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.

 

Mueller Suspected of Giving Podesta Brothers Immunity and Hiding it from the Public

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Forensic drive images are not the same as a mirror image just so you know. The Forensic image is what was used. Crowdstrike and the DNC refused to turn over the mirror and server itself.



Paul Sperry
‏ @paulsperry_
50m50 minutes ago

BREAKING: The FBI (and Mueller's team) obtained only the "forensic" images of the allegedly hacked DNC systems from CrowdStrike, which is not the same as workable mirror images of the hard drives. (And again, no actual machines were examined at the FBI forensics lab at Quantico.)

edit on 18-7-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

Your link is bad link and why would Uranium One retract their statement when they claim they complied with all applicable laws.

Uranium One admitted to what you say didnt occur.

If you cant accept that then take it up with Uranium One.


Yes. I deleted it because could not get link to work.

Your article is from 2017.

I see no follow up.

Anyway, gotta take grandson to Taco Bell.

Carry on



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

Your link is bad link and why would Uranium One retract their statement when they claim they complied with all applicable laws.

Uranium One admitted to what you say didnt occur.

If you cant accept that then take it up with Uranium One.


Yes. I deleted it because could not get link to work.

Your article is from 2017.

I see no follow up.

Anyway, gotta take grandson to Taco Bell.

Carry on


Then the statement by Uranium One and export of Uranium stands.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Lmao! Paul Sperry is an idiot and if he's your source for opinions about things you don't know anything about, I'm truly sorry for your plight.

Once again, you are completely wrong, talking matter-of-factly about things you're not qualified to speak on.

A forensic image is in fact a byte-for-byte, sector-by-sector copy. The difference between a forensic image and some other types of drive images (which may or may not be raw image copies), is that a forensic image always refers to an image that is an exact copy that includes slack space and unallocated space. Unallocated space is of course space on a drive that is not currently allocated to files. That doesn't mean it's blank though, in fact unless it's a brand new drive that's not had any usage, it's going to be filled with deleted files and file fragments. "Slack space" refers to the portion of sectors that isn't storing file data.

Don't take my word for it though (even though you should because unlike you, I'm an IT professional), look it up and not in Paul Sperry's Twitter feed.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

This.

If it is the Podestas, this is the best way to sweep them under an immunity rug.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Annee

Your link is bad link and why would Uranium One retract their statement when they claim they complied with all applicable laws.

Uranium One admitted to what you say didnt occur.

If you cant accept that then take it up with Uranium One.


Yes. I deleted it because could not get link to work.

Your article is from 2017.

I see no follow up.

Anyway, gotta take grandson to Taco Bell.

Carry on


Then the statement by Uranium One and export of Uranium stands.


Apparently, it died in 2017 -- since there is no follow up.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Here you go. Just so you don't have to take my word for it.

Forensic Images: For Your Viewing Pleasure


Forensic examiners use imaging techniques to acquire data from a disk as opposed to copying files because an image contains every bit of data from the source disk and a copy operation will only retrieve currently accessible files. A forensic image will contain current files as well as slack space and unallocated space. Relevant forensic artifacts such as, deleted files, deleted file fragments and hidden data may be found in slack and unallocated space.


Definition: Forensic Image


A forensic image (forensic copy) is a bit-by-bit, sector-by-sector direct copy of a physical storage device, including all files, folders and unallocated, free and slack space. Forensic images include not only all the files visible to the operating system but also deleted files and pieces of files left in the slack and free space.

Forensic imaging is one element of computer forensics, which is the application of computer investigation and analysis techniques to gather evidence suitable for presentation in a court of law.

Not all imaging and backup software create forensic images. Windows backup, for example, creates image backups that are not complete copies of the physical device. Forensic images can be created through specialized forensic software. Some disk imaging utilities not marketed for forensic use also make complete disk images.


What is a Forensic Image?


A forensic image, sometimes referred to as a mirror image or hard drive clone, is a fundamental aspect of data preservation and digital forensics. Forensic imaging creates an exact bit-for-bit copy of the source hard drive, SSD, USB or other media, and creates a unique digital fingerprint that is used to certify its authenticity. This process is critical when digital evidence will be admitted as evidence in litigation.

When a computer is identified as potentially containing electronic evidence, it is imperative to follow a strict set of procedures to ensure an admissible extraction of any potential evidence residing within. The first thing to remember is the “golden rule of electronic evidence” – if within reason, the original media should never be altered or modified in any way. Thus, before any data analysis occurs, it usually makes sense to create an exact, bit-for-bit copy of the original storage media. This process is more commonly known as forensic imaging. A forensic image is also sometimes referred to as a bit stream image, hard drive image, mirror image, disk clone or ghost image. However, in the technology world, mirror imaging, ghost imaging, or disk cloning are each specific backup methods and do not always generate a true forensic image.


What Are Forensic Images and Forensic Copies?


A forensic image is an image or exact, sector by sector, copy of a hard disk, taken using software such as Paraben Lockdown/Forensic Replicator or Logicube Forensic Dossier. These software solutions create exact copies of the hard drive, and, unlike the Windows OS, they don’t try to write to drive on startup, thus preserving an exact copy of the hard disk. Deleted files, slack space, system files and executables (and documents renamed to mimic system files and executables) are all part of a forensic image.


Thanks for point out Paul Sperry's nonsensical blather on Twitter, I'll be sure to inform him that he's a clueless clown.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Omg what a slimeball move that would be.
Giving Podesta immunity for the sake of a sham prosecution.


It really would be a slimeball move.

And if it's true, I'll always believe that Manafort was only prosecuted in order to give such a deal to the Podestas... rightly or wrongly.


How would the podesta's know anything about Paul manafort cheating on his taxes 10 and 15 years ago?



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:00 PM
link   
You won't ever know who the five are.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Asktheanimals

Podesta? You don't know who.
You guys don't like this law because its Manafort on trial. And Manafort was on trumps team and that's the only reason.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Did the FBI take a look at them or are they relying on Crowdstrike?



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

And?



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

These aren't people charged with any crime.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

So he worked for the fbi. So what. Crowd strike is an organization the FBI employed quite frequently. What would be so unusual for a computer expert from one organization to join an organization he was familiar with?
Everything is a conspiracy around here.
I know I know.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

They've been presented with the whole deal numerous times Annie.
They don't accept the truth. They have their own special way of turning their head upside down and crossing their eyes to look at it and that way it only comes out that Hillary Clinton committed some kind of crime.
edit on 7182018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Annee

They've been presented with the whole deal numerous times Annie.
They don't accept the truth. They have their own special way of turning their head upside down and crossing their eyes to look at it and that way it only comes out that Hillary Clinton committed some kind of crime.


To this date Hillary has never been charged with anything.

She has been "Swiftboated" by unfounded accusations and outright lies.

Basing argument/debate on nothing real is a a futile endeavor.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

You live on the border and you are going to taco bell?



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust


How would the podesta's know anything about Paul manafort cheating on his taxes 10 and 15 years ago?


The obvious implication/inference (given the offer of immunity) would be that the Podestas were right there by Manaforts side doing the same thing...

I find it odd that they would grant five guilty parties immunity in order to prosecute two.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Boadicea

These aren't people charged with any crime.


Um... I know. But that's not better. Mueller obviously knows they're guilty of something if he's offering/requesting immunity but has not charged them for their crimes.

That's a problem.



posted on Jul, 18 2018 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: The GUT
a reply to: theantediluvian

Did the FBI take a look at them or are they relying on Crowdstrike?



Even IF they did, it wouldn't matter if the "results" are tainted and rigged with "omissions" 🔑🔓

Not to mention the "hackers" used proxy connections that are untraceable 😃



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join