No Russian Collusion? What now?

[Rigby5]

• In the 773 days to yesterday, Trump has made 9,014 partly or wholly made-up statements according to the Washington Post
• He's started lying more and more frequently with each year of his presidency
• 104 came in one two-hour speech this weekend
• Donald Trump Has Reportedly Racked Up More Than 9,000 Lies Since Taking Office

And that is what bothers me the MOST about him, his lies upon lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.... just unadulterated DECEITFULNESS.

I just can't take the lying, it breaks every rule I was ever taught by my parents, by my church, by my employers etc etc etc

...he makes my skin crawl....

I agree with all that, but he was also elected, so also deserves better treatment than I see from most.
It is like they always want him to fail at everything, forgetting that if he fails, that harms the country.

 

[Rigby5]

Now that Cohen has been revealed as a total nothing-burger, what shall we do next?

Should we pretend Cohen never happened and continue the collusion narrative, promising an impending Mueller "bombshell"? Or shall we take a different, wiser tangent? One thing is certain, Trump is GUILTY and UNFIT, and something must be done. Even a Republican like me knows that!

So in true bipartisan spirit, I've compiled some possibilities that should be considered. I've run these through the same computer used to predict global warming, so the actual probabilities are included. They're 100% accurate, you can trust me:

• Trump is an alien from the planet Flaflooga, sent to take over the Earth with his mind-ray: 87%
• Trump is literally Hitler, thawed from cryogenic suspension and here to establish the New Reich: 92%
• A Genuine Birth Certificate will be found proving that Trump is a Russian national (how ironic!): 41%
• Cancelled checks from Trump to Putin with the memo "Thanks for the boost" will surface: 78%
• Trump and Pence will both get "an offer they can't refuse" from Kim: 18%
• Pelosi and Schumer will prove that Trump is actually their 17 year old love child: 29%
• AOC will tweet a clapback so stunning that Trump will resign in shame: 65%

As you can see, there is at least a 410% chance that Trump should not be President. I'm sure there are more possibilities, but the computer overheated. This should take us well past 2020.

You're welcome, Democrats!

Jeez...the legal term is 'conspiracy', not 'collusion'.

And since the Mueller investigation has not even been revealed - you have not a clue what it says or if there was conspiracy.

Sheesh...you Trumpbots just cannot stop looking silly and ignorant.

Now I have no idea if Trump will be found guilty of conspiracy - my guess is no. But I am not stupid enough to run around claiming he is/is not when there is no possible way 99.999% of Americans could know for certain.

There is a legal definition of collusion, but it is not group effort to commit a crime, but a group effort to cover one up.
So it is a lesser charge with likely no legal penalty.
The judge could use obstructing or contempt charges as punishment, depending on location and circumstances.
But then you can see the appeal of talking about collusion instead of conspiracy, because you could get sued if you claim conspiracy and later no crime is found. Collusion is safer because then no one can sue you.

 

[McRocket]

• In the 773 days to yesterday, Trump has made 9,014 partly or wholly made-up statements according to the Washington Post
• He's started lying more and more frequently with each year of his presidency
• 104 came in one two-hour speech this weekend
• Donald Trump Has Reportedly Racked Up More Than 9,000 Lies Since Taking Office

And that is what bothers me the MOST about him, his lies upon lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.... just unadulterated DECEITFULNESS.

I just can't take the lying, it breaks every rule I was ever taught by my parents, by my church, by my employers etc etc etc

...he makes my skin crawl....

I agree with all that, but he was also elected, so also deserves better treatment than I see from most.
It is like they always want him to fail at everything, forgetting that if he fails, that harms the country.

He deserves EXACTLY what he is getting...no more, no less.

No one made him run. And he has been caught in so many lies, deceptions and flat out idiotic comments that he fully deserves to be scorned and ridiculed.
Plus, he clearly is a total asshole. it's not like he admits his weaknesses. He seems to have ZERO humility.
And he is vicious at insulting ANYONE who in ANY WAY puts him down. His skin is thinner than cheap, toilet paper.

No...he FULLY deserves all the insults that he gets.

 

[Rigby5]

That legislation is about MONEY.
Is not about information or EMAILS.
And anything except money is perfectly legal.

But Trump was talking about wanting help in finding the missing Clinton server emails after Benghazi.
Since Hillary said they were missing, then anyone looking for or finding them would be doing everyone a favor, and it would not at all be illegal.

And you are also wrong about email in general.
Since emails always are routed through dozens of servers in order to get delivered, the counts have ruled than can never be considered private, and it is not illegal to copy them.
All the servers they are routed through likely has copies of them.

”And anything except money is perfectly legal”

Nope, you’re wrong about that too. Just about everyyou’re posting is unadulterated bullshit.

