The Campaign For DA

2.06.2018

Random Tuesday Morning Thoughts



  • "A Texas state district court judge [in Hildago County] has been arrested on allegations he accepted approximately $6,000 in cash bribes."
  • Dirk's name was misspelled last night. And it happened in Sacramento over the weekend. 
  • The 32 year old elementary school teacher in Weatherford who contracted the flu and was dead in days should scare us all.
  • I'm still studying my maps to get a handle on the chance for "winter weather." Disclaimer: The following graphic is by Delkus. I'll factor that in accordingly.
  • For those saying the FISA search warrant on Carter Page was illegally obtained, you have no idea how search warrants work. I do. If a judge grants it (which is 99% of the time in any jurisdiction at any level), there is almost nothing you can do. This is the opening sentence from an article in a professional journal published by the Texas District and County Attorney's Association: "Though defense counsel’s accusations that an officer lied in an affidavit for search warrant might strike panic in a prosecutor’s heart, you need not fear." Sheesh. But the author is right. (And in Carter Page's case, no one says false statements were made. The worst allegation is that exculpatory information was withheld -- something that can be legally withheld.)
  • Proof Nunes is a moron. Does he truly believe there is a court reporter present when a search warrant affidavit is presented to a judge? And search warrants aren't based upon what was "verbally presented" -- they are based on an affidavit. 
  • Two days a week, because of extracurricular activities, I've got to the Freshman in the House to school at 5:45 a.m. That's 5:45!!! I can't wait until that kid get's her driver's licence in the Fall.
  • We had a North Texas police chase yesterday where the guy fled on foot once his tires were shredded. Those baggy pants served as a law enforcement tool.
  • Under the radar election news yesterday: Pennsylvania has more registered Democrats than Republicans yet, because of gerrymandering, Republicans hold 13 of 18 Congressional seats. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down the gerrymandering last month and ordered the districts redrawn. An emergency appeal by Republicans to the Supreme Court yesterday was denied. Dems will pick up a ton of House seats.
  • The government "shutdown" deadline is in a couple of days. In January, everyone acted like the sky was falling unless a deal was made. Now, as they'll kick the issue down the road again, no one even mentions it. 
  • This is the Dallas Morning News scorecard from the Patriot's draft in 2006 2000 where Tom Brady was taken in the sixth round. 
  • Remember the judge presiding over the Trump University lawsuits who Trump called a "hater" and a "Mexican" during the campaign? Well that judge is now about to rule on "The Wall" in an environmental case. 
  • The naming of Robert Wagner as a "Person of Interest" (hate that term) in the death of Natalie Wood in 1981 is nothing other than California law enforcement officers wanting to get in front of the cameras. One lead investigator said, "This is a suspicious death investigation. We want to know what happened from the time of the argument to when she got into the water." Sounds like you've got an open and shut case there, hoss. You'll note the DA's office hasn't said a word.



53 comments:

Anonymous said...

Re "What we want to know is what happened after the argument..." What we WANT and what we GET are usually two different things! THAT sure doesn't open up anything "new"! :-)

Anonymous said...

I think Tom was drafted around 2000, not '06. Anyway, they won the '01 Super Bowl when he took Bledsoe's place.

Anonymous said...

Re swearing out warrants:
Yep, it's based on the paper, and there's no court reporter - don't know about FISA court, but most of mine were done in chambers. Swore out one once in the (duty) magistrate's dining room at 8pm, another time across the hood of my car in the courthouse parking lot after the AUSA being told by the judge "It's almost five, just meet me at my car."

At least in the federal system it is possible to swear out a warrant via telephone, but that's really only for very exigent circumstances. In 21 years, I don't think I've even heard of anyone doing that.

Anonymous said...

Ok, I think you libs have made it clear....we can turn the law enforcement and intel communities loose on you without repercussions. I think this one might just come back to bite you all in the ass.

On a local level I hope our friends in law enforcement start to target lawyers, Democratic politicians and political influencers. Just start recording their movements, tapping phones, etc. It's time to start destroying some lives!!!

