Reply With Quote
So the FBI just took the DNC's word for it? Why don't they just take the DNC's word for it that Trump is guilty of treason too if that's the case?CrowdStrike methods/report just got on yet again.
No one has been able to attribute to Russia, no one.
No one has been able to attribute to Russia, no one.
ETA: but you have a point since most people like yourself have just accepted "Russia hacked the election"
So the FBI just took the DNC's word for it? Why don't they just take the DNC's word for it that Trump is guilty of treason too if that's the case?
No one has been able to attribute to Russia, no one.
"In its statement, the FBI agreed with the DNC’s implication that it had instead relied on data from Crowdstrike. But the Bureau points the finger for its lack of independent evaluation squarely at the DNC. According to the FBI official, “This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information. These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.”
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/fbi-sa...email-servers/
If you're interested read up on how flawed the Crowdstrike report was and how they've now made two revisions since their initial findings.
Isn't it a little wierd---suspect that TSA is never wrong but everyone else is according to him?
Guy suffers from mental illness.
I can't find anything even saying the CIA was allowed access to the server to run their own forensics. NSA obviously got in there and they came out with the least amount of confidence it was Russia in the ODNI
Which brings up the question of why was the DNC not allowing access to their server for forensics to be run?
Tantrum... This is possibly what got Trump to continue to have to deal with this.
When you use the word Tantrum, I see Trump. He is a spoiled child.
Hillary could not have possibly motivated the left like Trump has managed.
Thats only 100, 100$ bills.
You wont need a machine to gum that up.
Bet. and make it your account too.
Investigation finds nothing on Hilary: “lock her up! She's a criminal”
Investigation yet to find anything on Trump: “there's no evidence! Told you so!”
Do you trump fellators not see how ing hypocritical you are?that hillary got what she deserved but LMAO you mother ers have your heads so far up trumps ass it's a wonder you are able to still type on your keyboards tbh
They are scared.Investigation finds nothing on Hilary: “lock her up! She's a criminal”
Investigation yet to find anything on Trump: “there's no evidence! Told you so!”
Do you trump fellators not see how ing hypocritical you are?
Trump Flees The Room And Runs From Reporters After Being Asked About Mike Flynn
A White House Executive Order signing event abruptly ended without Trump signing the executive orders after the president fled the room because a reporter asked him about Mike Flynn.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/...iticus+USA+%29
Bully Trash is actually a chicken
Investigation finds nothing on Hilary: “lock her up! She's a criminal”
Investigation yet to find anything on Trump: “there's no evidence! Told you so!”
Do you trump fellators not see how ing hypocritical you are?
The investigation began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General in connection with Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State. The referral focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system.
Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...-e-mail-system
Slow day in the twitterverse?
if this was the language being used in the Trump investigations trump s would clearly be sayingsee! no real evidence! told you so!
Petrified, tbh.
I wonder if conversations in the International Space Station are awkward right now?
If people need their fix of breathless Russiagate reporting, tune into CNN.
Witness!
The investigation began as a referral from the Intelligence Community Inspector General in connection with Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail server during her time as Secretary of State. The referral focused on whether classified information was transmitted on that personal system.
Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
While not the focus of our investigation, we also developed evidence that the security culture of the State Department in general, and with respect to use of unclassified e-mail systems in particular, was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pr...-e-mail-system
Like i said
Fine as long as you disappear forever when you lose the bet. No coming back as got account 2.
Like TSA did
Why is this BREAKING? Isn't this what this entire thread is about?
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