It’s illegal for a campaign to solicit contributions from a foreign national. Campaign contributions are not limited to monetary donations, but extend to anything of value.

Types of contributions

Contributions are the most common source of campaign support.

A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:​

These is nothing in the list that is remotely like emails.
Emails cost nothing to copy, so there is nothing like a service at all involved.

LOLOL

Revealing a candidate’s personal hacked email is of value to their opposition. That’s self evident as Trump wouldn’t have solicited Russia to hack her unless it was worth something to him.

You don't get it.
Whether or not something is of value to someone is irrelevant.
The ONLY basis for campaign finance laws is that you can try to assure that no one uses secret money to buy up a monopoly on the media.
And PERSONAL value can't do that.
Lots of things have personal value.
But the campaign finance laws can't touch that unless it can be turned into control over the media.

And in fact, there is no evidence Hillary EVER got hacked at all.
It was the DNC that got hacked, but that was BEFORE Trump suggested the Russians look for Hillary's missing emails.
So you don't seem to know at all what is even being discussed?

FYI
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.

Sorry, but you are mixing up the DNC server that was hacked, with Hillary's server, which everyone denies was ever hacked.
The DNC server was hacked long before Trump made that public request for the Russians to help find the 30,000 missing Hillary emails in a speech. That is why he made the request. Hacking was already in the news. But no one ever found any of Hillary's deleted emails. The FBI tried to find them on Weiner's laptop, but failed.

 

[Rigby5]

• In the 773 days to yesterday, Trump has made 9,014 partly or wholly made-up statements according to the Washington Post
• He's started lying more and more frequently with each year of his presidency
• 104 came in one two-hour speech this weekend
• Donald Trump Has Reportedly Racked Up More Than 9,000 Lies Since Taking Office

And that is what bothers me the MOST about him, his lies upon lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.... just unadulterated DECEITFULNESS.

I just can't take the lying, it breaks every rule I was ever taught by my parents, by my church, by my employers etc etc etc

...he makes my skin crawl....

I agree with all that, but he was also elected, so also deserves better treatment than I see from most.
It is like they always want him to fail at everything, forgetting that if he fails, that harms the country.

He deserves EXACTLY what he is getting...no more, no less.

No one made him run. And he has been caught in so many lies, deceptions and flat out idiotic comments that he fully deserves to be scorned and ridiculed.
Plus, he clearly is a total asshole. it's not like he admits his weaknesses. He seems to have ZERO humility.
And he is vicious at insulting ANYONE who in ANY WAY puts him down. His skin is thinner than cheap, toilet paper.

No...he FULLY deserves all the insults that he gets.

It is not that I care about Trump in the least. But it is bound to anger those who did vote for him, and it sets a terrible precedent.
As far as lies, that is par for the course, and thin skin is a very successful strategy many politicians, lawyers, etc., use often.
It means nothing.
The point is what is best for the country?

 

[Faun]

You’re thoroughly confused.

The hard drive copies were taken from the DNC’s servers. The 33,000 deleted emails were on Hillary’s servers. The two had nothing to do with each other.

“And digital copies are useless.
In order to find evidence of any hacking or illegal correspondence, you need the originals. When things are deleted, they are not wiped off the drive. They are just marked as being able for future writes to be able to write over. They are still there. But when you make a copy, you don't copy the parts that are marked as deleted.”

Too fucking stupid. <smh>

They didn’t create the copies with Windows Explorer, dragging files from one location to another — they did a byte-for-byte copy which duplicates every byte from the source drive onto a destination drive. that includes data from files marked for deletion as well as actually deleted files (except for such data that is overwritten).

The copy contains everything that can be found on the source drive. Which is why the FBI said this was an “appropriate substitute.”

I am not confused at all.
It was someone else who claimed Hillary's email server was hacked and I was the one trying to point out that was the DNC that was hacked, not Hillary.

And no, unless you use the exact same brand, size, and condition of drive, you can't really do a byte by byte copy and have it make any sense. You will be copying the file table as well as just raw data, so then will have extreme difficulty trying to even find files, much less read them.
But the point is it would be easy for people to avoid anything they wanted to delete when doing the copying.

If anyone at the FBI knew what was appropriate, they would be working for a computer company and not the FBI.

I said, ”Digital copies of the hard drives were provided to the FBI,” clearly speaking of the DNC’s servers, which had nothing at all to do with Hillary’s servers; to which you replied... ”yes, but those copies were missing over 30,000 emails, and were what Trump was suggesting the Russians might be able to find.”

Yes, you are completely confused as “those copies” were not “missing over 30,000 email.” Again, those were copies of the DNC servers; while the 33,000 missing email were deleted from Hillary’s servers, not the DNC’s.

