Slashdot Mirror
Edward Snowden Kills Team Trump's Conspiracy Theory By Explaining How The FBI Can Quickly Comb Through Email (geekwire.com)
FBI director James Comey told Congress Sunday that the further investigation of emails related to Hillary Clinton didn't turn up anything that would cause the bureau to recommend charges against her. The FBI had reviewed over 650,000 emails under nine days. Upon hearing this, GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump and his supported started to question whether the FBI could go through all those emails in such a short period of time. We will never know for sure until the FBI explains its process to us all (which is unlikely to happen), so people turned to Edward Snowden over the weekend for answers. And Mr. Snowden didn't disappoint. From a report on GeekWire: How easy would it be to cull out the duplicate emails? Outspoken journalist Jeff Jarvis posed that question to Snowden in a tweet, and got a quick response: "Drop non-responsive To:/CC:/BCC:, hash both sets, then subtract those that match. Old laptops could do it in minutes-to-hours."
Mr. Know-it-all seems to pull a lot of shit out of his ass anyway.
n/t
... then we still don't know how plausible it is that they reviewed XXXX number of emails in 11 days, after taking months to review 80,000 emails before.
I could review 650k emails in a day, and then take the rest of the week off.
It would be very easy via automation to tag the emails which are dupes of ones already in the data set.
Which, apparently, was all of them. No shit, Sherlock.
reviewing non-dup emails is hard.
Snowden didn't do shit. As much as we all "love" him for his previous leaks, he didn't shoot ANYTHING down. He only answered how to dedup a list to make it smaller, not answer how large the list would be after the fact or how long it would take to comb through said remaining list.
the point is, if they can do it this quickly, why did take some many months the first time they investigated this?
FBI has botched this from the get-go and Comey continues to carry water to cover up the fact that she broke the law by even having the server.
Seriously, anyone who's ever had to do de-duplication or pattern matching or anything like that could have told you how easy this is to do. It's almost like computers are good for this kind of stuff!
Rawr
I work for an organization that is heavily involved in electronic discovery processing for large corporations, law firms and the United States government.
Email threading, and duplication detection / dedupe are standard tasks that are performed on a daily basis on huge datasets. (As part of the Processing phase of the EDRM model.)
It is not at all unfeasible that the FBI could have used standard, off the shelf software to identify duplicates and generate an exception report for all 'new' emails that were not in the previously collected datasets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Trump crowd beautifully illustrates that.
Guy answers high school freshman-level tech support question. We'll have details on this exciting story as they develop.
30% of my state has voted already - before hearing the FBI's "verdict" regarding charging Clinton this past weekend.
Trump is still saying the FBI is lying and they rigged the results - even though they made their announcement about the new emails last week during the early voting time making it look like they were tryng to tank Clinton.
The damage has been done.
This is not the country I want nor how I want our elections to go. And I am disgusted with the US Electorate. Regardless of who ends up in the Whitehouse, all of you will get the government you deserve.
I'm a network admin. Email technology isn't very complex. I can pull up 7 years worth of emails at a drop of a hat. The only real issue is digging through the ocean of emails if you don't know what you are looking for. This thread sounds like more the usual political spam that gets crapped into slashdot. Even if we found a smoking gun, the FBI would simply ignore it. The privileged elite are royalty. You can't arrest them.
First of all, how ridiculous that we go to a criminal who's been forced to live under the protection of the Russians for help on understanding something going on in the country. Maybe he's right, maybe he's wrong, but he certainly doesn't fall under the category of "reliable and unbiased", and I would take everything he says with a huge ol' grain of salt!
Having said that, his explanation just muddies up the water further. If they could parse the emails this quickly, then why did it take months to do the initial assessment? The FBI hasn't said one way or the other, which is why people think that this is the work of the DOJ (who are int eh Clinton's pocketbook)
Did you all forget that last week the case was assigned to someone who Podesta personally thanked in the past for keepingh im outta jail???
But Snowden's weighed in and his word is the gospel, right? So now we can just believe him and know everyone else out there is lying, right?
