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.

 

New Bombshell report shows FBI corruption in handling of weiner laptop emails

page: 3
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   
So they basically used a thread scoop or word reference, and ignored the scoops and words AND THEN TURNED IT OFF AFTER 2 MINUTES?

Damn.

😆




posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rewey
a reply to: Grambler

I particularly like this part:


Although the FBI’s New York office first pointed headquarters to the large new volume of evidence on Sept. 28, 2016, supervising agent Peter Strzok, who was fired on Aug. 10 for sending anti-Trump texts and other misconduct, did not try to obtain a warrant to search the huge cache of emails until Oct. 30, 2016. Violating department policy, he edited the warrant affidavit on his home email account, bypassing the FBI system for recording such government business. He also began drafting a second exoneration statement before conducting the search.

The search warrant was so limited in scope that it excluded more than half the emails New York agents considered relevant to the case.


Just wow. Comey certainly Strzok'd Weiner, that's for sure.



You're nasty..... But I kinda like it....



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
There's a very obvious reason the left-wing ATS members haven't jumped on this thread. And if they do (as we see on page 1, this is to be considered "lies" or "fake news") it will be pure deflection. But I think we'll see an absence of them, rather than comments debating the information provided.

Sessions, as I said yesterday in some thread, is the invisible man. He's got to be doing something, I just have no idea what. Hopefully it's productive and relevant to the major issues we currently have with the Justice Department.

The great thing is that Trump will make it through this garbage & hypocrisy the MSM / left-wing is throwing at him with the Russian collusion investigation that has gone out-of-scope into the realm of wherever they currently are, which will be redirected once their current attempt at impeachment falls on its face.

Truly disturbing, yet I'm not surprised. Expect it to get worse before it gets better.


Yes, the most obvious reason being that people are at work. Hard to jump on this as fast as the old, retired Right Wingers that can spend the majority of their day reading ATS and topping off their whiskey drunk.

The biggest reason not to jump on this completely is that we need a lot more evidence, or at least some more credible sourcing.

Do remember, the OP himself said "Now I agree with you, we should get the other side of the story as well". Do you know what this means? It means this is not as cut and dry as it seems. They left just enough room for plausible deniability, just in case reality does not exactly match what is being presented. If the facts were clear and the evidence/sourcing crystal clear, we would not need the other side of the story.

The evidence would speak for itself. But as this has been presented here, that is not the case.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan


Good point! This implies that even the Inspector General Michael Horowitz is corrupt. He didn't mention that less than 1% of Hillary's e-mails were scanned by the FBI. And, he declared in the latest IG report summary that there was NO POLITICAL BIAS behind the FBI's actions. Holy crap!

If it turns out that Jeff Sessions is NOT in Trump's corner, the President should fire all of them, and let the chips fall where they may. I could live with Mike Pence as President.


That is not the case.

In fact, if you read this article, much of the info is from IG horowitz's investigation.

Horowitz never siad there wasnt bias, he merely said he couldnt prove bias.

In addition, he also said that there quite possibly could have beenbias in strzoks decision to prioritize the russia investigation over the hillary one.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:22 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

LOL, you're here, arent you? What does that make you? I'm neither old, nor retired....not particularly right wing on most things either. I know this might be a crazy concept to you, but some of us are actually allowed to use the internet while working at the same time!



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

Yes, the most obvious reason being that people are at work. Hard to jump on this as fast as the old, retired Right Wingers that can spend the majority of their day reading ATS and topping off their whiskey drunk.

How old is Grambler?
How old am I? I'm not retired - I just work from home and spend too much time on ATS during business hours. And I saw plenty of the lefties during the day on ATS yesterday when the anti-Trump threads were rolling about Cohen and campaign finance & the looming impeachment - lmao


The biggest reason not to jump on this completely is that we need a lot more evidence, or at least some more credible sourcing.

LOL - since when has that stopped anyone before from commenting... rather, deflecting??


Do remember, the OP himself said "Now I agree with you, we should get the other side of the story as well". Do you know what this means? It means this is not as cut and dry as it seems. They left just enough room for plausible deniability, just in case reality does not exactly match what is being presented. If the facts were clear and the evidence/sourcing crystal clear, we would not need the other side of the story.

The evidence would speak for itself. But as this has been presented here, that is not the case.

The evidence prior to this bit of information has mounted. The corruption at the FBI in favor of the DNC has been well documented. Their reputation has been established in the eyes & minds of those that remain open, and that reputation isn't sterling.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert


Considering your absolute non-bias, can you point me to a pro-republican comment you have made? Better still: Show me an anti-Hillary/Democrat comment that has consequence?



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: six67seven
There's a very obvious reason the left-wing ATS members haven't jumped on this thread. And if they do (as we see on page 1, this is to be considered "lies" or "fake news") it will be pure deflection. But I think we'll see an absence of them, rather than comments debating the information provided.

Sessions, as I said yesterday in some thread, is the invisible man. He's got to be doing something, I just have no idea what. Hopefully it's productive and relevant to the major issues we currently have with the Justice Department.

The great thing is that Trump will make it through this garbage & hypocrisy the MSM / left-wing is throwing at him with the Russian collusion investigation that has gone out-of-scope into the realm of wherever they currently are, which will be redirected once their current attempt at impeachment falls on its face.

Truly disturbing, yet I'm not surprised. Expect it to get worse before it gets better.


Yes, the most obvious reason being that people are at work. Hard to jump on this as fast as the old, retired Right Wingers that can spend the majority of their day reading ATS and topping off their whiskey drunk.

The biggest reason not to jump on this completely is that we need a lot more evidence, or at least some more credible sourcing.

Do remember, the OP himself said "Now I agree with you, we should get the other side of the story as well". Do you know what this means? It means this is not as cut and dry as it seems. They left just enough room for plausible deniability, just in case reality does not exactly match what is being presented. If the facts were clear and the evidence/sourcing crystal clear, we would not need the other side of the story.

The evidence would speak for itself. But as this has been presented here, that is not the case.


Of course you would resort to accusing right wingers of being drunks, nothing new from you.

Yes, of course, as always, we should be open to all sides of the story.

Especially when anonynous sources are involved.

However, many many of the facts in this article are from the IG report, and publicaly released infor therin.

For example, do you deny that it is publicly available that an agent was upset strzok set on these emails for over a month, had to go over his head, and when oversight was going to want to see about the emails, stzrok said, "F them"?

Or how about that only around 6000 of the 700,000 emails were actually gone over?

Or that the fbi which routinely goes only through a small amount a day said they went through all of these emails with three people in 12 hours?

Or that lynch was in contact with the fbi telling them to go thorugh the emails fast?

This report is far more detailed with many more publicly available proof than almost all I have seen detailing trump russia collusion, yet people take them as gospel.

You pretend to be non partisan, but constantly come up with reasons we need to believe or investigate any wrong doing by trump, but claim no investigations are needed into hillary (for the same criteria you sight for investigating Trump) or investigations into the investigators themselves, despite evidence arising showing potential wrong doing.

The point is, we on ATS discuss many things with far less proof based on far worse sources than this

Yet many of the people eager to jump on any rumor trump had hookers pee on beds, or he possibly broke the law by paying a hooker, seem to not be so interested in discussing this corruption, which if true is of a far greater magnitude.

And of far more significance, for some reason, the media, and even most politicians seem not very interested in this story, even when many of the details are plainly outline in the IG report.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: six67seven

Im 34, work block shift in home health care for people with disabilities.

I have the day off, and am quite sober.

But sadly slanders on posters and accusations of being drunk seemed to be a recurring theme with that poster.
edit on 24-8-2018 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Yeah why wouldn't one believe a guy fired from the fbi?
People fired from the fbi are obviously the most credible people on the planet.

Man do you have surprises coming, I almost feel sorry for you.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: six67seven
There's a very obvious reason the left-wing ATS members haven't jumped on this thread. And if they do (as we see on page 1, this is to be considered "lies" or "fake news") it will be pure deflection. But I think we'll see an absence of them, rather than comments debating the information provided.

Sessions, as I said yesterday in some thread, is the invisible man. He's got to be doing something, I just have no idea what. Hopefully it's productive and relevant to the major issues we currently have with the Justice Department.

The great thing is that Trump will make it through this garbage & hypocrisy the MSM / left-wing is throwing at him with the Russian collusion investigation that has gone out-of-scope into the realm of wherever they currently are, which will be redirected once their current attempt at impeachment falls on its face.

Truly disturbing, yet I'm not surprised. Expect it to get worse before it gets better.


Interesting idea! a few weeks back I read on Alfredo Jalife's blog that Sessions is busy going after the money of the Deep State and freezing those assets.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

That's what I thought (age-wise) because yesterday you posted that you'd be old enough to run for POTUS in 2024.

I didn't take you for a liar, I don't think anyone does on ATS that is paying attention, I just wasn't sure if you were joking


I think we have a good idea now, of who the real drunk may be...




posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I'm going to set aside that this piece is written by Paul Sperry who has a history of mischaracterizing technical aspects of things he's written about (e.g. "the FBI.. obtained only the 'forensic' images of the allegedly hacked DNC systems" — forensic images are actually the best images) and address the crux of what he's claiming here.

Basically, it comes down to this: did they or did they not process the emails?

The claim that he reiterates from Trump is that it's impossible to go through hundreds of thousands of emails in eight days. This is true in that on average, a single person can only read so many emails per hour. Let's say one person could look over 60 an hour (keep in mind many emails are going to be on their face unrelated, like "did you pick up my dry cleaning"), that would be 11,500 man hours. Say they worked 12 hours a day for 8 days (96 hours per person), that would be 120 people.

This is where shortcuts come in handy. For instance, emails prior to the Clinton's tenure as SoS wouldn't be relevant. It was a shared laptop so there's going to be mailbox files for different users. Sperry pushes the 694k number but he doesn't really break down had this was arrived at. The number comes from the report that is referenced in the OIG report which does explain more:

- There were 350k emails initially recovered from the laptop. These would have been found in some sort of mailbox (think .pst/.ost).

- Another 344k emails were found in 13 Blackberry backups.

9 of the 13 Blackberry backups were Weiner's. It's not clear from the OIG report how many of the emails in the mail client files were Abedin's. Now as to the remaining Blackberry emails, it should have been possible to de-dupe those, at least among the Blackberry backups. In other words, if you back up in January and then you backup again in February, there's going to be emails that are in both and you don't need to look at the same email multiple times. Furthermore, if the accounts backed up from the Blackberry are the same as the ones on the laptop's email client, there's going to be a lot of dupes there because emails to the same address would be going to both.

So the first steps would be to determine which emails were Abedin's vs Weiner's and the then as much as possible to remove dupes from what remains to get a collection of unique emails.

Now the are other ways to cut down on the number of emails to be examined. The investigation is essentially into Hillary Clinton emailing potentially classified information. So you don't need to look at Amazon orders and PayPal receipts or emails from Abedin to her 3rd grade bestie.

So you'd identify the relevant addresses for Hillary Clinton and then look for all emails to/from those addresses. You could further winnow it down by excluding by range. For example, emails from before her tenure as SoS wouldn't be relevant here.

Side note: Now arguably, emails from after her tenure would be, not because they potentially contained classified information necessarily but because they could, as was noted, contain information related to destruction of evidence. I think ignoring this is a fair concern in a broader sense but they're not strictly needed if what you're looking for is potentially classified content sent by the the SoS through her private email server.

At any rate, it should be clear that the number of emails that needed to be looked at is FAR less than 690k. A huge chunk were Weiner's and could be ignored off the bat, many of them that weren't Weiner's were duplicated on the laptop.

It's not clear from the OIG report how many were Abedin's vs Weiner's nor whether they removed dupes from among the remaining automatically.

This brings us to the crux of Sperry's piece which is the claim that de-duplication was unsuccessful. And the OIG report is referenced here again. The relevant part is this:

"because metadata was largely absent, the emails could not be completely, automatically de-duplicated or evaluated against prior emails recovered during the investigation"

It's not entirely clear as to what metadata was missing and which data set the metadata was missing from nor what "completely, automatically" means here. Where they able to de-dupe some of them? What is apparent is that the de-duplication here refers to comparing emails from the laptop against emails previously reviewed by the FBI.

Contrary to what Sperry asserts ("such as To, CC, Date, From, Subject, attachments and other fields"), I think it's safe to assume that some metadata had to be present. For one, I can't imagine a format that wouldn't contain to/from, date, subject, etc. That wouldn't make sense for storing emails at all. Secondly, without that metadata, the emails would be basically impossible to do *anything* with. You don't need to be particularly tech savvy to understand that.

As with other misleading claims by Sperry, I think his bold statements exceed his competency.

Anyway, according to the report cited in the OIG report, they ended up reviewing "approximately 48,982" emails. This would be unique Abedin emails from the time frame in question. The report then says:


The FBI reviewed 6,827 emails that were either to or from Clinton and assessed 3,077 of those emails to be “potentially work-related.”


So of the 48,982, 6,827 were to or from Clinton. That's the number that was actually looked at by hand. (6,827). Of those, 3,077 had been assessed by the initial team (which did not include Strzok) as potentially work related. This is where the time has to be really be spent because somebody has to read each one and assess if the information in it is classified.

According to Sperry, on Nov 5th, Strzok, Moyer (who it is noted is a Democrat because you know only Republicans can investigate Trump and Democrats can't be involved in investigations of Democrats — basically only Republicans can investigate anyone unless of course they're Mueller) and a third unnamed investigator (must have been a registered Republican since there's no other details) split up the 3,077 into about a thousand each and went through them.

That's a manageable number. From that, they identified 13 chains with classified information. From within those chains, 5 emails were unique to this data set.

The upshot? Sperry's a hack and this really isn't the bombshell it's made out to be. We already knew from the initial investigation that she sent emails that contained classified information, whether it was 10 or 20 isn't *that* significant.

I say go ahead and appoint a special council to go back through it all and let him/her decide whether to pursue prosecution. Don't be surprised when they don't though because the same hurdles are going to exist.

I would also point out that this could blow up in Trump's face too for a number of reasons. Firstly, going after Clinton again is going to galvanize Clinton-favoring Democrats. Much like how Republicans rally around Trump or how Bill Clinton actually saw his approval rating go up as he was being impeached. Secondly, there's been bits and pieces floating around about some of the communications in the Trump administration from his own use of an insecure device, to Kelly's probably hacked phone to Kushner and others using Signal and similar apps in contravention of record keeping regs.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I'd like to see more charges against the FBI during this whole obsession with trump started.

The Russian kgb warned the FBI about the Boston bombers and nothing happened

Gay night club terrorist had his own father call the FBI warning about his son and could be prevented.

The child rapist nassar was brought to the FBIs attention for years and nothing happened.

I hope these cases were not passed by because of trump derangement syndrome.

There are 1 or 2 more big cases involving the FBI dropping the ball



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian


Goddamit, it's the shortcuts that hang the man, right? Right? Or maybe NOT right...at all.

Hillary Clinton💪💪💪

edit on 24-8-2018 by Jonjonj because: what?



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:15 PM
link   
All these bomb shell nothing burgers coming out every time Trump is in trouble. You guys are way too predictable..



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError
All these bomb shell nothing burgers coming out every time Trump is in trouble. You guys are way too predictable..


If you've been a member of ATS for any length of time, You know that the bombshells against the Obama Administration and Hillary never stop coming.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: ErrorErrorError


Please, if you will, explain. If not...



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

They were stuck between a rock and a hard place--give enough time for the investigation to be thorough and find damaging, criminal behavior, or rush it through a risk causing issues to the campaign/election.

Better that she lose the election that be charged while a (presumed) sitting POTUS, I suppose.

This is what happens when you're so corrupt that it starts all catching up to you.



posted on Aug, 24 2018 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: vinifalou

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: Grambler

I sincerely hope Trump is secretly working with someone to take her down.

I wouldn't vote for him in 2020 if Hillary is still on the loose by then, with all this damming evidence against her, the DOJ should be all over it.

If it's really a 78D chess then he's tying all the lose parts together so there is no possibility for her to escape the military court she's gonna face.


The big issue is that the fbi is corrupt, and seeking to influence elections and destroy politicians they do not like.

That has the potentila to destory our country more than anything trump or hillary or putin could do.


I really believe this is why Trump hasn't done anything yet. He needs to restore the integrity of the FBI/DOJ before announcing that to the public.


How can you say that he has to restore the integrity of the FBI/DOJ when everyone in senior leadership of the DOJ are all appointed by Trump?




top topics



 
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join