Anonymous said...

The crooked judge is a Democrat. And for Pete's sake, leave Delkus alone. You really come across as jealous and insecure as hell.

wordkyle said...

"Illegal" seems to be a common theme when you try to defend the FISA business regarding the Trump investigation. You seem to set a very high bar on what you consider unacceptable in this instance.

However, more-informed people than I am have recently addressed the standard:

"There’s no dispute that at least some, if not a great deal, of information in the anti-Trump “Steele dossier” was unverified or false. Former FBI director James Comey testified as much himself before a Senate committee in June 2017….

Presentation of any such unverified material to the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court to justify a wiretap would appear to violate crucial procedural rules, called “Woods Procedures,” designed to protect U.S. citizens.

Yet Comey allegedly signed three of the FISA applications on behalf of the FBI. Deputy Director Andrew McCabe reportedly signed one and former Attorney General Sally Yates, then-Acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein each reportedly signed one or more."


I don't know if this meets your standard of "illegal," but it's (apparently) a violation. Actually, multiple violations done multiple times. The procedure to protect U.S. citizens was (apparently) flouted by the FBI in order to go after a presidential candidate. There are a lot of shoes dropping that you choose to ignore simply for political reasons. Think that over.

Anonymous said...

I've tried cases in that court in Hidalgo County. I am absolutely not surprised.

I think you may be wasting your breath, attempting to educate your readership on warrants. First of all, they probably know all this. They simply do not care.

And I'm not usually one of those "why no post about [X]?" people, but come on. Marty Crane died of the weekend.

Some Houston Lawyer

Anonymous said...

He, is that 'Not for President' guy still in Wise County jail? Haven't heard much out of anyone lately.

Anonymous said...

Dems will pick up a ton of House seats.



Nothing like having the Black Panthers helping PA grow the libtard Dems.

Anonymous said...

Nunes is a moron. But he knows FOX News viewers are "conservatives" and uneducated morons. Don't talk facts, use innuendo and rumor. They lap that stuff up like cream gravy. Just spew a little of that on Hannity and proclaim how awful it is to talk bad about a white president. That'll keep 'em wound up for a while.

Anonymous said...

If you can't drum up (or chase) enough clients in Houston to the point you have to drive down to some shithole for a paycheck, that tells me all I need to know there law hawk!

Anonymous said...

Explain to us all how you are more accomplished than Nunes?

Anonymous said...

"... the Dallas Morning News scorecard from the Patriot's draft in 2006 ..."
that's why every discussion about the NFL draft is a huge waste of time and gives me tired-head. It goes on for weeks before the draft and for weeks after the draft.

"...the death of Natalie Wood in 1981..." There were only three wutnesses present on the boat when she died ane now, almost 40 years later, law enforcement is hoping someone will come forward with information.

Anonymous said...

Nunes is a former dairy farmer. Which is fine - that certainly doesn't mean he can't be a good Congressman, and certainly doesn't mean he can't serve well as Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. But what it DOES mean is that he should take the time to have experts (like, actual lawyers) explain how all this works to him, and maybe he should actually put in the time and effort to read, research, and learn before taking action.

But 9:32 nailed it - he won't because he knows it doesn't matter; he'll just say what he wants, make the accusations he wants, and the base will lap it up, truth/facts/knowledge be damned. (And before Wordy jumps in here, there are Dems who are absolutely as guilty of the same thing.)

Anonymous said...

WK, if you would read the transcript of Comey testmony before the Senate intelligence committee, he did refused to answer if the Steele dossier had been verified due to an ongoing investigation. Redstate, a conservative web site has a link to the testimony.

The Comey testimony you are referring in the dossier as being unverified was the salacious story of prostitutes peeing on the bed when Trump was in Russia for the miss universe contest. Check this out. Read the testimony. Parts of the Steele investigation were used in the FISA warrant regarding Carter Page.

Reading and checking out sources is always a good idea so you won't be misinformed and spread misinformation.


Anonymous said...

Outstanding RTG. I’m in love

Anonymous said...

