materials in the NYPD’s hands. I would think the narrative would be the reverse; the NYPD has the DVD’s with the pedo crap pertinent to their investigations but everything else is in fedzilla hands. Just an opinion; no way to back that up.

[Hostage]

Whenever I see ‘reports’ whether in news/tabloid media or official reports, I remind myself never to take anything at face value.

There are ‘reports’ that NYPD seized the Weiner laptop. Here is one:

http://www.brainstain.co.uk/2018/05/22/search-warrant-anthony-weiner-laptop-unsealed

“The New York City Police obtained a search warrant on his laptop, iPad and iPhone, on September 26th, 2016, approved by Magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis.”

This report of an NYPD warrant is dated ostensibly before the FBI warrant application because NYPD was on the case first. If you’re so inclined, you can research this through City Judge Ellis. But if I were following it I would not be surprised to find access is still blocked.

As for the FBI warrant, I would immediately tell myself a timeline is essential. The dates of the warrant application that you linked to come after NYPD is engaged as well as several other special NYPD investigators as well as SDNY US Attorney Preet Bharara. Your Scribd link calls it an ‘FBI’ warrant to examine a laptop at an FBI office. This should seem odd to you.

As for the ‘housing’ of the laptop at FBI offices in NYC, that is not surprising as a US Attorney and the FBI in this aspect are investigating emails, not sexting with a minor.

How to reconcile the location of the laptop. Your eyes read the search warrant of the laptop housed at FBI offices in NYC. My eyes read the same. Our eyes are not lying. What we need to remind ourselves of is we were not there, we don’t know of all the movements.

If someone were to ask me, where could the laptop be if not FBI offices, I would respond “I don’t know”. If I were pressed further to come up with a plausible explanation for the disconnect, I would say physical custody is with NYPD, transported temporarily to FBI offices in NYC in response to an order signed by a judge (search warrant).

[Hostage]

#31

[thinden]

very enlightening thread.

thanx for the input.

[Bob Ireland]

***> “So, the NYPD could have an image of the laptop.”
No, NYPD has the laptop. FBI has image on DVDs of outlook emails. This is the result a procedural process would take when two law enforcement groups are joined in an investigation.***

The problem I see here are the national security laws. My experience and limited knowledge is that - if there is classified material present on paper or in an electronic device - the FBI counterintelligence division MUST take possession of that material. To leave that classified material in possession of NYPD would allow potential unauthorized access to such privileged material.

The chain of custody in any prosecution under counterintel violations could present serious problems, not to mention the chance of unauthorized access or leaks by personnel of NYPD.

Still, as I say, it is not an area of expertise for me; I am just a long-time student of intel and counter-intel issues. I do seem to remember reading [source? credibility?] that Andrew McCabe took possession of Weiner's laptop at FBI HQ and sat on it for nearly a month... apparently prompted by Jas Comey to act, perhaps due to NYPD / DoJ Southern Dist prosecutor pressure.

[MWestMom]

for later

[edzo4]

weiner is in prison
has been since Nov 2017

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/weiner-reports-to-prison/index.html

Anthony Weiner, the former politician and now convicted federal sex offender, reported Monday morning to Federal Medical Center Devens, a federal prison in Ayer, Massachusetts.

[stylin19a]

thanks.

That same story is here, using the exact same phrase as brainstain only 3 days earlier. ( with more “history” provided) : https://www.theepochtimes.com/search-warrant-for-anthony-weiners-laptop-unsealed_2529665.html.

Just a story...no proof it was NYPD who requested the warrant.
I have an email in to the author of the epochtimes asking for info.
I have an email into brainstain asking for info
There is no author specified in your article.

theepochtimes is a China outfit.
brainstain is a uk outfit.
Would they be versed in U.S. jurisdiction ?

do a duckduckgo search on “The New York City Police obtained a search warrant on his laptop, iPad and iPhone, on September 26th, 2016, approved by Magistrate Judge Ronald Ellis”
results are mostly nobody we ever heard of and no I wont chase them all down.

Again, I’m looking for proof based on documentation, not conjecture.

The September 26th, 2016 warrant is a Fed warrant.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Judge Ronald L Ellis is a United States magistrate judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, not a city judge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_L._Ellis

Only Fed law is cited in the warrant, not local or state.
The warrant was unsealed by a U.S. District Judge. https://onsizzle.com/i/case-1-17-cr-00307-dlc-document-54-filed-o-usdc-sdny-document-electronically-21906115

No mention of NYPD applying for this Fed warrant.
Actually, no mention of exactly who applied for the warrant. No affidavit is attached.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4465430-WEINER-Search-Warrant-2016.html#document/

Can NYPD apply for a fed warrant ?
Would NYPD apply for a fed warrant ?
Would the Feds issue a Fed warrant to the city of NYPD ?

We know Granite Intelligence had the devices as of 09/26/2016.
Generally reported that Weiner turned them in to them on 09/23/2016.
We know that the Feds had the laptop at least on 10/30/2016.