As far as your knowledge on hard drives, it really wasn’t necessary for you to exhibit sheer ignorance on the technology. You did get the size correct though, I’ll give you that. The destination drive must have at least as much storage capacity as the source drive, and ideally in this case, would be the same size, but that’s all you got right. And I expect a professional company as CrowdStrike, who are in that industry, know enough to know that.

This is not a 2 person conversation. There are other people claiming it was Hillary's email server that was hacked. And it was Hillary that would not allow the FBI to check for the missing emails or evidence of hacking. Hillary did give the FBI a copy of the drives, but that did not at all help in supplying the missing 30,000 emails.
Of course I was unaware the DNC had also supplied copies of their drives because that makes no sense. If you actually want to find deleted files of evidence of hacking, you need the original drives in the machine they were in at the time. You don't want copies, and copies are not going to do any good.
You don't want RAW bytes because they you have to carefully find and interpret the file allocation tables, and then follow their entries to find the actual sectors. That is very difficult these days because all drives use a virtualization scheme for sectors, so that they can map out bad ones, and implement drive encryption. It is not as simple as just looking at RAW bytes. The interpretation is very difficult unless you perfectly shadow it onto the exact same media, in size, brand, embedded firmware, etc.

And yet, despite your ignorance on the subject, the FBI found the copies an “acceptable substitute.” You’ve not convinced me you know more than they do. And yes, access to raw data is also vital in performing forensics on a hard drive as that is how to view data that was deleted after being sent to the “recycle bin.” Also, if you do a copy like that to a similar sized drive with the same cluster size on both and you plug that into the same OS as the source, the undeleted files and files marked for deletion can be read.

That is the part that proves the FBI's ignorance or corruption. They should not have accepted copies, and instead insisted on the originals. That fact I know more about computers is obvious, since they are paid for law enforcement by a the federal government, and I am paid by Intel, HP, IBM, Sequent, Microsoft, Apple, etc., to work on computers.
Yes you might succeed if you use the same size drive, with same brand, version, embedded system, etc.
But likely hopeless if you use a different size drive, different brand, different version of firmware, etc.
The algorithm that locates actual physical sectors from the virtual requests is not going to be the same even if the different sectors have been mapped out as bad, the allocation table is set up differently, the drive uses a different RAID optimization mapping, etc.
But that does also depend on what is meant is meant by a RAW copy. If you use the firmware from the original drive, and follow the file allocation table routines for a virtual sector by sector copy, there is a chance that might work even though the destination drive was using different firmware, allocation table routines, etc. But the FBI should never have taken that risk. They should have used the original drives, taken them as evidence, and left the DNC to use the copies. They failed in their ability to ensure a credible line of evidence. They could have been given anything. They can't use anything they get from the copies because they could easily not be accurate or even deliberately manipulated.

LOLOLOL

Now you’re just making more shit up. You have not demonstrated you know more than folks working in the FBI. Nor do you demonstrate you know more than folks working for CrowdStrike, the cyber security firm who made the copies. You actually exhibit ignorance on how to copy hard drives and how useful a copy is.

And despite your meaningless protests, CrowdStrike delivered useful copies of the hard drives to to the FBI. We know this because the FBI found them to be an “adequate substitute,” and they would know since they’rr In the business of performing forensic tests on such equipment. They also know the quality of the copies, which you actually have zero knowledge of. And along with other corroborating evidence, they were able to use those copies to determine who the hackers were.

Now stop making shit up.

 

[Faun]

Oh look, we have us a cyber forensics expert, here!

Just so we are all clear on this line of bullshit from you:

You claim to know more about this than the government forensic scientists who have dedicated their lives to this field.

Do I have that right?

Of course I do know more than anyone working at the FBI, who is not going to have nearly as much experience as I do.
I build computers over the decades from scratch. Not all aspects but most of them, and I have to know about all of them.
The FBI does not have to know much at all, and can't know very much because you can't learn this stuff while working at the FBI.
I have built mainframes, minis, personal computers and smart devices.
I do operating systems, firmware, embedded systems, network protocols, pacemakers, etc.

Great, then explain to the class why the brand matter when doing a byte-by-byte copy of one drive to another, assuming the storage capacity on the destination drive is at least as big as the source drive......

The reason the brand and version of the drive matter is that the mapping of virtual to physical sectors of the drive are dependent upon the embedded firmware scheme. You can likely find the file allocation table and start looking for sectors, but they have not been real physical sectors in many decades. The reasons for this include the ability to map out bad sectors, allow encryption, to allow RAID sort of distribution of sectors so that you can read the next sector off a different platter at the same time you read the previous sector, etc. Sectors used to originally be physical and sequential, but now are virtual and can be distributed for faster access vertically instead of sequentially. It all depends on brand, version, etc. Harddrives have their own processors and complex cache schemes. You would have to reverse engineer the entire scheme in order to read from RAW bytes. You could do that 30 years ago, but not any more.