Well, 9:41, you may not know how the law biz works, but if I have clients from Chicago who sought me out in the first place, and likes the work I do in Houston enough to let me handle their cases in the Valley, Golden Triangle, and N. Texas, well, I think that does qualify as drumming up enough business. I also spent last week in Louisville in a week-long arbitration at the request of one of those clients who you think I can't get enough business out of.

But hey, if you don't know the first thing about a warrant (I'm assuming my implication that you were not capable of being educated is why you chose to take a swipe at me), then I can't exactly expect you to know anything about the practical aspects of the business, either.

Good luck going through life stupid.

Some Houston Lawyer

Anonymous said...

You fools trying to turn this into a procedural argument aren't looking at the bigger picture, the premise for the warrant, the apparent bias and the political motivation behind asking for the warrant in the first place. And explain why they used the dossier if, as you constitutional scholars have jumped through hoops to point out, the warrant would have been approved anyway without it!

Anonymous said...

I guess obfuscation is the next layer in the libs playbook about the memo!! Outrage will be next, followed by more legal mumbo jumbo and lawyersplaining! Just admit there was bias at the highest levels of the FBI and DOJ and an attempt by Obama and the Hillary camps to go after Trump. Hell, I ain't even mad, I understand why they did it, I just wish you all would look at the writing on the wall and admit it. Nothing about what went on here passes the smell test!

Anonymous said...

Notice how “The FBI LIED about the Steele dossier” has been scaled back to, “The FBI did not highlight the truth about the Steele Dossier in the part of the application we bothered to read.” So now the main attack on the FBI is about font size.

This would be entertaining were it not so damn damaging to the institutions of government and governing.

Anonymous said...

How is Wagner more guilty now than he possibly could have been 40 years ago? Not possible, but some DA out to grandstand trots it out there like it was gospel. Ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

I agree with a constitutional lawyer named Mark Levin. Hillary Clinton paid for a warrant.

Anonymous said...

If the outgoing Bush administration had done the same thing to Obama, Barry would still be obsessing over it.

This is where it has to be acknowledged that the truth is not a value to the Left.

wordkyle said...

BG: "Proof Nunes is a moron..." - Your implication is that records of FISA proceedings aren't kept, and that Nunes is a "moron" for asking for them. Not sure what to make of that.

1012 - Are you trying to create a narrative wherein Nunes sat in a room by himself, made things up out of whole cloth with zero research or input from others, then released the information with no prior review by others? Really? I understand that it's your excuse to insult everyone who might disagree with you ("the base will lap it up") but are you stupid enough to hang your hat on that version of reality?

It's like you guys aren't even trying anymore.

Anonymous said...

Barry, have you ever read Fourth Amendment cases in the appeals process?
For a continuation of a warrant allowing surveillance if any street cop were to be shown to have information saying the source for their probable cause was shaky and they didn't tell the judge- goodbye evidence. I have seen evidence get tossed because a CID agent didn't know his CI had recently developed a meth habit, and have seen city cops get their cases tossed because they chose not to tell the judge their CI was cooperating to avoid felony charges.
For the FBI to not let the FISA court know about the credibility issues with Steele makes their work seem pretty shoddy.

You are spot on about Robert Wagner. The coroner's COD as drowning and other unknown factors would make any case sink faster than Natalie Wood with a foot in her back.

Anonymous said...

Real piece of work huh. My guess is that none of that is true since you spend hours a day on a blog with zero ties to you geographically. My guess is you are nother DWI lawyer.

Anonymous said...

Either Barry is dumb enough to believe the Leftist lies regarding the FISA warrant or he is a liar. Those are the only two options.

wordkyle said...

1053 - Please provide examples to illustrate your "Notice how" observation. Your whole point is based on it, but that "scaling back" is not apparent to me. Please elaborate.

1029 - I'm not sure why you called me out. Nothing you say seems to disagree with what I said. Are you agreeing with me, or what? Or are you trying to say that the only unverified part was the Russian prostitute thing; i.e., every other part is verified? If that's your point, that's a new one, as I don't recall Comey saying such a thing. Again, please elaborate.

Harry Hamid said...

It's sort of a shame, then, that Nunes waited until just days after Congress had reauthorized FISA Section 702 to raise questions about its use.

If it's being misused, maybe that's something that should have been discussed before reauthorization. Of course, it used to be that if I raised questions about that sort of thing, conservatives told me to leave the country because I was supporting terrorism.

Now, of course, it turns out that Trump and Company are the constant victims of government abusing its power and constantly whine and moan about how bad they've got it.

Anonymous said...

I've looked and tried to determine whether there is any Court Reporter present for a FISA warrant application and really can't locate an answer. Clearly these are ex parte hearings, but ex parte doesn't always mean without a court reporter. However, it looks as if these requests are made on paper and then considered by the Court over a period of days, which would indicate there isn't a realy hearing, but rather, simply, a submission process. My guess is that what Nunes is really after with respect to his comments, is a disclosure of what evidence the renewal applications claimed the original warrant revealed, because that's the legal standard, and if the FBI submitted an application claiming that the original warrant resulted in the capture of evidence, actual evidence, that someone within the Trump campaign was working with a foreign government when that wasn't accurate, then certainly heads ought to roll.

Anonymous said...

So let me get this straight - the FBI was so anti-Trump that it publicly announced its investigation into Hillary, then stated that was closed, then made yet another public announcement about potentially re-opening the investigation just days before the election, all while secretly investigating Trump's campaign (and either deliberately misleading or lying to the NYT about it)? If only they had been MORE anti-Trump, he might have actually won the popular vote.

And no, Nunes didn't make all of this up on his own - nothing in my comment stated that. What I did state is that he--as well as all members of Congress and the POTUS--should be vigilant to "know what they don't know" and take the time to learn. Nunes has admitted he didn't read the underlying FISA application and other underlying documents. He has repeatedly made statements (like the one today highlighted by Barry) that show that he fails to understand how the process works. Stupidity is one thing. Ignorance is another.

And 10:37, here's why they used information from the dossier even if a warrant would have been issued without it: because you present as much evidence as you feel will be necessary, and then some extra to make sure. If you can show a judge 10 reasons why you should get your warrant, but (hypothetically) only 3 are needed, then show him/her 10. If the judge doesn't like 2-3 of your reasons, you've got 7-8 more. Lawyers are risk averse. If it takes a belts and suspenders approach to remove any doubts about my case, you'd better believe that's what I'm doing.

Anonymous said...

BINGO!!! "Some Houston Lawyer" for the WIN TODAY!!!

Anonymous said...

The Robert Wagner accusations surface every other year. Big deal.

Anonymous said...

We love how a memo written by a congressman and his staff becomes Stone Tablet Truth automatically in people's minds. We should have taken the easy route. Would have been less work going up and down that mountain.

DF The Lord & DF Moses

wordkyle said...

1215 - First, you seem to be walking back your previous comments. Okay, fine. But then you turn right back around and imply that Nunes and others are completely ignorant about what they're doing. Again, another attempt to establish a narrative that ignores reality. Does this kind of thing work in your circles?

Anonymous said...

Does the layman need to know the intricacies of a warrant to understand that obtaining said warrant under false pretenses, and having done so with a political motivation goes against the principles of which this country was founded? If it's as easy to get FISA warrants on private citizens as you guys claim, then we have a much bigger problem that those in power will undoubtedly continue to exploit! It's about to be a rabbit has the gun situation!

Anonymous said...

Nice job back-patting your own comments๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚

Anonymous said...

But you would play fast and loose with an unvetted, politically paid for document when you know you don't need it? That's the opposite of risk averse because that one thing extra you added could soon become a sticking point for the judge.

Anonymous said...

Like we love how some dossier paid for by the Clinton's and compiled by a foreign agent becomes Stone Tablet Truth automatically in libs minds!

Anonymous said...

12:15 - Good to hear. That clears the Trump administration to request a FISA warrant on their 2020 opposition. Let’s destroy America legally.

