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."
... 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.
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.
What?
That you elected a lying bitch instead of a lying asshole?
That you elected someone who has no real accomplishments because the other guy has no real accomplishments?
I'm really trying to see what "rubbing" you're gonna do. My guess, if you're voting for Hillary because you like her lies better than the other lies.
I'll respond to any intelligent response. I am not holding my breath.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Are you stupid? You have to go through the set once with eyeballs to determine if there are emails that are problematic. To determine if there are new emails you simply just run an algorithm that takes five minutes to run. Stupid Trump people are stupid.
Not really. I thought Occupy was an absurd waste of time, and I thought the whole "1%er" nonsense was simply contrived. Not that I don't want to see the wealthy made more accountable, and large corporations brought more firmly under the rule of law, but to imagine a guy like Trump, whose business history has been one of screwing over investors, using every trick in the book to evade taxes, and who is, by definition, one of the Elite, was going to bring the "1%ers" to bear was so ludicrous and laughable that I just have to imagine that most of his supporters are either complete morons or were more likely hoping he'd be so fucking awful that he'd bring the system down (which is absurd, the Founding Fathers built the system to deal with even the most terrible Presidents).
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Of course when you're "Flat broke" (her words) 15 years ago, but are worth over 150 million today, you probably ARE "a champion for the working class", I mean most of us can pull that trick off, can't we. Aren't you worth 10's or 100's of millions.
Because it took that long to go through 33,000 emails.
They didn't have to go through 650,000 this time. They could just analyze the data to see if any were new from the prior set.
Which is exactly what you know, the original fucking article you decided not to read says.
He's commenting on how it's easy to de-duplicate and filter down emails based on some very simple parameters (e.g. "Is this in the existing database?" and "Is this to/from Clinton?") and how that would cull down the number of remaining emails to a reasonable level which a small team could easily sort through.
It doesn't muddy the waters at all. The first process was to go through all the emails and then go back to original sources and find it if this information was ever classified and when, and then hand it off to various other agencies for them to be able to determine if they need to retroactively classify and redact the emails before releasing them under the numerous FOIA requests. The initial part of the investigation also involved determining if the server's security had ever been compromised, which meant a bit of a deep forensic analysis and going through reams of logs. It's much more time-intensive than simply saying, "have we seen this before, is it to/from Clinton, and is it of a personal nature?"
Rawr
That you elected a lying bitch instead of a lying asshole?
As one Republican consultant said in a Politico article, "Given a choice between crooked and crazy, the American people will always vote for crooked."
and we will pity sheeple like yourself for thinking it's ok to have a corrupt felon running your country.
A felon is a person convicted of a felony
Thus, OBJECTION YOUR HONOR!! Reference to facts not in evidence anywhere!
My point is that even though she has been found unofficially not-guilty by the lack of recommendation to indict I still don't trust her.
To further my point: Even though Casey Anthony wasn't found guilty of killing her kids, would you still trust her to babysit your children? Because I wouldn't.
"alt-right revisionists" That's rich. Considering that anyone who disagrees with Clinton is labeled as Alt-right these days. And as far as your comment goes about secret police...well it's clear whose side the secret police is on ;-) But hey, don't let me change your mind and make you the enemy of the Party, Comrade. I hear we're digging some fresh Gulags on an indian reservation in North Dakota.
Love, a Bernie supporter/socialist who is labeled alt right.
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.
There's a third explanation. You don't understand how computers and basic problem solving works.
The 400+ agent review involved someone personally reading and evaluating every email.
The 650k email review involved extracting the small subset of email to/from Clinton, extracting the even smaller subset of emails not in their previous already-reviewed sample, and then reviewing those.
That may have been as simple as going through a few hundred personal emails that weren't part of the initial dump.
I stole this Sig
Precisely the point. Snowden is holed up in Moscow, or somewhere else in Russia, so he is under the complete control of the Kremlin. Assange is in the Ecuador embassy in London, and the only thing keeping him there is the fact that he'd be arrested by the Brits and extradited to Sweden. If Putin was supporting Trump, he'd have vetted anything Snowden said regarding anything involving the elections. He is in no position to control Assange. What Assange is doing is due to his own enmity with Clinton
And time to start trotting out the logical fallacies.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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.