“You can likely find the file allocation table and start looking for sectors, but they have not been real physical sectors in many decades.”

Thanks again for demonstrating for the forum that you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.

File allocation tables look at clusters, not sectors...

A sector is a fixed division of a track on a disk. And A cluster is a group of contiguous sectors and basic unit for FAT32 files. The FAT tables in FAT32 provide information about used clusters, reserved clusters, and free clusters. All clusters allocated for a file is organized by FAT tables in a linked list manner .

Wrong, you do not read clusters, you read sectors. Sure a cluster is a group of sectors and is how you find the sectors, but is it sectors you read.
Clusters exist as a way of avoiding the sector details in the file table system.
And FAT32 is not only somewhat obsolete, but only 1 of many different allocation table system.
For example, the UEFI boot system uses the GUID Partition table instead of a FAT table.
Windows uses NTFS by default.
Linux uses Ext, Ext2, Ext3, Ext4, JFS, XFS, btrfs and swap.
I deliberately avoided referencing clusters since they are not universal to all file systems, and mean nothing at all to the drives.
I doubt the DNC servers were using FAT32.

“Wrong, you do not read clusters, you read sectors.”

Now you’re lying about what I said. I said nothing about how data is read. I said file allocation tables index by clusters, not sectors. I even posted a link describing how a file allocation table uses clusters.

“Sure a cluster is a group of sectors and is how you find the sectors”

LOLOL

Yeah, you say that now, now that your ignorance in the subject was exposed. But earlier, you were talking about file allocation tables and sectors.

Linux uses Ext, Ext2, Ext3, Ext4, JFS, XFS, btrfs and swap.

Swap is not a file system. It’s a partition used to extend memory by storing raw memory and doesn’t even rely on a file allocation table.

And for shareability, Linux also supports NTFS and various flavors of FAT, which rely on clusters to find files.

 

[Faun]

And no, unless you use the exact same brand, size, and condition of drive, you can't really do a byte by byte copy and have it make any sense.

Oh look, we have us a cyber forensics expert, here!

Just so we are all clear on this line of bullshit from you:

You claim to know more about this than the government forensic scientists who have dedicated their lives to this field.

Do I have that right?

Of course I do know more than anyone working at the FBI, who is not going to have nearly as much experience as I do.
I build computers over the decades from scratch. Not all aspects but most of them, and I have to know about all of them.
The FBI does not have to know much at all, and can't know very much because you can't learn this stuff while working at the FBI.
I have built mainframes, minis, personal computers and smart devices.
I do operating systems, firmware, embedded systems, network protocols, pacemakers, etc.

We have the best investigative cyber division in the world... next to maybe the Russians, who are well trained as well....

What are ya trying to do, impersonate Trump..telling us a bunch of grandiose crud about yourself? The BIGGEST, the Greatest.... the Bestest (sic)

and yes, they know a hell of a lot more than you.... and when they don't, they know who to go to in the private sector, that can help.


A copy of the servers affected is what they used and experts say, this is what is best to use, vs the original server.


Trump's Stupid ‘Where Is the DNC Server?’ Conspiracy Theory, Explained

Even so, what CrowdStrike gave the FBI is likely better than if it had seized and analyzed a physical box.

“To keep it simple, let’s say there’s only one server. CrowdStrike goes in, makes a complete image including a memory dump of everything that was in the memory of the server at the time, including traffic and connections at the time,” Rid said. “You have that image from the machine live in the network including its memory content, versus a server that someone physically carries into the FBI headquarters. It’s unplugged, so there’s no memory content because it’s powered down. That physical piece of hardware is less valuable for an investigation than the onsite image and data extraction from a machine that is up and running. The idea a physical server would add any value doesn’t make any sense.”

What Rid means is that after a hack, some of the evidence of who did it and how they did it may be fleeting. It could be in the server’s memory, the RAM, and not stored on its hard drive. (Hackers use “fileless” malware precisely for this reason.) To preserve evidence in cases like these, incident responders need to make an image—essentially a copy of the server in that exact same state at that exact same time—so they can look at it afterwards. Think about this like when investigators take pictures of the crime scene or victim.

Lesley Carhart, principal threat hunter at the cybersecurity firm Dragos, told Motherboard that physical servers are rarely seized in forensics investigations.

"For decades, it has been industry-standard forensic and digital evidence handling practice to conduct analysis on forensic images instead of original evidence," she said. "This decreases the risk of corruption or accidental modification of that evidence."

I asked Rid if he thought it was suspicious that the DNC did not hand over the actual server to the FBI, and he said “no, not at all.”

Also, the copy of the server hard drives is only step one in the process.... it doesn't tell you much, all the other legwork is where the prosecution/indictments come from....

