BULLDOG
Diamond Member
- Jun 3, 2014
- 95,526
- 31,641
- 2,250
been in IT for 30 years. yea, i have an idea.i think when given a copy, a lot can change.Do you think that unless they examine the original hardware, you cannot determine the origin of the hack?great. then look at the original cloud server, not a lot of snapshots. you'd never allow trump or others to look at "copies" of evidence but demand full access. is it any wonder you don't want the same for YOUR side?There was no physical server dumb ass. It was kept on the cloud.
if trump said he was hacked, but only provided you a copy of his machine, do you trust it to be all there? authentic? i wouldn't. i would want to examine what he said was hacked. not a copy. not his blessed version. the actual server.
Sure you would, but you have no idea what the best practices require. That's why we have specialists in certain things instead of just relying on someone who doesn't understand how things work.
now - you yell at someone for spreading false narratives yet you then in the same sentence scream SEVENTEEN AGENCIES LOOKED INTO IT!
i have proven that is a false narrative. why are you not chiding yourself for spreading lies?
30 years? Then you should understand a snapshot is the best way to determine what happened, and by who. Why are you asking stupid questions?
Why do you misquote me? I said all 17 agencies agree Russia hacked our elections, and they do.