Replies

I chased this story til forever....from day 1
NYPD never confiscated Weiner's laptop.
No NYPD search warrant can be found.
NYPD basically told me to take a hike on my FOIL(New York's version of FOIA)

I poked huge holes in the True Pundit article(they broke the NYPD story) and the Erik Prince radio interview a few days later - which was the same story as True Pundit.
Those 2 were the only places that told\reported that story.

Everyone else who reported that story always referred back to True Pundit.
They were the source and their sources were "un-named" NYPD people.
In all this time, not one NYPD name leaked.

TruePundit didn't even report on the "9 of 12" story. I haven't been able to find the genesis\source of it and I stopped looking.

With the evidence I presented, I was able to get an online news "source" to make a correction of their "reporting" of the story and they took NYPD out of it.

The chain of evidence on Weiner's laptop is rock solid and it doesn't include NYPD. Weiner handed over an iPhone, iPad and laptop computer to Granite Intelligence on Sept. 23, 2016. This was documented by Granite.

Here's an article about chain of evidence: https://nypost.com/2018/05/17/search-warrant-for-weiners-electronic-devices-unsealed/NYPOST
Not one mention of NYPD.

That 568 page Horowitz monstrosity OIG Report of 06/2018 - mentions Weiner's laptop extensivly - yet not one mention of NYPD in the whole document.

If the NYPD seized his laptop, you would have to believe they gave it back to Weiner so he could turn it over to Granite?

Here's the True Pundit article. The original story is half way down the page and is in red.
https://truepundit.com/nypd-turns-against-the-fbi-seized-laptop-shows-hillary-clinton-covered-up-weiners-alleged-sex-crimes-with-15-yr-old-during-election/

Here's the Erik Prince Interview story with a link to the actual Breitbart radio interview.

https://fortunascorner.com/2016/11/05/erik-prince-nypd-ready-to-make-arrests-in-anthony-weiner-case/

Take an objective hard look at the truepundit article and the prince interview. You know darn well we'd rip this apart and call it for what it is. Talk amongst yourselves...

TruePundit didn't even report on the "9 of 12" story. I haven't been able to find the genesis\source of it and I stopped looking.

From what I recall (and it's not much), there was a rash of cop deaths in NYC, nine of them, either suicide or fishy circumstances--in early 2019, I want to say. But might have been 2018. Tracy Beanz covered the deaths on twatter and was trying to nail down if they were connected to the laptop. But I think all the cops were from different precincts/boroughs in NYC, so they really couldn't have been in the group in one precinct to see the laptop. Tracy Beanz's twatter has been suspended, so there's no way to look back there, unless she archived her tweets or a story about this on her website--UncoverDC.com.

Sorry I can't be more help. That's all I remember.

The chain of evidence on Weiner's laptop is rock solid and it doesn't include NYPD. Weiner handed over an iPhone, iPad and laptop computer to Granite Intelligence on Sept. 23, 2016. This was documented by Granite.
~~~~~~~~~
I don't consider the chain of evidence on Weiner's laptop rock solid.

For NYPD to wash its hands of it (ordered from the top), just bring in Granite and scrub NYPD. Unfortunately that seems to include police officers. That seems easier than the FBI "losing" notes, files and other exonerating information re Trump, Flynn for example.

The Deep State does this for a living - they make prosecution disappear and reappear at will.

I don't understand how a court would consider a private intelligence company part of the court's chain of custody. I always see chain of custody starting with police officer, handing off to forensics etc. Those related departments have exacting protocols etc. I doubt an organization like Acme Intelligence, or in this case, Granite Intelligence, is considered within a court system's chain of custody.

I know that it can be applied to include individuals (like a meth addict and his drugs - part of the chain is the meth addict, proving he had it in his custody). But if violating some tenet of the chain of custody for a police department breaks the validity of the evidence, how does having an outside organization like Granite swearing they didn't let anyone else access it, etc. maintain it. In fact Granite's involvement makes me distrust it.

How do we know Granite and the NYPD didn't lie, albeit for different reasons?

By the time a higher up was said to have nixed the Weiner laptop (might have been SDNY federal attorney or prosecutor), and police realized what was about to happen, why would they insist they had it in their possession? They Knew their brass would confiscate or reject it as a case. Especially after being told by their superior they couldn't have it. So PD lets go and Granite picks it up.

The account you provided means we have to have 100% trust in...Granite? We're watching the House, Senate, DOJ, FBI fake their prosecutions and cover up for Hillary. Whom could we trust with Hillary's secrets? Would have to be a known white hat for us to have any faith that when they say it was protected or never in NYPD, that was the truth.

Which agency or outside organization doesn't think it would be a problem to retain evidence that could implicate Hillary in heinous crimes? Why would Granite feel safe holding the laptop?

Might be that Granite is the investigative equivalent of Dominion software. It can have all the branding it wants, corporate office and certifications, but Dominion is still deep state.This is part of the legacy of the Deep State; "official procedures, just like inaugurations broadcast world-wide, can no longer be trusted. :(