Wake up Sheeple! Don't get all comfy and warm in that blanket of misinformation - Demand accountability from our government!!
But Snowden is literally an actual Putin-supported spy. Possibly the most famous one. So if Putin is somehow not able to control him from hurting Trump, are we supposed to believe that Putin is some all-powerful dictator able to coerce a billionaire into becoming his personal mole, infiltrating the FBI, and so on and so forth that Dems have claimed and massively exaggerated to the point of hysteria?
Your move, Correct the Record.
Unfortunately, there is no way to kill a conspiracy theory. The best way to make a conspiracy theory flourish is to completely and utterly debunk it. Have you seen the flat earth society (would provide a link, but I don't want to help their SEO)?
That still doesn't explain why the FBI boasted that they had 400+ agents working for many months for 33,000 emails and yet magically can go through 650k in just a few days. Either they were lying before, or they are lying now.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
It would be easy to trim the emails down to those just not going only to Wiener, but even that may not be a valid way to filter because Huma could have asked him to print something. The rest of the filtering is magic that these supposed experts are making up. Anything unique about any of these messages will screw up a hash and, frankly, it's quite unlikely that they have stored all of the emails in a way that makes the data comparison trivial. The belief is that there is leaked classified material, which means that the data needs to be done in isolation from most common tools. Classified material does not get stored with unclassified material and differently classified material gets isolated. Unless of course the FBI is itself suffering a data spill.
This means that they needed to actively and magically remove irrelevant parts. However, the forwarded message itself may contain a data spill (there were numerous emails where the subject is a a data spill), so you cannot arbitrarily ignore those.
And yet furthermore, if there was even one classified document or message here, it is a much greater crime because it means that the spill had spread from the private email server (and it inherently already had, by way of traditional SMTP). And given the WikiLeaks showing that Hillary had her maid printing out classified documents, it's a pretty safe bet that Huma was emailing herself things that would not have been possible without putting it on a private email server on the public internet.
It took the FBI months to go over 30K emails. It took them 9 days to concretely determine that they will not prosecute for a further exaggeration of a crime that has been committed (read FBI Director Comey's public statement from July where he literally lists all of the crimes, then notes that there was no intent and that no one will prosecute; further realize that intent has nothing to do with anything except sentencing when dealing with classified document leaks based on existing laws).
We learned one and only one thing: FBI Director Comey is out of a job no matter who wins the election. We continue to observe that Hillary is above the law.
No, that despite your ridiculous false equivalencies (hint: Clinton isn't even in the same universe as Trump and his alt-right revisionists) and a concerted misinformation campaign, and despite electoral interference from our secret police, I mean FBI, Hillary Clinton was still elected.
Assuming that is the outcome, which, while the alternative is unthinkable, is far from a foregone conclusion.
A celeb said something related to the US presidential election? Put it up stat!
.. they just said nothing that would change anything.
basically boils down to Hillary is above the law and we're not going to pursue it.
Yet people still claim 'innocent' - only because they are stupid AF.
...your fun at party's.
But Snowden is a Russian spy! Why would he say things that badly reflect on Trump?
Help me, CNN!
The FBI already said that Hillary mismanaged the handling of confidential documents via her illegal private server.
We already KNOW this to be fact. The FBI admitted such.
The fact is that none of it matters. The power that be decided they would not prosecute because of lack of "intent". Destroying evidence apparently is not "intent".
Hillary has been bought by Wall Street and numerous foreign entities via her foundation. Anyone that has the means to buy political influence has bought their piece of Hillary.
Hillary's supporters simply do not care about any of this. They aren't electing Hillary - they are electing an ideology. More global interventionist policies, larger and more intrusive government, and a supreme court that will rubber stamp all of it.
This is what Hillary's supporters are electing. The candidate and the associated crimes committed by that candidate are irrelevant.
Anyone that has ever used a database knows how easy this is. Sadly team Trump is all about spouting words from the mouth at random, and learning how things are done after the fact.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Go Snowden, thanks for facts. Leave the Pussy grabbing for Trump and Assange
Everybody seems to have forgotten that HRC answered the original subpoena with _hardcopies_. Even if you scanned and OCRed them, their hashes will not match due to inevitable missing metadata and formatting differences, OCR typos, etc.