“To really investigate a high profile intrusion like the DNC hack, you have to look beyond the victim network,” Rid said. “You have to look at the infrastructure—the command and control sites that were used to get in that are not going to be on any server ... looking at one server is just one isolated piece of infrastructure.”

And this is what they did to get this information on the Russian hacks


https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

First of all, the DNC hack is of unknown time, but the best guess is that it was not detected for several months, meaning that a memory dump would be useless.
Second is that in the quote:
{... “To really investigate a high profile intrusion like the DNC hack, you have to look beyond the victim network,” Rid said. “You have to look at the infrastructure—the command and control sites that were used to get in that are not going to be on any server ... looking at one server is just one isolated piece of infrastructure.” ...}
Clearly a copy of a drive would be totally useless, and would not even be possible to log as evidence.
I agree you would need to examine the routers, switches, configurations, and the whole network. Which could really only be done on site. Someone handing you a copy of a drive is totally and completely useless.

”Clearly a copy of a drive would be totally useless, and would not even be possible to log as evidence.”

That is absolute more made up bullshit. A byte-by-byte duplicate is an exact copy of the original. As long as they copied the entire image, ALL of the data on the original drives would be on the copies.

 

[Faun]

”And anything except money is perfectly legal”

Nope, you’re wrong about that too. Just about everyyou’re posting is unadulterated bullshit.

It’s illegal for a campaign to solicit contributions from a foreign national. Campaign contributions are not limited to monetary donations, but extend to anything of value.

Types of contributions

Contributions are the most common source of campaign support.

A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:​

These is nothing in the list that is remotely like emails.
Emails cost nothing to copy, so there is nothing like a service at all involved.

LOLOL

Revealing a candidate’s personal hacked email is of value to their opposition. That’s self evident as Trump wouldn’t have solicited Russia to hack her unless it was worth something to him.

You don't get it.
Whether or not something is of value to someone is irrelevant.
The ONLY basis for campaign finance laws is that you can try to assure that no one uses secret money to buy up a monopoly on the media.
And PERSONAL value can't do that.
Lots of things have personal value.
But the campaign finance laws can't touch that unless it can be turned into control over the media.

And in fact, there is no evidence Hillary EVER got hacked at all.
It was the DNC that got hacked, but that was BEFORE Trump suggested the Russians look for Hillary's missing emails.
So you don't seem to know at all what is even being discussed?

FYI
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.

Sorry, but you are mixing up the DNC server that was hacked, with Hillary's server, which everyone denies was ever hacked.
The DNC server was hacked long before Trump made that public request for the Russians to help find the 30,000 missing Hillary emails in a speech. That is why he made the request. Hacking was already in the news. But no one ever found any of Hillary's deleted emails. The FBI tried to find them on Weiner's laptop, but failed.

“Sorry, but you are mixing up the DNC server that was hacked, with Hillary's server, which everyone denies was ever hacked.

LOL

Um, no, you were the one who confused them. What Care4all is talking about is that there is evidence that hackers tried to illegally gain access to some of Hillary’s servers. But you are right in that there is no evidence any of those attempts were successful.

 

[jc456]

Now that Cohen has been revealed as a total nothing-burger, what shall we do next?

Should we pretend Cohen never happened and continue the collusion narrative, promising an impending Mueller "bombshell"? Or shall we take a different, wiser tangent? One thing is certain, Trump is GUILTY and UNFIT, and something must be done. Even a Republican like me knows that!

So in a true bipartisan spirit, I've compiled some possibilities that should be considered. I've run these through the same computer used to predict global warming, so the actual probabilities are included. They're 100% accurate, you can trust me:

• Trump is an alien from the planet Flaflooga, sent to take over the Earth with his mind-ray: 87%
• Trump is literally Hitler, thawed from cryogenic suspension and here to establish the New Reich: 92%
• A Genuine Birth Certificate will be found proving that Trump is a Russian national (how ironic!): 41%
• Cancelled checks from Trump to Putin with the memo "Thanks for the boost" will surface: 78%
• Trump and Pence will both get "an offer they can't refuse" from Kim: 18%
• Pelosi and Schumer will prove that Trump is actually their 17 year old love child: 29%
• AOC will tweet a clapback so stunning that Trump will resign in shame: 65%

As you can see, there is at least a 410% chance that Trump should not be President. I'm sure there are more possibilities, but the computer overheated. This should take us well past 2020.

You're welcome, Democrats!

I guess those other million pages they are pouring over are clean as well. So far, anyone that has been with trump since 2012 has been arrested and either has been tried and convicted or awaiting trial. There are a few that Mueller hasn't approached yet but he will. The best thing for Trump and the good of the Nation is for Trump to do a Nixon. For you idjit cupcake rightwingfruitcakes, Nixon was impeached but the didn't have the votes in the senate to convict him. Plus, the charges, if brought today, would not have stood up legally. But, like Trump, Nixon was loosing it and on one special day, resigned.

when will mueller approach them since you know what he's doing?