So the question is: When did Granite Intelligence turn over the devices and to who (whom).
Which is my next Moby Dick.

thanks

later

[stylin19a]

fyi...I think we went down this road before...

The warrant was issued for the devices stored at Granite Intelligence, per attachment “A” of the warrant.

The IG report says the FBI got the devices on the day the warrant was issued - 09/26/2016.

I can live with the IG report on this, for now.
I’ll probably send and email to Granite for chuckles and grins without any expectations\acknowledgement.

So now, did the devices go anywhere out of Fed custody between 09/26/2016 and 10/30/2016 ?
Did it stay in Fed custody but they allowed other LEOs to look at it ?

something to chase some other time.
I am done for now.

[Hostage]

Both FBI and NYPD had separate investigations linked to the laptop they were obliged to pursue. They would have to have made a joint jurisdiction agreement for the laptop.

A few key facts can be seen in the Scribd link of the FBI search warrant that stylin19a provided above.

1. Attached to that search warrant is an application. The application is signed by an FBI agent. That FBI search warrant application was applied for AFTER the NYPD was investigating the Wiener case.

2. The search warrant orders the FBI to search and investigate the laptop at the FBI offices in NYC. This is very odd.

—> a. The laptop had been seized by the FBI and now a search warrant is issued to search the laptop. How can the FBI be applying for a search warrant for a laptop already in its possession? How did they get the laptop to begin with? Did they have a prior search warrant? If so, why the need for another search warrant?

—> b. NYPD had the laptop and agreed with the FBI to a joint jurisdiction agreement. NYPD was responsible to bring the laptop to FBI field offices in NYC for examination by FBI cyber professionals.

and there are some other facts:

—> c. FBI had CD-DVD copies of the emails.

Using logic, the laptop would stay in the primary physical custody of NYPD with unfettered access granted to FBI investigators including transporting the laptop to FBI offices on an as-needed basis. The logic follows that the laptop had more evidence than just emails. The FBI’s concerned portion was a subset of the entire evidence cache. The FBI did not need a lot of the evidence on the laptop that NYPD needed including metadata.

—> d. NYPD was the first to investigate. They had a statutory duty, a required procedural step to obtain a search warrant and seize all of Weiner’s devices. There was no choice for them to ignore that. They had plenty of probable causes so getting a search warrant would have been done immediately.

Once FBI was involved, the existence of potentially classified material would, of course, cause a discussion between NYPD and FBI chiefs.

Using logic, taking the laptop away from NYPD would risk if not shut down the NYPD investigation that they were obligated to pursue, This is because there is more than just data files on a computer. There are also hidden logs and data about who accessed, when, for what amount of time, files transferred, copied, deleted, all this is known as metadata which is essential to an investigation. Copying files and letting the device be transferred to another jurisdiction would be a gross mistake.

On the other hand, FBI was investigating emails and files attached to emails as well as al the metadata surrounding the emails. This data is possible to put on CDs/DVDs for investigating whether there were any security breaches.

Logic implies the FBI ordered NYPD to keep the laptop under a tight seal, no data releases or discussions period, and to have on-demand access to the laptop by designated FBI persons.

I note that there was a time of about a week to two weeks between the time the NYPD is reported to have had the laptop and was horrified to its contents and the time the FBI put a sort of gag order on NYPD. During that interim time, we learned of the ‘life insurance folder’, 600k emails linked to Clinton, horrific stories of child abuse and horrific rumors of Hillary Clinton. Then suddenly, silence, nothing more.

I would infer that transporting the laptop to FBI offices was done because FBI cyber examiners would need to declare they examined the original contents so their reports would be admissible to a court. I would bet that the laptop was brought from NYPD to the local FBI office so that the FBI could state the examination took place in their offices under their jurisdiction. A declaration of equipment would accompany the transfer.

I would also bet an NYPD detail was stationed at the FBI office on the day of the transfer and would not leave the location of the laptop. The FBI search warrant gives a timeframe for the search to be made. That is unusual in the sense that if they had possession of the laptop, they would have 24/7 access to it and would not need a timeframe for examination. It is logical to infer the FBI set a date and time with the NYPD to have the laptop brought to FBI offices for examination and that NYPD agents brought the laptop and stayed with it.

[Bob Ireland]

Your numerous points do not seem to address my original premise: federal law requires the FBI to take possession of any classified materials. Any classified materials no longer in restricted access can no longer be considered classified material - which indeed may be the case when the data appeared on Weiner's laptop.

As to data 'images', it would seem more logical that NYPD would be given a certified copy of data images of any unlawful sexual material that could be used for prosecution... a much lower bar IMHO than counter-intel evidence of security leaks or espionage... a rather sticky wicket to pass through.

The possibilities of data tampering with any of the material on the laptop - given the loose chain of custody evidenced in this case - may render all this speculation moot. The legal issues seem to multiply in my untrained mind.