So, Ron - here's how it works. The Fifth Amendment says no person shall be deprived of life, LIBERTY OR PROPERTY without Due Process.
Mayor Jenny Durkan is an elected official. In that capacity she acts with "the color of law."
18 USC sec. 242 makes it a crime to, under color of law, willfully subject any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution.
The conduct under review is not what she allowed CHOPers to do, its whether her decision to concede parts of Seattle to the CHOPers subjected OTHER RESIDENTS of Seattle to deprivation of their "liberty" or "property" under color of law.
So it would be the OTHER RESIDENTS of the Capitol Hill area who went without police and fire protection because of decisions made by Mayor Durkan to abandon control of the area to the CHOPers which is the basis for the investigation since doing so was an official act.
But your understanding is exactly what I would expect from a Hollywood moron with a room temperature IQ.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with shipwreckedcrew

shipwreckedcrew Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @shipwreckedcrew

30 Oct
Top notch Nevada election analyst Jon Ralston has Biden in front with a shrinking margin headed to Monday. Not totally surprising.
But he has also has first term Dem. Rep. Susie Lee in trouble in the Nev. 3rd Dist.
Pres. Trump carried this district 48-47 in 2016, but Lee won it in 2018 52%-41% when the seat was open.
Lee's opponent has only run for office one prior time, losing a race for Nevada State Senate. If he knocks off an Dem incumbent in a district that is very even in regis.,
That would be solid news for the GOP because it means the Independents broke for the GOP candidate. This is a suburban Las Vegas district, covering the area south of the city down to the "point" at the bottom of the state.
Read 6 tweets
27 Oct
Here is another good example of an idiot non-lawyer writing as if she understands evidentiary issues.
emptywheel.net/2020/10/27/doj…
Marcy has blocked me, so please @emptywheel her from me.
The only thing Ballentine was tasked to do was to confirm under oath that the notes from Strzok and McCabe were "true and correct copies" of the originals. She didn't need them to do that -- she could have compared the copies to the original herself and made the declaration.
But she did contact them. The didn't respond in way that helped her with her filing requirement. But she had talked to them in the past about the notes -- as both acknowledge. Sullivan's order did not say she had to get "authentication" from Strzok and Page, but she tried.
Read 4 tweets
25 Oct
I actually think there is a lot of truth to this. A Biden/Harris win effectively puts Harris in position to run the party for 12 years. She would finish any part of Biden's first term, then run herself as an "incumbent" in 2024, and could run again in 2028.
But her own primary run showed she has not significant constituency in the Democrat party that is committed to her. She would likely be "controlled" by the Obama-ites who would control a Biden Admin via appointments and cabinet posts.
But there are significant factions within the Democrat party that want to transition farther left -- the younger AOC crowd. The do not want Harris in de facto control of the party for maybe 12 years. So when the Dem primary field took shape in 2019, with Sanders/Biden/Warren
Read 5 tweets
21 Oct
To add another layer of specificity -- when you get a warrant for a computer, that doesn't mean you crack the hard drive and dump everything. The computer is the "place" you are searching. The warrant must also describe with particularity the items you are searching for.
The warrant is not a "generalized" right to search for whatever is on the drive. The warrant is to search for evidence of a particular crime that the owner is suspected to have committed. You have to specify the crime, and the nature of the evidence you are looking for.
So, if you have a warrant to search for child porn, there are search tools the FBI uses to narrow their search for just that file data. They don't get to read through all the documents that evidence of bank fraud. That's not what the warrant authorized them to are searching for.
Read 4 tweets
21 Oct
The OLE document you screenshot is about 10 years old. I think OLE has held off publishing a new one the law on electronic searches is evolving so much -- especially with regard to phones. It was true at one time that Jacobsen -- which was a physical proper search ...
was seen as support for the "private party" search exception to the Fourth Amendment. But the law has not developed in that fashion. Following Riley v. California in 2015, Circuit Courts have scaled back the "private search" doctrine for phones and computers.
But a significant practical problem is the inability to have LE "reenact" the private party search. The FBI does not search computers the same way a repair shop would. The FBI tech agents aren't going to sit down with the repair shop worker and say "Show us what you did".
Read 5 tweets
21 Oct
Let me add a dose of reality to the world you guys live in.
FBI agents and prosecutors do not sit around all day waiting for a computer to show up unexpectedly and land on their desk. They are busy offices. There are thousands of open case files in an FO the side of Baltimore.
Deleware US Attorney not that big but hundreds of filed cases and hundreds of open investigations. Unless a particular case is an unfolding "life of death" drama, it's going to "get in line" when it gets opened. The agent who picked up this laptop had to give it to a tech agent.
It's the tech agent's job to image the drive and then run it through a series of programs to sort out the files into different types. Normally they only do that if they have a warrant, and the warrant tells them what they are looking for.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!