When he tells us.

no, that isn't what you said. post up the schedule bright bart!!!

 

[jc456]

FYI
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.

Okay, let's see the proof please.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

This is the DNC hack, it is NOT the Clinton's personal email servers.
The DNC hack happened much sooner, around June or July of 2016.
Trump did not wonder about if the Russians could find the emails the Clintons deleted off their server until after that, Sept. I believe.

No one questions that the DNC servers were hacked.
Everyone disputes that the private email servers of the Clinton's were ever hacked.

You do realize that if the private Clinton servers were to have been hacked, that would make Hillary criminally responsible for using an insecure private server instead of the secure State Dept. one?

You should try harder to keep up on these details, or at least ask about them.

I question if the DNC servers were hacked. there is no evidence of that. We know from Assange that Seth Rich a DNC staffer gave him the information off that DNC server. Let's ask Rich. Oh wait, we can't, they killed him for stealing documents off the DNC server. too fking sad for him. not one federal agency ever looked at that server. EVER!!!! Comey stated so under oath.

 

[jc456]

Yet this is precisely what you are doing;

Correct. Let me rephrase:

On or about the day Trump asked Russia to find Hillary's misisng emails, they attempted to hack her personal account.

Feel better?

how do you know that? what account? the emails were on her personal server confiscated years before. they weren't active when trump suggested russia go find them. you're truly confused.

 

[jc456]

And no, unless you use the exact same brand, size, and condition of drive, you can't really do a byte by byte copy and have it make any sense.

Oh look, we have us a cyber forensics expert, here!

Just so we are all clear on this line of bullshit from you:

You claim to know more about this than the government forensic scientists who have dedicated their lives to this field.

Do I have that right?

well he is if it is he same group that never looked at the DNC server. what a bunch of traitors.

 

[jc456]

Digital copies of the hard drives were provided to the FBI.

Yes, but those copies were missing over 30,000 emails, and were what Trump was suggesting the Russians might be able to find.
And digital copies are useless.
In order to find evidence of any hacking or illegal correspondence, you need the originals.
When things are deleted, they are not wiped off the drive.
They are just marked as being able for future writes to be able to write over.
They are still there.
But when you make a copy, you don't copy the parts that are marked as deleted.
So you won't get anything that someone wanted to hide.
You need the originals in order to find what someone tried to hide.
That is true whether it was evidence of hackers or of illegal actions by the Clintons.

You’re thoroughly confused.

The hard drive copies were taken from the DNC’s servers. The 33,000 deleted emails were on Hillary’s servers. The two had nothing to do with each other.

“And digital copies are useless.
In order to find evidence of any hacking or illegal correspondence, you need the originals. When things are deleted, they are not wiped off the drive. They are just marked as being able for future writes to be able to write over. They are still there. But when you make a copy, you don't copy the parts that are marked as deleted.”

Too fucking stupid. <smh>

They didn’t create the copies with Windows Explorer, dragging files from one location to another — they did a byte-for-byte copy which duplicates every byte from the source drive onto a destination drive. that includes data from files marked for deletion as well as actually deleted files (except for such data that is overwritten).

The copy contains everything that can be found on the source drive. Which is why the FBI said this was an “appropriate substitute.”

I am not confused at all.
It was someone else who claimed Hillary's email server was hacked and I was the one trying to point out that was the DNC that was hacked, not Hillary.

And no, unless you use the exact same brand, size, and condition of drive, you can't really do a byte by byte copy and have it make any sense. You will be copying the file table as well as just raw data, so then will have extreme difficulty trying to even find files, much less read them.
But the point is it would be easy for people to avoid anything they wanted to delete when doing the copying.

If anyone at the FBI knew what was appropriate, they would be working for a computer company and not the FBI.

I said, ”Digital copies of the hard drives were provided to the FBI,” clearly speaking of the DNC’s servers, which had nothing at all to do with Hillary’s servers; to which you replied... ”yes, but those copies were missing over 30,000 emails, and were what Trump was suggesting the Russians might be able to find.”

Yes, you are completely confused as “those copies” were not “missing over 30,000 email.” Again, those were copies of the DNC servers; while the 33,000 missing email were deleted from Hillary’s servers, not the DNC’s.

As far as your knowledge on hard drives, it really wasn’t necessary for you to exhibit sheer ignorance on the technology. You did get the size correct though, I’ll give you that. The destination drive must have at least as much storage capacity as the source drive, and ideally in this case, would be the same size, but that’s all you got right. And I expect a professional company as CrowdStrike, who are in that industry, know enough to know that.

