Anonymous ID: 110c24 July 31, 2019, 10:44 p.m. No.7289316   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9327 >>9329 >>9339

>>7289274

Is it a coincidence that Q drops on patriots fight a placeholder -DECLAS highlighting Exculpatory Evidence?

A few days later Tulsi Gabbard drops the bomb on Kamala Harris?

Is it illegal to hold Exculpatory Evidence as an AG?

How does that tie into FISA?

Anonymous ID: 110c24 July 31, 2019, 10:46 p.m. No.7289339   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>9561

>>7289316

In Brady v. Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled that criminal defendants may be entitled to a new trial if prosecutors fail to turn over evidence favorable to the defendant, whether exculpatory or impeachment. (Impeachment evidence, when it comes to criminal trials, refers to prior acts or statements that would affect a witness's credibility.) In fact, prosecutors who withhold exculpatory evidence could find themselves facing criminal charges. And that requirement may even include evidence that wouldn't be admissible in court.

Anonymous ID: 110c24 July 31, 2019, 10:53 p.m. No.7289409   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7289396

>"Minimization procedures" limit the collection of information concerning United States persons by protecting their identities and requiring a court order to retain the communications for longer than 72 hours. The communications can be retained without court order if there is evidence of a crime. Identification of a US person, known as "unmasking", may also be authorized if an agency believes it is necessary in order to understand the intelligence or believes that the person was committing a crime.