It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Hero FBI plows over 650,000 emails in eight days, Investigation Complete

page: 1
31
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+9 more 
posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
After Trump complained that a review of 650,000 emails cannot be read for investigation in eight days, Wired has reported that the FBI was able to clear 81,250 emails a day, 3,385.41 per hour around the clock by replacing investigations with "word filters" and "word searches".
www.wired.com...

I'm not sure why Wired didn't report on this great news sooner, they seemed very happy and apparently this technique has been happening for a long time. The FBI has now eliminated government waste by eliminating reading documents that are implied to contain incriminating information (like communication data dumps being marked "life insurance") found on suspects file systems. Instead just glossing over them with word searches is enough to know that an email does not contain any evidence of criminal activity. For example, a drug dealer would say "I'll sell you 200 kilos of coc aine in exchange for $2 million USD. So to know if there is any of that, you just run a word search for "coc aine" and other drug words. If it doesn't contain those words, it couldn't be related to selling drugs.

Or, if you are trying to convict a pedophile just search for "pedophile" and "child pornography"... if those words do not appear on their emails, then you don't have a pedophile. So Clinton was accused of money laundering and bribery. So you just run a word search for "bribe" and "money laundering" and BAM you are done that quick. Wired said it them self. Humans are now replaced with computers at the FBI and it works great as this investigation shows.

Wired reports that there would be no point in reading about trivial issues and skipping those emails, like the one that says:

Georgetown Law Faculty and Staff, My parents are visiting this weekend, and I need to sell my enormous collection of beanie babies! I’ve approximately 480 little creatures of joy, and I’m selling each one for $20.00. You must buy all 480, though. It is a collection (not an auction)… They are very respectful and amicable with one another, and they are (for the most part) cat and dog friendly. Some are sassier than others, naturally. Please let me know! My parents can’t find out.
So a Georgetown practicing attorney at law is having his parents come over. But he has a problem. He has 480 beanie babies and his parents could find out. So, he must sell them for $9,600 to other middle aged lawyers who also collect beanie babies before that happens. But good news, they are DOG FRIENDLY and CAT FRIENDLY beanies, so they are better than a lot of beanie babies right because some of them apparently are not dog friendly or cat friendly. Oh and the other lawyers need to know something important as well, some of them are sassier than others, for those beanie baby buyers who are concerned about the behavior of the beanies they buy. This message is obviously just something to be ignored because it must be about a lawyer trying to sell his beanie babies for $10,000 before his parents come over for the weekend and find out about them. And why would anyone want to read about that because it couldn't be evidence of criminal activity or code for something illegal going on.

Its wonderful that the FBI can now fully investigate suspicious documents at the rate of one per second by having a computer read them. I commend the FBI and they can now fire most of their staff.



In one email sent to Podesta, the email reads that “As for dinner I’m not particularly fussy about the type of pizza I enjoy, just as long as there’s no hair on it, I hate hair on my pizza!” [sic]

Another email to John, reads “I’m dreaming about your hotdog stand in Hawaii…”

And yet another email sent from Podesta himself asks a member of the Sandler Foundation, “the realtor found a handkerchief (I think it has a map that seems pizza-related. Is it yorus?” [sic]

Source: shark-tank.com...

Even without using code words considered, a word search is surely bound to capture any criminal activity if there is any there. Someone going on about handkerchiefs that are pizza-related handkerchief maps is clearly talking about someone who lost a piece of cloth, so ignore that easily. Nothing to see here, its all debunked and everything with word searches, move along now guys. Wired Magazine and the debunking sites tell us this and they are the authorities. The new standard of investigation is one second for each document given to the FBI as evidence. Welcome to a great new age.




posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Ok Ill say this..

Im thoroughly convinced now (I was extremely skeptical) that this actually IS a Pedo ring. Podesta needs to be in jail. Immediately, and these kids need to be rescued.

That being said..

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with Hillary Clinton. So please, keep her name out of it.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: fractal5

I take it your OP is supposed to be sarcastic



+6 more 
posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: fractal5

Um....

How about no?

How about you get a team of about a hundred agents, to read every single line of code, every single last piece of punctuation, run every single part of every mail through a code finder or substitution cypher, and make double damned sure that those 650,000 documents get read and fully checked over to ensure there is nothing hidden in them that could be related to a criminal act?

Good GRIEF!


+1 more 
posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
All the FBI AFFIRMED yesterday is that Hillary Clinton broke the law by having classified documents in insecure places, but her mental faculties weren't up-to-speed. She didn't comprehend the danger.

Even if the FBI had found NEW classified documents, their verdict would have been the same. Not guilty by reason of mental dullness.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

No they did not say she broke the law. Hence the reason for no charges.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: fractal5

Um....

How about no?

How about you get a team of about a hundred agents, to read every single line of code, every single last piece of punctuation, run every single part of every mail through a code finder or substitution cypher, and make double damned sure that those 650,000 documents get read and fully checked over to ensure there is nothing hidden in them that could be related to a criminal act?

Good GRIEF!
You disagree with me that 1 document per second is the correct speed under the new word search method of investigating data dumps of convicted criminals labeled "life insurance". Perhaps they could have done this instantly with an investigation app that runs all the word searches for them. This would have been better. All FBI investigations would be instant and the app just renders "guilty" or "innocent" to make it as simple as possible and we can render the verdict based on that. I think that is where we need to head next. If you can investigate suspicious documents in a second, why not instantly?



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Well, I wonder how much money changed hands in this (sic) investigation? We already know that on the last one an FBI agent received over 600 thousand in a "campaign" donation for his wife. Who made out on this one?



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: fractal5
"In one email sent to Podesta, the email reads that “As for dinner I’m not particularly fussy about the type of pizza I enjoy, just as long as there’s no hair on it, I hate hair on my pizza!”


Do you have an email ID for this one? I'm not finding it using the words quoted.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:38 AM
link   
If there was any actual chance of the FBI finding anything incriminating on Clinton et al they would not be conducting the investigation.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:41 AM
link   
This is tinfoil hat level ranting lol



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure that people, especially people in official positions know not to leave a digital or paper trail when doing nefarious things. In other words I don't think evidence of criminal activity is ever going to be found in anyone's hacked emails. Not even in code words.
edit on 11/7/2016 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: fractal5

I do disagree.

Scientists working with the data sent back from satellites orbiting Mars know, that there are things a human may see in a dataset, like an image for example, that a program or even entire purpose built computer, will routinely miss. That is why the Mars orbiters data sets have been examined not just by experts, computer programs and the like, but also farmed out in their hundreds of thousands for regular people to look over, because even pretty basic human beings without specific training, can spot anomalies more reliably than a computer can.

That means that it is also perfectly possible that a computer would miss a series of words on a page, or their meaning, whereas a person would know the lingo well enough to go "Hold on a second, this may be spelled like a sack of vomit, but it pretty clearly says mandatory life sentence to me!".

You get the picture?



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: fractal5
10/15/16 join date posting blind support for Hillary.

No shilling going on here.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I could be wrong, but I believe the OP is, in fact, being sarcastic.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I did figure that out, but just in case someone thought I was being unreasonable, I thought I would add my reasons for feeling the way I do about things.

I appreciate the heads up though!



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: fractal5
10/15/16 join date posting blind support for Hillary.

No shilling going on here.




LOL!

OP is pure sarcasm. Quit being so quick to cry shill. Get a tissue and dry your tears.



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Or SAP files above their GS-

(C) with a cloth

The Island

The truth is stranger than fiction



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenjames15

Let's see what director Comey had to say:


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.



Although we do not have complete visibility because we are not able to fully reconstruct the electronic record of that sorting, we believe our investigation has been sufficient to give us reasonable confidence there was no intentional misconduct in connection with that sorting effort.


Why were they unable to fully reconstruct the electronic record of the sorting?

Bleachbit.

Do you think that program was accidentally downloaded and run on those machines?


Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past.



To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.


FBI.gov

Careless Hillary SHOULD HAVE KNOWN not to keep classified info on a unsecured system.

The only reason they're giving for her not being prosecuted is her own stupidity. That's the only out they have for her.

She did not know how to properly safeguard classified material (or so the FBI says) and this is the person some people want to have access to the nuclear launch codes.

What happens if she is careless with those?



Troll harder next time.
edit on 7-11-2016 by jadedANDcynical because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: fractal5
"In one email sent to Podesta, the email reads that “As for dinner I’m not particularly fussy about the type of pizza I enjoy, just as long as there’s no hair on it, I hate hair on my pizza!”


Do you have an email ID for this one? I'm not finding it using the words quoted.

After a whole bunch of web searches it appears a 4chan troll/shill faked the "hate hair on my pizza" email because it shares header information with Email ID 40819. Nearly all of the comments said it was an obvious fake and apparently irresponsible media outlets ran with it. The ID appears intentionally left out of their post.

Email ID is 32795 for the "handkerchief" email which I find much more strange. I'll have to edit my OP so that email does not show.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join