Anybody want a peanut?
They didn't think he'd do anything to the 1%ers. Any talk of that was just a smokescreen.
Trump's campaign was about racism first and foremost. He made subtext into text. Look how evangelicals just fucking love the guy, despite him being the literal opposite of the only evangelical president we've ever elected - a man who builds houses for the poor with his own bare hands instead of putting his name on ostentatious housing for the rich). And that's because the religious right was not about a "moral majority" or even abortion, it was founded on racism (the last time the national conversation included the phrase "religious freedom" was when we were talking about Bob Jones university and was the catalyst for the rise of the religious right). Hell, the southern baptist convention (single largest organization of evangelical churches with millions of members) was created so slave-owners could still be part of a baptist convention. It was only 20 years ago that the SBC officially denounced slavery and segregation. Yeah, only 20 years ago, WTF! right?
And when you are racist, nothing else really matters. For decades the republican party has been telling these people "you may be poor, but at least you are still white." But now with a black president and the general population on the verge of no longer being a white super-majority just being white isn't enough of a consolation any more.
So all the nonsense that Trump''s said during the campaign. It simply did not matter if it was realistic, or even true because it was just a distraction. He was selling a reinvigoration of white supremacy and as long as he kept up that message, they were happy with him.
How would a Republican president, even Trump, be different in curtailing "More global interventionist policies, larger and more intrusive government, and a supreme court that will rubber stamp all of it."
What has Bush Jr. (the last Rep. prez) , or the republican congress done in the last, say 16 years, done to stop or slow any of these things?
Analysis of a mass of written work for duplicateness is a dumb little initialization task compared to that of analysis for content.
we need a 3rd party candidate or a 269 269 tie!
Comey announced they filtered out all emails that were not sent to or from Hillary, which would indeed narrow down the set. But this method may suffer other problems.
Assuming that intent is relevant to the crime for argument's sake, if you are only looking for a smoking gun of Hillary's intent ("hey could you set up a private email server so that I can avoid those pesky Congressional investigations and FOIA requests"), then such a filter is adequate.
If you think maybe Hillary asked her assistant to do such thing, but was not stupid enough to put it in email herself (what are assistants for, if not plausible deniability?), then clues may be found in emails that were filtered out (ie. not "combed through").
This is but one example where the filter may be efficient (fast) but inadequate.
These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
You can't "kill" a conspiracy theory. Impossible. Never happen.
Conspiracy theories are unkillable: entirely immune to evidence, rational explanation, solid data, and common sense.
If you don't believe me, keep listening to Trump and his supporters. See if this conspiracy theory dies. None of the past ones have. Climate change is still a Chinese hoax. (There was one utterly unexpected exception: Obama's birthplace did suddenly move from Kenya to Hawaii).
Interestingly, the "thought leaders" of conspiracy theories are very often not actually true believers themselves. They are most often just manipulators with a good understanding of the suggestibility of the morons they recruit to their cause. I bet Trump doesn't really believe most of his conspiracy theories himself. They are just convenient tools of manipulation and control.
Snowden is lying. My son is seven. So good at cyber. Cyber so good. China beating cyber. Hashtag winning. Hashtag crooked Hilary. Cyber.
Just remember, law does not apply to high ranking government as it does for us normal people. If it was a regular person, they would be in prison for quite a while. That is the point.
The latter, while doing a lot of things that are either distasteful or something that a lot of people may disagree w/, is neither unethical nor illegal: it's just that most people would disagree w/ his judgement. The former did something that is clearly illegal, and among other things, downright corrupt (trading State Department favors for Clinton Foundation donations, Clinton Foundation - a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization - footing the bill for her daughter's wedding and 10 years of their lives), as well as putting national secrets at risk by maintaining a private server. If WikiLeaks could break into DNC emails and that of Clinton aides, how difficult would it have been for more professional organizations (read enemy states) to actually hack Clinton's private server(s)? And a lot of people have gone to jail for much less - Gen Petraeus, Adm Cartwright and the guy who got a year in jail for taking 6 photos in a classified area of a submarine.
