Not what I said Rick. There have been multiple extraditions of hackers specifically and there is a long history of renditions. Not liking or approving of either has zero bearing on whether they should be used.
-
-
And Warsame? Was Warsame tried? I’m not sure.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Many thanks. I see he was convicted of terrorism related charges (arising out of 2012 Benghazi consulate attack) in U.S. fed ct. in 2017. So that is, indeed, a precedent (and, as you say, there are others).+
-
I think the larger issue here is it's an indictment designed not to be prosecuted. While the info comes from a range of sources (people are vastly underestimating how much comes from partners) to prosecute it would put intel at risk.
-
I blv the reason why prosecutors name as defendants foreign conspirators whom they have no hope of prosecuting in court is that w/a prima facie showing of conspiracy, their out-of-court statements can be used against those defendants in court, as an exception to the hearsay rule.
-
Sounds right to me. Also easier to get an obstruction of justice conviction when there is an actual crime, no?
-
People really really really need to drop the obsession with obstruction.
-
Personal note: I’m not obsessed with obstruction. ;-)
-
Sure. But why raise it here? It's actually not relevant to what is probably going on.
-
Sigh. It’s ‘relevant’ because Mueller has filed such add-on charges. Otherwise, I agree, not very noteworthy. And with that, I am returning to my regularly scheduled programming — a baseball game
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.