FBI Forced to Release Clinton Pre-Election Emails Search Warrant – Attorney Says Shows ‘No Probable Cause’
‘Nothing at All in the Search Warrant Application That Would Give Rise to Probable Cause’
A famous attorney says the search warrant the FBI used to access emails on a laptop used by former Congressman Anthony Weiner that was found to have emails his wife, Hillary Clinton top aide Huma Abedin sent or received, does not show probable cause.Â
“I see nothing at all in the search warrant application that would give rise to probable cause,” says E Randol (Randy) Schoenberg, an attorney who was portrayed by Ryan Reynolds in the 2010 movie “Woman in Gold.” Schoenberg, via Twitter, posted a link to the just-released search warrant, saying the FBI and the judge “had to know that there was no probable cause. Why did they do it?” he asks.
I see nothing at all in the search warrant application that would give rise to probable cause. https://t.co/AyyEMPjBc8
— E Randol Schoenberg (@RandySchoenberg) December 20, 2016
Since when is this probable cause? pic.twitter.com/R4vymsMMeC
— E Randol Schoenberg (@RandySchoenberg) December 20, 2016
FBI and Judge Fox had to know that there was no probable cause. Why did they do it?
— E Randol Schoenberg (@RandySchoenberg) December 20, 2016
Saying he is “appalled,” Raw Story notes, Schoenberg, a California civil litigation attorney, took to Facebook to add:
“I see nothing at all in the search warrant application that would give rise to probable cause, nothing that would make anyone suspect that there was anything on the laptop beyond what the FBI had already searched and determined not to be evidence of a crime, nothing to suggest that there would be anything other than routine correspondence between Secretary Clinton and her longtime aide Huma Abedin.”
“You will have to ask Judge Fox, or the agent in charge (whose name has been redacted), or Director Comey, why they thought they might find evidence of a crime, why they felt it necessary to inform Congress, and why they even sought this search warrant.”
Schoenberg, according to the NY Daily News, made the request to unseal the warrant.
FBI Director James Comey, in a letter to members of Congress eleven days before the November election, revealed the existence of the laptop and the emails, before even filing for the search warrant. That letter, experts, including FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver, suggest, likely cost Clinton the election.
I’ll put it like this: Clinton would almost certainly be President-elect if the election had been held on Oct. 27 (day before Comey letter).
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) December 11, 2016
Here’s more evidence, from a panel survey, of a late shift to Trump during final 2 weeks of campaign. https://t.co/PMwRYTeINa pic.twitter.com/bVMa7gFioq
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) December 20, 2016
These were the same voters being re-surveyed, so data suggests Trump win wasn’t “baked in” — something changed at the end of the campaign.
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) December 20, 2016
The approved search warrant itself, as The Hill transcribes, in part states:
“Because it has been determined… that many emails were exchanged between [redacted] using [redacted] and/or [redacted] accounts, and Clinton that contained classified information, there is also probably cause to believe that the correspondence between them located on the Subject Laptop contains classified information.â€
Schoenberg’s bio states he “received the California Lawyer Attorney of the Year award for outstanding achievement in the field of litigation,” in 2007. “He also received the 2006 Jurisprudence Award from the Anti-Defamation League and the Justice Louis D. Brandeis Award from the American Jewish Congress.”
Â
To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.
Image by Azi Paybarah via Flickr and a CC license
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.