While I happen to agree w/ Trump even during the GOP primary level, even if I didn't, given these choices of corrupt vs shooting off the mouth, I'd pick the latter any day!
Why? Why would a wanton disregard for the law be preferable to someone who respects the law, but wants to change it - for better or worse? At least w/ the latter, there is a process, as well as checks and balances. A lot of things on Trump's agenda will have to be negotiated if he comes to power w/ not just Democrats, but Republicans as well
... none of the deleted emails was there.
Hillary is only winning those who make less than 35K a year.
She's not winning college educated voters. She's winning diploma holding voters who can't support themselves. If you have a degree and not a good job then access to higher education was not your problem.
People who support themselves are for the most part supporting Trump.
Work Safe Porn
You have to wonder which explanation they are most/least like to provide. That they are crap geeks or intellectually dishonest.
Snowden is a government spy.
I have worked in I.T. for 30 years and I specialize in Computer Forensics. I investigate email cases like this all the time and in the last 10 years I have been involved in well over 1000 cases.
There is NO WAY the FBI is going to be able to extract and examine 650,000 emails in a week.
First it all has to be extracted into a readable format, including any email attachments, and that usually involves a powerful computer crunching the number 24/7 and for that many, I expect it to run for two or three weeks just waiting on the computer to do it's part.
Next comes the examination, and that potentially could be a case of 650 agents each given 1000 emails to go through which would take a few days, ONCE they all got it.
Over all, there is no way it was done, and examined and a press release prepared. It's all a lie to help Clinton steal the election.
> The point is that Trump's supporters have no solid evidence that there was not enough time to review the emails.
That's just silly. People are still finding new things in the Podesta emails. Our evidence comes from having experience DOING the same task on another set of email. By that, we know that lot of things were hidden in attachments on emails with silly subject lines like "Congratulations." Tell me, why would someone reply to a weeks-old email saying "Congratulations" about something to send an attachment with incriminating stuff and not, say, send a new email or respond to another thread that was recent & relevant? There are also various code names to worry about (Diane Reynolds = Chelsea Clinton, Evergreen = Hillary Clinton, etc.) that will confuse naive grepping.
Saying that a computer could hash and search 650k emails in a few minutes is just silly. We can already do that with the Podesta dumps via search engines, but we find new things and make new connections every day. It's not a very easy task to parallelize, either. People are only making connections about the Clinton Foundation selling influence by connecting the dots across many emails.
So sure, they can "review" 650k emails in 8 days, but how you can have 650k dupes from 33k emails is not well-explained and anyone who has actually read /r/wikileaks would know that most of the good stuff is deliberately hidden in binary attachments under ridiculous subject lines that won't be found by mere grepping. We know because it took us weeks to catch onto the methods.
But yeah, sure, feel free to assume they've done a thorough review of 650k emails by running a handful of greps, secure in the knowledge that computers can search quickly and that makes it all easy, because that's what you wanted to hear.
Nowhere have I read anyone interviewing, talking to, etc, people who do exactly this kind of thing all day - attorneys. This process is literally what electronic discovery IS.
As an attorney who works on these types of issues, 650k emails is a trivially small corpus. Even if they were all responsive, and no duplicates, I would expect a decently-sized team to take about ten days to go through that number of emails. Of course, realistically, in most cases you are going to filter that down by 90% or more before a human being looks over a single email... depending on the process and work hours, a single person can easily look at 1k emails a day, and that's when you're doing legal analysis on them... if all you're doing is figuring out "Bullshit/not bullshit" and kicking it upstairs for further analysis 2k emails is not unreasonable for a 12 hour shift. Although it wouldn't be fun to be doing...
But still, at 100 emails/hour that's 6500 man hours of work if you want a human being to comb through every single email, or a hundred people working one 65-hour workweek, which even gives Comey the luxury of a full day to set up the process.