This is not a 2 person conversation. There are other people claiming it was Hillary's email server that was hacked. And it was Hillary that would not allow the FBI to check for the missing emails or evidence of hacking. Hillary did give the FBI a copy of the drives, but that did not at all help in supplying the missing 30,000 emails.
Of course I was unaware the DNC had also supplied copies of their drives because that makes no sense. If you actually want to find deleted files of evidence of hacking, you need the original drives in the machine they were in at the time. You don't want copies, and copies are not going to do any good.
You don't want RAW bytes because they you have to carefully find and interpret the file allocation tables, and then follow their entries to find the actual sectors. That is very difficult these days because all drives use a virtualization scheme for sectors, so that they can map out bad ones, and implement drive encryption. It is not as simple as just looking at RAW bytes. The interpretation is very difficult unless you perfectly shadow it onto the exact same media, in size, brand, embedded firmware, etc.

they never received copies. they never looked at the DNC server. Comey stated so under oath. Still to this day they haven't been looked at. one can only ask why? I do that all the time.

 

[jc456]

And no, unless you use the exact same brand, size, and condition of drive, you can't really do a byte by byte copy and have it make any sense.

Oh look, we have us a cyber forensics expert, here!

Just so we are all clear on this line of bullshit from you:

You claim to know more about this than the government forensic scientists who have dedicated their lives to this field.

Do I have that right?

Of course I do know more than anyone working at the FBI, who is not going to have nearly as much experience as I do.
I build computers over the decades from scratch. Not all aspects but most of them, and I have to know about all of them.
The FBI does not have to know much at all, and can't know very much because you can't learn this stuff while working at the FBI.
I have built mainframes, minis, personal computers and smart devices.
I do operating systems, firmware, embedded systems, network protocols, pacemakers, etc.

We have the best investigative cyber division in the world... next to maybe the Russians, who are well trained as well....

What are ya trying to do, impersonate Trump..telling us a bunch of grandiose crud about yourself? The BIGGEST, the Greatest.... the Bestest (sic)

and yes, they know a hell of a lot more than you.... and when they don't, they know who to go to in the private sector, that can help.


A copy of the servers affected is what they used and experts say, this is what is best to use, vs the original server.


Trump's Stupid ‘Where Is the DNC Server?’ Conspiracy Theory, Explained

Even so, what CrowdStrike gave the FBI is likely better than if it had seized and analyzed a physical box.

“To keep it simple, let’s say there’s only one server. CrowdStrike goes in, makes a complete image including a memory dump of everything that was in the memory of the server at the time, including traffic and connections at the time,” Rid said. “You have that image from the machine live in the network including its memory content, versus a server that someone physically carries into the FBI headquarters. It’s unplugged, so there’s no memory content because it’s powered down. That physical piece of hardware is less valuable for an investigation than the onsite image and data extraction from a machine that is up and running. The idea a physical server would add any value doesn’t make any sense.”

What Rid means is that after a hack, some of the evidence of who did it and how they did it may be fleeting. It could be in the server’s memory, the RAM, and not stored on its hard drive. (Hackers use “fileless” malware precisely for this reason.) To preserve evidence in cases like these, incident responders need to make an image—essentially a copy of the server in that exact same state at that exact same time—so they can look at it afterwards. Think about this like when investigators take pictures of the crime scene or victim.

Lesley Carhart, principal threat hunter at the cybersecurity firm Dragos, told Motherboard that physical servers are rarely seized in forensics investigations.

"For decades, it has been industry-standard forensic and digital evidence handling practice to conduct analysis on forensic images instead of original evidence," she said. "This decreases the risk of corruption or accidental modification of that evidence."

I asked Rid if he thought it was suspicious that the DNC did not hand over the actual server to the FBI, and he said “no, not at all.”

Also, the copy of the server hard drives is only step one in the process.... it doesn't tell you much, all the other legwork is where the prosecution/indictments come from....

“To really investigate a high profile intrusion like the DNC hack, you have to look beyond the victim network,” Rid said. “You have to look at the infrastructure—the command and control sites that were used to get in that are not going to be on any server ... looking at one server is just one isolated piece of infrastructure.”

And this is what they did to get this information on the Russian hacks


https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

not a bright person you are. Comey testified under oath, the DNC server was never looked at. NEVER. crowdstrike was hired by the DNC, and they faked their report. That was news as well back then. you sure are behind the times, makes you leftist and stupid.

 

[jc456]

Nixon wasn't impeached.

He resigned because he was told that Republicans in the Senate WOULD vote to impeach if he let it go that far.

Keep up

they couldn't get him out of office though. he was stupid for resigning. but that's water under the bridge. why are you talking about Niixon anyway?

 

[Likkmee]

MMMMMMMM. Venezuelan collusion !!!!