Anonymous said...

"Some Houston Lawyer" NEEDS TO LEARN ABOUT A CONCEPT CALLED VERB CONJUGATION REGARDING THE WORD "like"

Waco lawyer said...

It appears the judge may require a recording of a FISC hearing
http://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/FISC%20Rules%20of%20Procedure.pdf
Title V. Hearings, Orders, and Enforcement
Hearings.
Rule 17.
(d) Testimony; Oath; Recording of Proceedings. A Judge may take testimony under oath and receive other evidence. The testimony may be recorded electronically or as the Judge may otherwise direct, consistent with the security measures referenced in Rule 3.

Anonymous said...

Just watched the SpaceX launch of the Falcon Heavy test flight online. That was the most amazing space launch ever. Absolutely must TV!!!!

Anonymous said...

1:58 - Don’t worry. The 80’s called and they want their foreign policy back. It’s cool.

Anonymous said...

What stock market close at today? Barry?

Anonymous said...

We didn't have these types of FBI problems back in my day. The only problem was matching my dancing shoes with my red ballgown.

DF J. Edgar

Anonymous said...

Power of the memo. Still a place for paper.

DF Hammermill Bond

Anonymous said...

WK, June 6 testimony before Senate intelligence committee Comey would not answer in an open setting whether the FBI was able to confirm anything in the Steele dossier.
Burr: was the FBI able to confirm any criminal allegationsccontained in the Steele document?
Comey:I don't think that is a question I can answer in open setting because it goes into details of the investigation.

Verify the testimony because your quote is not how he testified.

Comey applied the label "salacious and unverified" to certain material he briefed the president about on January 6th, a reference to Trump and the prostitutes.

A portion of the Steele dossier was used regarding Carter Page in obtaining the FISA warrant and granted 3 more times.

Anonymous said...

Nunes is a moron to smear our institutions to support the president while nothing is being done to prevent Russian meddling in the 2018 elections. Only morons would claim the investigation is a hoax and witch hunt.

wordkyle said...

552 - In his testimony, Comey referred to the dossier (the "certain material" you refer to) in a conversation he'd had with Trump, as containing "salacious and unverified" information.

In re-reading Comey's testimony, I don't see any mention of prostitutes. Can you point that out for me? You seem very certain that's the only reference he intended.

A conjecture on my part: Since Trump had just fired Comey, it's reasonable to assume Comey was hostile to Trump by this point, if not from the beginning of their association. Wouldn't "I can't say in an open session" serve as a great "I refuse to answer that question" if he didn't want to say anything that might help Trump? As has become evident, Comey is very much a part of the bureaucratic/political class in Washington.

Anonymous said...

I think Comey did a pretty good job smearing the FBI in his handling of the Hillary investigation and getting caught flat footed by the Russians during the election. The Nunes memo just proves what we all suspected. Might not technically be illegal but it was a political dirty trick of the highest order.

Anonymous said...

If you know of any more salacious reports other than what Comey briefed the president about January 6th, please share or we can assume is the alleged Russian compromat.

Comey saying he could not answer was nothing to do personal feeling toward Trump, he could not testify regarding classified information in an open meeting in an ongoing investigation.

Comey is a Republican who has served so why does that taint him? I don't see a big conspiracy against Trump but see a danger in dimishing the justice department and the FBI like Obama did to our police.

wordkyle said...

1006 - You seem to be working extensively off of assumptions.
1) You have no idea the real reason Comey said he couldn't state something in open session. My conjecture is just as valid as your conjecture.
2) The fact that you don't see a big conspiracy against Trump doesn't mean there wasn't one. However, your predisposition might explain why you also don't see anything wrong with FBI and DOJ misconduct as long as it's directed at those with whom you disagree.

My own predisposition makes it pretty clear to me, based on information that has been made public, that something cockeyed went on concerning the Clinton campaign and Trump investigation. And it certainly doesn't hurt anything to take a look at it all. The fact that the FBI and DOJ have resisted cooperating with inquiries make such a look even more reasonable.