So when you read some idiot saying that it's not possible to have looked through that many emails... yes, yes it certainly is. A big document review team will comb through a million documents a week or more, and that includes doing legal analysis on them as well.
The question isn't how they can comb through 650,000 emails in nine days. The question is why they could do so this time, but it took a year to go through 33,000 emails last time. And the time is very, very convenient. The announcement that they had them came as an October surprise, and even made Comey look less like Clinton's loyal little bitch. But then, just in time before the election, a further announcement of "move along, nothing to see here."
Comey may be a Republican appointee, but the GOP leadership hates Trump as much as they hate Clinton. Neither will accomplish anything in the White House, but with Clinton in office, the Republicans will look a lot less stupid blowing off the White House at every opportunity. Or maybe they all just have a boner over impeaching her ass, and they can't do that if she's not elected.
Yeah, it's not like we have any experience from looking through the Podesta dumps.
I'm perfectly capable of writing perl -ne '/incriminating evidence/i and print' but I also know just how silly that idea is.
Unlike those who let CNN think for them, I've actually gone through the Podesta dumps. I know about important attachments hidden under irrelevant subject lines. I know the different code names and the different email addresses used. And there are some indications they talk in code, as well.
The people on /r/wikileaks are still making connections months later. The idea that any real review has been done on 650k emails in 8 days is pretty silly based on the real data of thousands of people doing it on another set over a longer time. We have a search engine for the Podesta dump. Saying you did a few searches so you've done a full review is kind of silly.
Given the Slashdot audience, I find the skepticism that it's possible kind of surprising.
First, the FBI has some very sophisticated tools for discovery in place for just this sort of thing. I've used an earlier version of one of them (we were evaluating the vendor that provides some of these tools) and, more importantly, people that know how to use them.
Since the specific question to be answered here is about Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State (review of e-mails related to Abedin and Wiener are a separate issue), they would go through this process: ingest the e-mails (including header metadata and the message bodies) into the indexing engine (it's only about 650K e-mails; say about 5-10 minutes - this stuff runs in an AWS cluster and is pretty quick), then they would load a list of all e-mail addresses associated with Hillary Clinton and search for all messages that contain that in a From, To, Cc, or Bcc header -- and possibly anything that passed through the clintonmail.org domain -- which is VERY fast (on the order of 20 seconds or so), then they load the Message-ids for all of the messages in the set of e-mails that they already have reviewed and exclude from the prior subset all of those that matched (because they've already been reviewed; maybe 1-2 minutes of processing time). The FBI then would have the subset of Clinton e-mails in Abedin's e-mail that they have not already reviewed, which is no doubt a pretty small number given that Clinton was neither a prolific writer nor recipient or e-mail in the first place.
I would be quite surprised if they found more than a handful of new messages for review, if any. But the procedure for finding those e-mails is very straight-forward to do and would take less than 30 minutes for their techs to do. I can't tell you how long it would take for the FBI to manually review each of those messages, but I suspect not too long.
Using Solr and Magento, it only takes me 45 minutes to run full text indexing against 50K enriched product records (color, weight, vendor, description, short description, title, nicknames, etc. - easily way more data than in a typical email for each product) And my box is not especially fast and does nothing in terms of clustering to improve performance. Now do that 13 times to arrive at approx 650k items, and it only takes approx 9 or 10 hours. Now you could run keyword searches against the entire lot to see if there is anything of interest. And that is BEFORE removing duplicates like Snowden suggested, or applying some Natural Language Processing algorithms, or any other relevant AI code... No conspiracy here, I think. Rather I think you see just who is truly out of touch with what modern tech can do.
Lots of FUD here. Snowden's response only removes duplicates. If all 33k known emails were found & removed, the FBI would still have to sift 617k emails to look for secret/classified/confidential info.
The crietria for deduping emails needs to be WAAAY more than just looking at the TO:, CC: BCC: fields. You also need to look at the subject and body. That said, I agreed it shouldn't take a computer that long especially if you hash them.