 

[jc456]

Now that Cohen has been revealed as a total nothing-burger, what shall we do next?

Should we pretend Cohen never happened and continue the collusion narrative, promising an impending Mueller "bombshell"? Or shall we take a different, wiser tangent? One thing is certain, Trump is GUILTY and UNFIT, and something must be done. Even a Republican like me knows that!

So in true bipartisan spirit, I've compiled some possibilities that should be considered. I've run these through the same computer used to predict global warming, so the actual probabilities are included. They're 100% accurate, you can trust me:

• Trump is an alien from the planet Flaflooga, sent to take over the Earth with his mind-ray: 87%
• Trump is literally Hitler, thawed from cryogenic suspension and here to establish the New Reich: 92%
• A Genuine Birth Certificate will be found proving that Trump is a Russian national (how ironic!): 41%
• Cancelled checks from Trump to Putin with the memo "Thanks for the boost" will surface: 78%
• Trump and Pence will both get "an offer they can't refuse" from Kim: 18%
• Pelosi and Schumer will prove that Trump is actually their 17 year old love child: 29%
• AOC will tweet a clapback so stunning that Trump will resign in shame: 65%

As you can see, there is at least a 410% chance that Trump should not be President. I'm sure there are more possibilities, but the computer overheated. This should take us well past 2020.

You're welcome, Democrats!

Jeez...the legal term is 'conspiracy', not 'collusion'.

And since the Mueller investigation has not even been revealed - you have not a clue what it says or if there was conspiracy.

Sheesh...you Trumpbots just cannot stop looking silly and ignorant.

Now I have no idea if Trump will be found guilty of conspiracy - my guess is no. But I am not stupid enough to run around, matter-of-factly claiming he is/is not when there is no possible way 99.999% of Americans could know for certain.

that means neither do you correct? so you don't know shit. you are just running your lips.

 

[Dragonlady]

• In the 773 days to yesterday, Trump has made 9,014 partly or wholly made-up statements according to the Washington Post
• He's started lying more and more frequently with each year of his presidency
• 104 came in one two-hour speech this weekend
• Donald Trump Has Reportedly Racked Up More Than 9,000 Lies Since Taking Office

And that is what bothers me the MOST about him, his lies upon lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.... just unadulterated DECEITFULNESS.

I just can't take the lying, it breaks every rule I was ever taught by my parents, by my church, by my employers etc etc etc

...he makes my skin crawl....

I agree with all that, but he was also elected, so also deserves better treatment than I see from most.
It is like they always want him to fail at everything, forgetting that if he fails, that harms the country.

He was NOT elected by the people, and he does NOT deserve better treatment solely on that basis. Respect is earned and Trump has done NOTHING to earn that respect. He lies, he treats others badly, he demands loyalty but gives none. He says he only hires the "best people" but 30 of them were refused security clearances after being investigated by the FBI and the CIA, and many more lied on their application forms.

Today, we have leaks about behaviour by the President wherein he has tried to fire Mueller, has tried to subvert investigations by the SDNY, and Whittaker LIED to Congress about all of this. I'm really looking forward to that smug asshole being charged with "Lying to Congress".

When Trump stops using "insult diplomacy"; when he stops declaring friendly nations as "security threats" to over reach his authority to slap tariffs on your trading partners, and a "national emergency" as an end around to Congressional Authority to build a wall, and when he stops LYING every time he opens his mouth, he might earn some modicum of respect, but as long as he calls Kim, Putin and Erdogan as his besties, you've got a big fat problem with him every getting respect from anyone.

 

[jc456]

• In the 773 days to yesterday, Trump has made 9,014 partly or wholly made-up statements according to the Washington Post
• He's started lying more and more frequently with each year of his presidency
• 104 came in one two-hour speech this weekend
• Donald Trump Has Reportedly Racked Up More Than 9,000 Lies Since Taking Office

And that is what bothers me the MOST about him, his lies upon lies upon lies upon lies upon lies.... just unadulterated DECEITFULNESS.

I just can't take the lying, it breaks every rule I was ever taught by my parents, by my church, by my employers etc etc etc

...he makes my skin crawl....

I agree with all that, but he was also elected, so also deserves better treatment than I see from most.
It is like they always want him to fail at everything, forgetting that if he fails, that harms the country.

He deserves EXACTLY what he is getting...no more, no less.

No one made him run. And he has been caught in so many lies, deceptions and flat out idiotic comments that he fully deserves to be scorned and ridiculed.
Plus, he clearly is a total asshole. it's not like he admits his weaknesses. He seems to have ZERO humility.
And he is vicious at insulting ANYONE who in ANY WAY puts him down. His skin is thinner than cheap, toilet paper.

No...he FULLY deserves all the insults that he gets.

look at the butt hurt leftist crying. whaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaa,