Didn’t catch them. Caught you.
Don’t forget, once Flynn registered as a Foreign Agent we also learned that he paid ex-FBI agent Brian McCauley a retainer of $28,000. McCauley, of course, is the FBI agent that reported to the media that there may have been “quid pro quo” with the State Department to declassify one of Clinton’s emails.
This story broke on October 19, a few weeks before the election… and two weeks after McCauley got paid by Flynn…
And also don’t forget that the FBI field office, as we speak, is under a DOJ investigation because it leaked classified information – like all the stuff about how there might be a new case against Clinton because of the Wiener emails, which very easily could explain a massive shift against her in the week before the election.
The NY FBI office has numerous links to Trump and his administration.
AND, people still aren’t taking the Steele dossier seriously, at least not in America. But everything about it is slowly being confirmed. The central allegation? That Russia promised Trump a stake of Rosneft if he’d lift sanctions. All investigators need is some documents, or the right person to talk… like maybe Flynn, who hasn’t been heard of in a few weeks…
Coincidentally, I’ve just finished reading through this mega-thread on Twitter, from Seth Abramson, concerning much of what ZebraShaSha is talking about:
One of the more central matters of interest; a main informant for Steele on the Rosneft connection turned up dead - after his report was passed on to Comey, and (presumably) the New York Field office.
Have a read.
This is a non-story. I keep hearing words like allegedly, according to sources, and such with zero proof and a juicy headline.
If there was something on Trump working with the Russians to rig the election, don’t ya think it would have been out there by now?
And how could the Russians really change the way people vote?
To clarify, Trump certainly worked with Russians during his tenure as a builder. So what.
IMO, Clinton did far worse by taking 20 million or so that we are aware of from Iran, a nation who sponsors terrorism and hates us for her campaign. Additionally, her collusion with the press in the form of giving her debate questions in advance, and skulduggery with the DNC, by using Sanders ethnicity against him was shocking.
The hilarious part about the election was Clinton herself. Part of the top 1%, and in deep with wall street and the banks. Essentially she was a closet Republican.
Utterly false. Forensic IT guys are really good at rehabilitating data from so-called ‘wiped’ drives. The only true defense against it is physically destroying the drives that the data is saved on.
You should probably define “wiped” and provide a citation for your claim.
And Trump associates have been proven to have had contact with Russians during the campaign. So what.
And Trump sold a property to one of the biggest players in Russia to use as a hedge against his wife taking his assets. For a 100% profit after owning the property for two years, without any improvements whatsoever. So what.
And the Trump campaign modified a Republican party plank so that it wouldn’t be so unacceptable to the Russians and Putin. So what.
And a number of intelligence agencies noted that the Russians very likely did interfere in the election, including various pieces of evidence that they were in charge of hacking the DNC and Clinton servers. So what.
And at least two Trump campaign associates have resigned over Russia ties. So what.
Yeah, uh, not nearly quite so extenuating as you appear to believe.
That would take a long and involved explanation of a number of things that are IT-related which I really don’t want to get into. However, if there are any IT folks around here who could corroborate my statement?
In a previous job, we had an axe and a sledge hammer to destroy the large IBM hard drives to keep the data out of the wrong hands.
.
If you’re talking about the ‘platter’ drives (about the size of a washing machine), that could actually work, though a nice open flame would be better. You wouldn’t need to destroy the machine itself, just the platters.
I am an IT folk.
That’s why I pointed out that your statement didn’t really contain information.
“Wiped” can refer to multiple conditions.
Some of those conditions are recoverable, others are not.
There’re common myths about what is and is not recoverable.
If you do not have details, then you’re not actually telling us anything.
Add son-in-law Jared Kushner to the list.
First take? That Jared doesn’t know anything at all about the subject and can testify for hours without making any trouble. Thus permitting them to say “See? Nothing here, let’s just forget it…”. In a situation this complicated and intricate, somebody is bound to be innocent.
First, you definitely can wipe the disk in a way that no forensic IT guy will ever recover from. And second, any such recovery requires physical possession of the hard disk in question. Which the Russians definitely didn’t have. Your comments are irrelevant in this context.
So you believe that what Dolt 45 was inviting the Russians to do- hack into his electoral rival’s computer- to get the “missing” emails is all hunky-dory because what he invited the Russians to do may not be technically possible?
Great. I look forward to the top FBI forensic IT guys getting hold of the 30,000 emails if it is so easy.
“According to the official statement of FBI director, James Comey, agency experts were unable to recover information from Clinton’s wiped-clean server, and Clinton’s legal team claims there are no backups. Thus the contents of the 30,000 deleted “private” emails are not known unless they are in the hands of foreign intelligence hackers, who could deploy them to influence the 2016 election, blackmail a President Clinton once in office, or to embarrass her and the United States.”
No. What he was saying (and even that was in jest) was if the Russians already have the 30,000 “deleted” emails, then they would be richly rewarded by the press if they gave it to them.
That’s not an invitation to hack (as if hackers need invitations, anyway).
She supposedly used bleachbit to wipe the drives.
A little tech info:
When you delete a file on your machine, you only delete the entry that tells the OS where the file’s bits are. The actual file remains untouched until you overwrite the areas on the hard drive where it existed, which the OS will allow since those sectors are now marked as free. Since files are fragmented, you may eventually overwrite some parts of the file and not others, allowing partial reconstruction.
Good secure deletion software will not only delete the entry in the OS’s file lookup tables, but overwrite the actual physical locations on the disk with random data.
Now, if the drive is physically in the hands of a forensic technician, sometimes data can be recovered even when it’s been wiped that way. Bits on a hard drive are magnetic, and residue of the magnetic field can be left behind and can be used in some cases to reconstruct files even when every bit has been over-written. So top-quality secure erasing tools will rewrite those locations of the hard drive multiple times with random data or special data designed to to attempt to erase any lingering information.
If you don’t have access to the physical drive, if someone has overwritten all the data there’s nothing you can do unless you can find it in a cache or something. But if a sophisticated agency like the FBI has the physical drive and still can’t recover anything on it, then it’s been ‘wiped’ in a pretty sophisticated way.
“But her emails”
Trump’s former campaign manager - and someone that still lives at Trump Tower - laundered money in Ukraine and had people murdered, at least according to his daughter.
Also, Trump did business with a man connected to a front company for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
Do try to keep up.
Granted on the physical possession thing. There’s no question that forensics isn’t really possible otherwise, and this would require subpoenaing the drive(s) in question. Unless, of course, the emails were on public servers, which would be the case as I understand it with some of Podesta’s but not Hillary’s.
Short of physical destruction of the drive, your first point is incorrect. The more the data is overwritten the more difficult it can be to recover data, but it’s still by no means impossible.