BUT Deduping is only the beginning. You'd still need to go through each for semantic content. i.e. this requires a human with awareness of the interpretation and context and probable security level of each email. Even assuming deduping reduced the number of emails to 1/10th, which seems very optimistic, it would still take months for the numbers of emails we are talking about.
Therefore, once again I call bullshit on Comey/the FBI.
Ah yes, grandiose claims of "I've read all the emails..."
Doubtless you and all the other "I've read all the email" types will be quote mining them for years to come. Podesta's emails are the Birther conspiracy theorists for the post-2016 world.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Let's discuss another scandal: global warming.
There is no problem with greenhouse has emissions. Global warming is not occurring. Trees make CO2 emissions naturally neutral. No magic is needed.
If we'd stifle all the fools who make 'save a tree' arguments against paper usage, and plant more trees, the world would be better.
> Ah yes, grandiose claims of "I've read all the emails..."
That's kind of literally the opposite of what I'm claiming, though I've certainly read many of them, I don't believe anyone can read them all in a short time and make any sense out of it. That's not a realistic investigation by any means.
But yes, they do conspire a lot in the emails. The entire Democratic primary was a sham, as well. Might want to read them for yourself, unless maybe you prefer to let CNN do the thinking for you...
that the fix wasn't in.
Elementary logic tells you that Hillary was lying when she said she had the server for convenience. It also tells you she was trying to hide something.
Simpler explanation is that someone explained how he'd die if he didn't shut up and let Hilary be coronated.
Oh, for anyone who can't/won't read the PDF I linked, I just transcribed it. Enjoy:
He still unnecessarily jeopardized so many good and valid US security programs. Any idiot knows that de-duping computer records can be done trivially. This was no miracle performed by the FBI. Frankly if they couldn't have done this in a few short days, then they would have been the idiots. Trump doesn't understand technology and doesn't care.
The conspiracy theory sounds great when you don't actually know anything about the subject.
I've worked on trial discovery software many years ago, and it's about what you'd think: Third party tools to gather metadata, database extraction of text using APIs where available, mouse-click simulation where nothing else is possible to automate the process.
Lawyers would literally set up entire rooms of computers to take a set of files from a cloned HD, and run the appropriate automation across the files, to generate images (TIFF images for court), text and metadata, and of course gathering error cases so they can be sifted though later.
Detecting dupes with such techniques would be very easy, and sorting through non-dupes for unique text also wouldn't take long.
The secret weapon: an SQL "JOIN" clause!
Quick, patent it before somebody else does! Everything else obvious gets patented.
Table-ized A.I.
I as external observer do have some minor issues with this
1. They definitely could compare the sets and filter only new emails.. any of such would require review because I dont see how hashtag filtering could reliably detect email intent.Such info is not known ( how many new emails and so on )
2.Snowden have gone repeatedly pro gov because he is hoping to return to US ( known stated information ) and as such its best in his interest to support gov inc.
Here's a nice little summary video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Want to claim they're fake? Give me the blockchain transaction when you win this challenge for 1 BTC:
http://blog.erratasec.com/2016...
You do not, because you cannot, argue with this. You just post insults. Because that's all you can do. You will not, because you cannot, argue against any of the things found in the email. You just ignore them.
Not possible without some form of IT system that performs natural language search, cross referencing and analysis. Even then, it would still need to understand context and present possible leads. So, either the FBI is using an undisclosed Artificial General Intelligence, or they are lying.
Either way, given that the AGI is a lead in a major criminal conspiracy itself, it would point to a deeply corrupt organization.
The media hasn't even talked about the big disagreements between Trump and the Republican congress. Sure, they will work together to repeal the ACA. There are still a sizable number of Republican neocons in Congress. It would be funny to see Trump and the Democrats fighting for peace with Russia.
I want to see Trump win, lose Nevada, and finally load up Yucca Mountain. The waste just has to sit there for a few hundred years for the strontium 90, and cesium 137 to rot away. Then it can be put somewhere more politically palatable.
