- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

What happened with all those sealed indictments?
Posted on 6/12/19 at 8:49 am
Posted on 6/12/19 at 8:49 am
There were thousands of them.
Sessions was in fact NOT a duck on water.
Did any of them ever amount to anything or are they still sealed?
Wanting to keep the Q nonsense on that thread and only want legitimate info on this one.
Sessions was in fact NOT a duck on water.
Did any of them ever amount to anything or are they still sealed?
Wanting to keep the Q nonsense on that thread and only want legitimate info on this one.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 8:53 am to dstone12
quote:
What happened with all those sealed indictments?
Waiting on the statutes of limitation to run out

Posted on 6/12/19 at 8:56 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Waiting on the statutes of limitation to run out
Would a federal indictment interrupt the running of the time?
Posted on 6/12/19 at 8:57 am to dstone12
quote:
What happened with all those sealed indictments?
There never were any.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:14 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
Waiting on the statutes of limitation to run out
According to this scenario below, filing a sealed indictment effectively presses pause on the statute of limitations, because the legal action was taken in a timely manner.
Apologies in advance for a CNN link, but it illustrates the point all the same. CNN: Prosecutors' Best Move - Charge Trump and Seal the Indictment

Now, let's look at their scenario above and substitute in HRC (or any of the Spygate conspirators, including Black Jesus):
Let's say an indictment against Hillary was filed on - let' s pick a date - Oct. 30, 2017 for crimes committed during the 2016 election cycle, dating all the way back to her time as Sec. State, or the period immediately following. I'll specify her email server subpoenas that were ignored and destruction of evidence.
So long as the indictment was filed in a timely manner within the Statute of Limitations, then it can be unsealed and executed at will, even after the SOL has expired.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:15 am to cokebottleag
I thought there was 10 times the yearly average of previous years.
I’m green on the subject and would like to know what the talk was about and where the misconception came from that there were thousands of baws heading to the clink.
I’m green on the subject and would like to know what the talk was about and where the misconception came from that there were thousands of baws heading to the clink.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:23 am to dstone12
quote:
I thought there was 10 times the yearly average of previous years.
I’m green on the subject and would like to know what the talk was about and where the misconception came from that there were thousands of baws heading to the clink.
Link to Google Docs spreadsheet detailing sealed cases
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:27 am to VoxDawg
ABC News - Nov. 16, 2018 - Nearly Three Dozen Sealed Indictments Filed in DC District Court, Are They Mueller's?
Spoiler Alert - They aren't. Potentially could've been some of the recently unsealed charges against Julian Assange, but otherwise we're all still in the dark.
Spoiler Alert - They aren't. Potentially could've been some of the recently unsealed charges against Julian Assange, but otherwise we're all still in the dark.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:27 am to VoxDawg
quote:
So long as the indictment was filed in a timely manner within the Statute of Limitations, then it can be unsealed and executed at will, even after the SOL has expired.
I believe speedy trial comes in to play somewhere... and tolling. It's an interesting gray area, I just like throwing out buzzwords to get people's opinions.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:36 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
I believe speedy trial comes in to play somewhere... and tolling. It's an interesting gray area, I just like throwing out buzzwords to get people's opinions.
It's totally unprecedented, to be sure, but so is the level of corruption and disregard for the rule of law exhibited by our Dramatis Personae involved in Spygate.
The simplest explanation is that there is a wholesale interconnection between many of the soon-to-be plaintiffs. Grand jury deliberations might be over for one case, but additional information has come to light that requires investigating a co-conspirator, or deliberation on an expansion of charges under a previous indictment.
Less than 2,000 is normal for a given year.
NOTE: Not all sealed records/filings are indictments. Some could be procedural developments, extensions, search warrants, etc, while a single indictment could name 50 people. Manage thy expectations.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:37 am to VoxDawg
quote:
where the misconception came from that there were thousands of baws heading to the clink.
I think you'll see from the images above, there's no misconception. The sealed records/indictments are very real. All info comes from the PACER system.
ETA - The link to the Google Docs spreadsheet I posted earlier is the only resource I've seen where there is an attempt at recording the unsealed counts, too.
This post was edited on 6/12/19 at 9:40 am
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:39 am to dstone12
What happened with the Russian lawyers case?
LINK
How about Tony Podesta?
Or McCabe? It was said he had a grand jury, it must be over by now--he is as free as a bird as of May 29, 2019 , -look how great he was- article about him.
https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-andrew-mccabe-russia-donald-trump

LINK
How about Tony Podesta?
Or McCabe? It was said he had a grand jury, it must be over by now--he is as free as a bird as of May 29, 2019 , -look how great he was- article about him.
https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-andrew-mccabe-russia-donald-trump
This post was edited on 6/12/19 at 9:41 am
Posted on 6/12/19 at 9:45 am to cokebottleag
So we have:
Vs.
That’s a huge discrepancy. And I am not putting you two against each other. But can either of you two show facts about you positions?
0 vs 100,000+ is a broad spectrum.
quote:
There never were any
Vs.
quote:
100,000+
That’s a huge discrepancy. And I am not putting you two against each other. But can either of you two show facts about you positions?
0 vs 100,000+ is a broad spectrum.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:13 am to dstone12
quote:
But can either of you two show facts about you positions?
I don't personally have access to the PACER system. To my understanding, that is limited to law professionals who pay for access. The Twitter usernames in the white chart I posted are all presumed to be lawfags of various stripes who have accounts through their day jobs.
If those compiling the spreadsheet and/or the regular monthly updates graphics are who they say they are, then to my understanding there is no reason to dispute the stats they're presenting. If it were being presented/curated by a single individual then there's a higher likelihood of potential frickery, because you're just taking one person's word for it, versus a team of a dozen or so, all with access to the same info. Think of it like Wikipedia - one troll could frick up the data, but then there's 10 people right behind him who want the information to be accurate.
PACER site
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:15 am to dstone12
They never existed
Was nothing but a bunch of Q hope porn garbage pushed by blogs like "ConservativeAmericaPatrioticPatriotStandWithIsrael.wordpress.com"
Was nothing but a bunch of Q hope porn garbage pushed by blogs like "ConservativeAmericaPatrioticPatriotStandWithIsrael.wordpress.com"
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:26 am to VoxDawg
Would it be fair to consider that should these sealed documents be indictments, they are getting spread out across the country to prevent Federal Court districts from being overwhelmed?
Can an indictment for say (10) defendants from the D.O.E, working in D.C. and living in Virginia, be filed in Iowa?
Can an indictment for say (10) defendants from the D.O.E, working in D.C. and living in Virginia, be filed in Iowa?
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:27 am to The Funnie Five
You can have a sandy vag and still need to acknowledge that the "they never existed" argument is utterly ridiculous. Those two positions aren't mutually exclusive.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:35 am to keks tadpole
quote:
Would it be fair to consider that should these sealed documents be indictments, they are getting spread out across the country to prevent Federal Court districts from being overwhelmed?
Can an indictment for say (10) defendants from the D.O.E, working in D.C. and living in Virginia, be filed in Iowa?
That's a prevailing line of thinking - yes. There's also some sense to be made that the farther out from the DC/Swamp area, the higher the likelihood that you'd get a fair evaluation from Federal GJs. Put some miles between the actual justice system and the scene of the crime. We all know how pervasive Swamp culture/corruption can be.

It is my understanding that any federal crime can be prosecuted in any federal court. I believe there are 93 US Attys, total.
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:38 am to VoxDawg
quote:
Now, let's look at their scenario above and substitute in HRC (or any of the Spygate conspirators, including Black Jesus):
Let's say an indictment against Hillary was filed on - let' s pick a date - Oct. 30, 2017 for crimes committed during the 2016 election cycle, dating all the way back to her time as Sec. State, or the period immediately following. I'll specify her email server subpoenas that were ignored and destruction of evidence.
So long as the indictment was filed in a timely manner within the Statute of Limitations, then it can be unsealed and executed at will, even after the SOL has expired.
Who would have filed these? Sessions? Huber? I think it would have come out by now, if so. The OIG DOJ report cleared HRC and Comey and basically told them to be more careful with their cell phones and that he suggested sensitivity training or some such crap.
Who knows... all of those sealed indictments could have been Mueller preserving Trump team special council investigations; and now that it is all falling apart the sealed indictments are moot?
I thought all of the sealed ones were led on to be: the world wide organization of sick pedos including politicos and Hollywood and across the pond and JFK Jr. would emerge; as the tribunals of political bad actors went down in GTMO NAS, Cuba?
Proofs of the GTMO tribunals have been because Trump is rebuilding U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Which I still say is no proof of anything; but long overdue infrastructure Obama and Bush never granted. They needed a new school, (WT Sampson School) piers, buildings falling apart from Hurricanes. As well as the upkeep of SIMA and rebuilding of the piers that services Navy ships and trains in gas chambers, and supports sea trials.
The prison barge stuff is more than likely complete nonsense. Barges bring goods from CONUS to GTMO base residents; food, household goods, cars, everything... also ships anchor off as support supply...
Disclaimer: Obama approved million dollar soccer fields and a state of the art court room for terrorists, @ GTMO NAS. Trump is finally boosting the SIMA piers and providing structure of schools and buildings to be updated from 30-50 years ago. They built new housing when I was there that is now 20 something years old. (Time flies and then you die and pay taxes)

This post was edited on 6/12/19 at 11:06 am
Posted on 6/12/19 at 10:40 am to dstone12
I looked at them a few months ago. They are filed in our Federal court system.
Keep in mind that these aren't all indictments, nor are they all criminal. Nonetheless, the numbers are an anomoly.
PDF FROM GOV WEBSITE EXPLAINING THE PROCESS, WITH EXAMPLE NUMBERS FROM 2006; A MUST READ IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND
Keep in mind that these aren't all indictments, nor are they all criminal. Nonetheless, the numbers are an anomoly.
PDF FROM GOV WEBSITE EXPLAINING THE PROCESS, WITH EXAMPLE NUMBERS FROM 2006; A MUST READ IF YOU WANT TO UNDERSTAND
Popular
Back to top