Not only is this completely illogical, it is a desperate attempt to misrepresent what Snowden says. And if you think that 650,000 emails can be analyzed 60,000 couldn't be over a year and a half, and you're a bigger fucking idiot or a bigger fucking Fraud corrupt motherfucker
That the state department, only a few days ago, told a court it will need 5 YEARS to review only about 30K of Hillary's emails.
So, when the Obama admin wants Hillary "cleared" it can do its own secret review and then publicly announce "nothing to see here!" but when a court wants to see less than 1/20th of the emails, the Obama admin says "that will take 5 years".
Note that the 5 years is an apparently arbitrary number (like the age 26 stay on yer parents insurance part of Obamacare) until you think BOTH numbers through ans see the manipulation:
With the emails: 5 years means: until after Hillary serves one term as president and gets through a re-election campaign.
With Obamacare, it meant his 18-year-old energetic supporters would get through both of his terms of office before Obamacare exploded in their faces and they had to face the full brunt of the bills.
You are being manipulated. Are you dumb enough to fall for it?
Why not someone take the dump, run it through their program and post the time required?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
> Badda bing, easy work.
Not for Trumpites, who first gotta figger out wat tis 'mail thing is about.
You're assuming some intellectual powers, which is highly unfair towards those brain-challenged.
I could have sworn that last Friday Comey said the investigation of these newly discovered emails would take months.
Also, did they determine how they ended up on Weiner's laptop.
You realise to any rational human being who isn't tangled up in the US elections such as myself, you sound like a raving paranoid crackpot who is in severe need of a psychiatrist right?
OMGS THEY TLAK IN CODE, SHE SAID SHE'S GOING TO DINNER WITH HIM TONIGHT, IT MUST MEAN SHE KILLED HIS MUM AND HATES AMERICA!!!!111111
comey is a crook he is deeply tied to the clinton foundation, he was also on the board of HSBC a big money laundering bank used to launder drugs money and to finance international 'groups' . in the 90's he got the clintons off in the whitewatercase. He's so deep into clinton corruption that if they go down he goes down. In july he basically said that anyone else doing what hillary did they wuld go to jail but she won't WTF?
As much as I've supported what Snowden has done, he's not entirely an authority in this case. Anyone can think of database selection parameters to reduce a dataset, but that is assuming the dataset doesn't have false flags. Suppose you drop everyone unknown from the to/from line as step 1. We already know the president used a pseudonym, so we're his emails dropped because it wasn't the public address? How many other pseudonyms were in there that are dropped with a simple selection? It isn't realistic to have someone read all of those so tools are required, but anyone with years of Gmail archives knows that unless things are filed right the first time, it can be hard to find something again.
Also, why on earth did she have a copy of all the emails on a personal computer shared with a spouse? That's a clear violation expicitly given in any agency's security briefing. Merely having that cache is a crime as the emails didn't just download themselves. Not Clinton's crime though so she can't be caught on this one.
It's an obvious attempt at disinformation.
Snowden answers a simple question that everyone semi-skilled in IT knows, how long deduplication takes.
This gets blown up to the retarded conclusion that 650k emails were duplicates. In the process trying to drag Snowdens and Wikileaks reputation through the mud.
This is quite obviously the state propaganda-machine ar work.
We doing clickbait at Slashdot now?
First... querying data is not the same thing as gathering forensic evidence. No one doubts that 650,000 emails can be queried.
Second... 80,000 Hillary emails subtracted from 650,000 still leaves 570,000 emails to go over... IF all 80,000 were duplicates.
Even the smartest systems have trouble searching for "context" in an email. Eventually a pair of eyes must be employed.
Just the forensic procedures, documentation of chain of custody and creating duplicate copies of the drives would have taken 4-5 days.
When, exactly, did he become the main authority of all things computer and hacking? What he did was, indeed, a service to our country, but is he really the go-to person for any and all computer related questions?
Surely there are more authoritative sources out there to answer questions such as these.
If you want to argue honestly, you have to admit the FBI's nuance on this point. I.e. that she didn't lie *to them*. Legally it matters.
While you're at it, it's still not too late to get Trump to keep his word and release his tax returns before polls close... Honesty, lol