That you elected a lying bitch instead of a lying asshole?
That you elected someone who has no real accomplishments because the other guy has no real accomplishments?
Well. Some accomplishments. Electing someone smart enough to (apparently) get away with killing bunches of people and lots of other illegal stuff over 30 years vs. someone who managed to somehow bankrupt a casino -- even after getting loans from his father and not paying people for all the work they did. Someone smart vs. someone stupid. Someone inclusive vs. someone divisive. Hmm... :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I'm sure it's been rephrased many times in many ways, but the way I know it is "should" rather than "will." People should favor crooked over crazy, but that doesn't always happen.
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 to get off of this "false equivalence" BS. To quote Seth Meyers:
“I mean, do you pick someone who’s under federal investigation for using a private email server, or do you pick someone who called Mexicans ‘rapists,’ claimed the president was born in Kenya, proposed banning an entire religion from entering the U.S., mocked a disabled reporter, said John McCain wasn’t a war hero because he was captured, attacked the parents of a fallen soldier, bragged about committing sexual assault, was accused by 12 women of committing sexual assault, said some of those women weren’t attractive enough for him to sexually assault, said more countries should get nukes, said he would force the military to commit war crimes, said a judge was ‘biased’ because his parents were Mexicans, said women should be ‘punished’ for having abortions, incited violence at his rallies, called global warming ‘a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese,’ called for his opponent to be jailed, declared bankruptcy six times, bragged about not paying income taxes, stiffed his contractors and employees, lost a billion dollars in one year, scammed customers at his fake university, bought a six-foot-tall painting of himself with money from his fake foundation, has a trial for fraud coming up in November, insulted an opponent’s looks, insulted an opponent’s wife’s looks, and bragged about grabbing women ‘by the pussy.’”
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.
Snowden is lying. My son is seven. So good at cyber. Cyber so good. China beating cyber. Hashtag winning. Hashtag crooked Hilary. Cyber.
But which one is which?
From my viewpoint, Trump n Clinton are the same. Crazy AND Crooked.
No kiddin'.
Up until the early 80s, I believe it was still POSSIBLE to have a relatively straight-headed, balanced, and "for the country" person in office. Today, money drives everything. EVERY-THING. It's impossible. I look at it as you vote for the "reality TV guy" and get screwed, or for the "first female in office" and get screwed. No pun intended.
Another possibliity: The software was written in those many months. Now they just have to run the new data through it.
Yes, it does explain it. It does it perfectly. It does so because it explains how they are two entirely different tasks. One was having to actually read emails one by one to see what they say. That is a very slow process. The other is simply comparing emails ro ones you've already read and determining that they are identical. That can be trivially automated, and is very, very fast.
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
The "prior set" were submitted on paper.
If only we had this machine that could take paper and...let's see, what's the word I'm looking for... ah, yes, scan that paper and convert it to a format that can be easily stored on a computer and even converted into searchable data. Now of course they would also need to make this scanning machine small and cheap enough that multiple people could have their own machine, making the process a lot quicker than a single person sitting there scanning each hard copy. Someone really should invent this, it would make life a lot easier.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
As a rebuttal to the specific example, yes. As a rebuttal to the emotion and gut feeling, not so much...
I'm with the GP post... I simply don't trust her. Trump will be held in check by a congress that will refuse to pass whatever hair brained idea he proposes, Clinton will go "House of Cards" and make it happen. They *both* terrify me.
No I won't move if $foo gets elected, nor will I go buy a ton of ammo and guns if $bar gets elected. I am preparing to weather the coming storm as best I can for myself, my kids, and my closest friend and her kid.
I voted for the less adept but MostlyHarmless(tm) Johnson FWIW.
-nB
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
While I can unabashedly attest to Trump being a whiny bitch, I cannot say the same about his being a woman.
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.
In Trump's defense, Atlantic City is failing as a whole and dumping his casino was the best thing he could have done. AC is a disgusting shit hole that can't compete with the infinitely nicer casino resorts right over the boarder in PA; it's dead as a resort town and anyone still trying to pump money into it is a fool.
My point is that even though she has been found unofficially not-guilty by the lack of recommendation to indict I still don't trust her.
To further my point: Even though Casey Anthony wasn't found guilty of killing her kids, would you still trust her to babysit your children? Because I wouldn't.
You did know that the false equivalency gambit has been thoroughly debunked. Right? All the bad things that Clinton might have done is not, in any way, shape or form, the same has all the bad things that Trump has done, in public or on "tape". His record in this area is so deplorable that those Republican leaders who still "support" him won't even say his name. That is pathetic enough, but we haven't even started to compare actual qualifications, and we hardly need to. One candidate has thirty years of public service with any enviable record of success, experience that, by virtually all credible accounts, makes her the most qualified candidate ever to seek the office. The other has a string of spectacular business failures and lawsuits against him and his companies.
> 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.
You are weird. Stop working on forensics and work with attorneys for a week. This is a trivially small e-discovery project. Depending on the parameters, and the amount of money you want to spend, I could do this in two days.
Wait. Who did she kill?
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.
In Trump's defense, Atlantic City is failing as a whole and dumping his casino was the best thing he could have done.
Sure. Although I'm not that covers it. From: A Look Inside Donald Trump’s Failed Taj Mahal Casino:
Though Trump Entertainment Resorts was losing million, Trump personally profited during his tenure, partially thanks to a deal that had his flailing casinos buying up Trump Ice bottled water. Trump walked away having pocketed roughly $82 million during his time there.
And: How Donald Trump Bankrupted His Atlantic City Casinos, but Still Earned Millions:
In one instance, The Times found, Mr. Trump pulled more than $1 million from his failing public company, describing the transaction in securities filings in ways that may have been illegal, according to legal experts.
The rest of the NYT article is pretty illuminating too.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
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.
Trump is way worse than a lying asshole.
1. He is a facist - populist us vs them mentality (muslims), denounces anything said about him as lies & blames others, whips up the armed/racist minority.
2. He hates the constitution. Wants to change 1A, 4A, and sure as hell the 19A.
3. He's a racist - see twitter war with Jon Stewart, see endoresments by David Duke & KKK, see his talk in MN yesterday
4. He's a power abuser - see every business dealing ever, see how he grabs women by the pussy because he can get away with it
5. He wants to take us straight to war - see his comments on why we can't 'bomb the shit out of the Middle East'.
6. He's an exploiter - uses & abuses every religious, ethnic, regional divide he can
7. He hates America - he detests freedom of speech - in others, he hates freedom of religion - in others, he tries to get people to stop Americans from voting - 'help watch out for a rigged election'
He is as bad as any other dictator in the world today. He has single handedly torn America apart to stroke his own ego.
You can hate Hillary all you want, I won't disagree with you, hell I'll probably mostly agree with you. But she is the lesser of two evils, and it's not re-fucking-motely close.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opi...
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
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 "prior set" were submitted on paper.
And you think they can't be converted into digital format (e.g. pdf, txt, etc) along the way but has to stay as paper?
If congress stays GOP (likely), guess who will be 'holding him in check'?
The same idiots that let him take control of their party, and have a psychopath running for president.
So, why would that happen AFTER he gets into office, when it didn't happen before?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
AC was a shit hole when Trump started there. He didn't make it any better. Arguably, he made it worse by working with the mafia to build his casinos rather than building up the local economy to support the area.
WTF are you talking about 'right over the border in PA'? Atlantic City is the other side of New Jersey from PA.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Wait. Who did she kill?
Seriously? If you believe the Republicans and those fostering conspiracy theories: Vince Foster, Seth Rich, everyone in the Benghazi consulate, etc... Just Google: who did hillary clinton kill Of course, there's *no* proof of anything - and if she *did* do all that *and* got away with it, then she's a serious bad-ass and wouldn't we actually want her as President to go up against Putin, etc... :-)
Conspiracy Theorists Won't Stop Accusing The Clintons Of Murder
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
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.
See my note below. Email ultimately is just a text file formatted a specific way. Now if you insist on using MS Exchange this fact is obscured by all the Microsoft-isms they like to do. Not all mail servers treat email as a singular binary object that requires email to be "extracted into a readable format". And to take that a step further - the script deciding if the message is pertinent or not doesn't need to be able to read it the same way a human does - so the full SMTP headers are fine to leave alone. Once you have a collection of text files, then you can apply modern tech (full text indexing / search) to allow keyword searches very quickly. Anything that is a "hit" there needs further human review (perhaps). But that suddenly takes you from 650k emails to maybe a few thousand (perhaps). After all aren't they searching for some very specific points? So they must have a handy set of keywords to be looking for... My own rough calculations suggest the full text indexing could be done is as little as 10 hours for 650k email messages. (I routinely take about 45 minutes to index approx 50k records of product data that covers more data than a typical email - headers and all. 650k / 50k = 13 "batches". 13 * 45 minutes comes in at between 9 and 10 hours to get full text indexing in place. On a single desktop PC, without considering clustering the search servers for faster processing. Throw in a few hours of the actual keyword searches, and then a quick review of any possible hits, and making a judgement call in 8 days becomes VERY feasible.)
Snowden mentioned "hashing" the emails that were not obvious duplicates. That means generating an SHA1 key (or similar) for the entire contents of the email - to/from/cc/bcc/subject/etc. Do that for both the new emails and for the "old" emails. Now anytime you have a matching SHA1 key on both sides, you have a duplicate email. Discard those. Now run the remainder through full text indexing (only about a business day of processing time) and run keyword searches for your specific topics of interest. Flag any results for further review/analysis. Some of that further work may be applying more scripting to remove false positives. The results could be that there are very few results that would impact the previous decision regarding Clinton. And with the apparent manpower that was thrown at this, I'm sure any emails that made it through that filtering were vetted thoroughly. I think the initial declaration by the FBI was the bullshit part, not the time it took to process the "new" emails.
If by celeb you mean "Former NSA Contractor-turned-whistleblower wanted by the US Gov't", then absolutely.
> 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...
I think it might be interesting to see Trump get blocked by a Republican congress.
It's email stored by stock email clients/stock backup of a data. If you are assuming that the messages have been obfuscated in some way then the whole thing is pretty pointless anyway unless you are going for recovering deleted data from a disk style madness.
In which case, check the Message-ID header, was it in the previous set. If so then it's a copy of an email you've already seen. You are not dealing with a tech-savy adversary trying to hide emails - you are dealing with someone who synced a phone to a computer.
You discard the bulk of the emails by looking at the Received headers and seeing that they didn't pass through Hillary's server (since they're probably mostly going to be Weiner in the first place given it was his computer and his mail would be there too).
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.
Crooked you know what to expect, even if you don't like it.. Crazy... well, you just don't know.. and its not like you can "return" him after 15-30 days.. you are stuck with him for 4 years and the fall out from that forever.
God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain Look for http://Thebar.steelbeachca
Executive powers still give a President a lot of ways of fucking things up even with an obstructionist Congress. And I'm not all that certain that the GOP would feel it in their political interests to block Trump. After all, a significant portion of their base think he's the Second Coming.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yeah, AC has been a shit hole for as long as I can remember, but competition from PA casinos is fairly new.
And 'right across the border' means 'not far into PA'; no one cares how far PA is from AC. Plus, NJ is a tiny state and being on the other side means a whole 1 hour drive. But that's really beside the point - for anyone in northern NJ and NYC (aka the gross majority of people who would have gone to AC) the PA casinos are much closer and easier to get to. There's a reason PA casinos have been constantly building and growing while AC casinos fail.
You're missing the point - the GP implied Trump fucked up with the casino - he didn't, he made out well for himself, and dumping the casino was the best thing to do. That doesn't change all the shady dealings he has had in AC (and having done work for Trump Casino, I can assure you the whole thing was just a tax haven). If anything, the point is Hillary is no better at being corrupt than Trump. Or, at least, Trump Casio is a poor example of his failures - there are plenty others to choose from.
Oh, for anyone who can't/won't read the PDF I linked, I just transcribed it. Enjoy:
Let me inherit a few hundred million dollar real estate empire, and I'll show you some grand accomplishments, too.
Seriously. What has he done? Blow up casinos? Run a fake university? He made an image of rich and gets to sell his name. That's all.
The stupid thing is that the thing that got him famous in his supporters eyes is saying "you're fired", NOT hiring people or creating jobs. That's who they think will spur the economy, a guy that fires people. But none of them claim to the the brightest bulbs, now do they?
I answered this in another comment, but in short: "crooked" does not mean malicious, it means self-serving.
Far from it. The Alt-Right is their own beast, not to be confused with the regular Republicans that embraced them and welcomed them into their party in order to give them a chance at... I don't even know, the GOP doesn't much like attempting to govern anymore.
"Her too!" is not a good argument for the facts that Trump is unfit to be in politics much less President.
Either make a case that she's actually worse than the above points, or go cry in your outhouse.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
The conspiracy theory sounds great when you don't actually know anything about the subject.
If you're looking around and everyone else seems crazy, its probably just you.
The secret weapon: an SQL "JOIN" clause!
Quick, patent it before somebody else does! Everything else obvious gets patented.
Table-ized A.I.
Don't we have a tradition of innocent until proven guilty in this country? If Hillary Clinton hasn't been convicted (or even, at this point, charged) with any crimes, how is it fair to say that she's "unofficially not-guilty." Isn't she - by definition - not guilty until she's been proven guilty in a court of law? I mention that last part because "that Facebook post I saw which linked to a blog post which totally showed why Hillary is guilty of personally killing everyone who crosses her" doesn't count as proof of her guilt.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
If Trump gets in and the GOP controls Congress, what's to stop the GOP from going full-on-alt-right? Let's assume that Trump wins by a large margin, he'll have a mandate and will pretty much get to shape the GOP any way he likes. The alt-right will be emboldened and will push for any dissenters in the Republican Party to either fall in line or lose their seats. We saw it recently with the Tea Party. Any GOP politician who didn't toe the Tea Party line was called a RINO and forced out in favor of more extreme candidates. In the "Trump wins by a landslide, GOP controls Congress" scenario, the GOP might not restrict Trump but egg him on in an effort to prove their loyalty to the alt-right movement in the Republican Party.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
A Trump supporter on a forum I manage replied to a comment i made about how Comey could handle all of those e-mails with a "meme image" saying that Comey only said there was nothing there because he found his suicide note in Hillary's e-mails. (Implying that somehow Hillary knew Comey would be looking through those e-mails and planted the note there, I guess.) It's totally ridiculous, but that one image would likely have a lot of people nodding their heads and believing that Comey said there wasn't anything to indict Hillary on because Hillary threatened his life.
It's the same logic that enables the moon landing hoax conspiracy keep the secret from everyone except for the few super-smart conspiracy theorists who see the truth. Hillary and Bill just take the place of the Uber-Conspiracy and they become super-stealthy assassins or mob bosses - depending on which conspiracy you subscribe to - keeping the truth hidden by having a knife to the throat of anyone who could otherwise take them down or even release evidence showing their guilt. Well, everyone except for the plucky conspiracy theorist who sees past the lies, does what big law enforcement can't do, and posts a scathing blog post about how Hillary killed Vince Foster with her bare hands.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Even if all of those weren't true: He has a horrible temper. During the first debate, Hillary brought up Alicia Machado. It was an obvious trap. If this were a Roadrunner cartoon, it would be a road painted on a rock with a big neon sign saying "This is fake! It's a trap! Do NOT try to run into it!!!" And still, Trump ran into the wall at 3am in a series of tweets which, among other things, told people to check out her sex tape. (Which she doesn't have. IIRC, it was someone with a similar name but was obviously not her, but even if it was her wouldn't have refuted the charges she made against him.)
He can't let even the smallest slights go which is a horrible quality for a President. Presidents can be the targets of daily verbal abuse by everyone from US citizens to foreign dignitaries. If the President decides to launch a missile strike because some Prime Minister called him/her a bad name, it will have serious repercussions. How would Donald Trump handle being insulted by a foreign dignitary that he needs to enter into negotiations with? I don't see that ending well at all.
Hillary, on the other hand, has been the target of slings and arrows since her husband was first elected President. She knows how to take the verbal punch, ignore it, and keep doing what needs to be done.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I actually thought that Occupy/1% had a good initial idea - the rich too often pay too little in taxes while the middle class gets the huge tax bill - but they were scattershot in how they protested this and tried to raise awareness. Their message got muddled and lost. It's not enough to identify an injustice that you want to rail against, you need to be organized in how you will protest this to get the maximum bang for the time/effort/money spent protesting.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
You can be liberal and be a critic of Clinton. You can be a sensible conservative and be critical of Clinton. Bernie is critical of Hillary. However when you're spouting "most corrupt candidate ever!" then that's pretty much off the rails. Alt-right is not the same as mainstream conservatives.
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.
Trump has already listed far more things that he's going to do on the first day in office than can be done in 24 hours. He sort of acts like the president has dictatorial powers, so if he gets elected he's in for a big surprise. Even the executive level departments aren't under direct control of the president; he can't eliminate a department by himself, he can't demand that the justice department arrest anyone, and if Obama couldn't have his own Blackberry then Trump certainly won't be able to be using Twitter at 3am.
Some people think that 30 years of unsupported allegations should be enough to convict someone. Which is absurd, but we have too many people who believe any thing they read on the internet (and yes, I can spot the irony in posting this :-). 5 years of Whitewater investigations and nothing came of it. Doesn't mean they're innocent but so far there's no evidence that they're guilty. And the murder stuff, it's pure unadulterated conspiracy hogwash.
So now I'm actually crazy for suggesting anything that might not paint Clinton in the best light?
Yeah no, sorry. Not buying into your school of brainwashing.
Hillary, on the other hand, has been the target of slings and arrows since her husband was first elected President. She knows how to take the verbal punch, ignore it, and keep doing what needs to be done.
This is absolutely untrue!
She's actually been a target since Bill was first elected governor of Arkansas in 1978...
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Ah the delicate alt right snowflakes
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Lost in a cloud of Department of Homeland Security issued tear gas, you mean.
Then you probably had high amounts of comfort and low amounts of empathy at the time. Might have a different opinion if it had been your home fraudulently foreclosed on by the banks or your investments decimated by fraud.
And, to borrow the Democrats warmed over pablum - he's still the Lesser Evil compared to Hillary. Trump is rich because he got money from Daddy. The Clintons are rich because they whored out workers and taxpayers to monied interests - much worse.
Oh, but of course it is, if you plan on voting for her, or even pretending she's the lesser evil.
Pick a subject and she's worse than he is. "But but when did she say she wanted to grab a woman's pussy?" Well, no, she hasn't said that. She has said that Mubarak of Egypt was a close friend of the Clinton family - the same Mubarak that had prisoners tortured with rape. Specifically, by specially trained guard dogs.
Why not someone take the dump, run it through their program and post the time required?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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
In Trump's defense, Atlantic City is failing as a whole and dumping his casino was the best thing he could have done.
Or not invest in a such a poor location in the first place? Surely that would've been better?
Thanks for the correction. That's 38 years. I wonder how many people could hold up under the pressure of being a group's punching bag for that long. Even if you don't care about their opinion, the daily strain of new conspiracy theories, allegations, and outright cries of your guilt would wear on most folks.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
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.
You should try Scott Adams' dehyponotization posting to try to correct your faulty reasoning on which candidate is crazy.
Sigh... When Trump's casino opened in 1984, Atlantic City was still popular. Problems didn't start until PA granted a number of casino licences in 2006 and the casinos opened a couple years later. These new casinos are not only nicer and in much nicer areas, but also actually a lot easier to get to for most people in NJ and NY - tourist traffic to AC quickly dried up causing the economic collapse of the once great ocean town. His was actually the fourth major casino to close since the birth of the PA gambling.
If you have some way of knowing what's going to happen 22 years in the future, I would sure like to know. Otherwise, I'm all for hating on Trump, but his casino closing is a poor example of his failings.
Re: Vince Foster
I was alive, awake, and aware when Vince Foster was killed. The newspapers at the time reported that the government had found that Vince Foster had committed suicide by shooting himself 5 times in the top of the head...
I do not believe any articles contain this bit of information anymore. How odd the world is. It is as if history is being constantly rewritten. As if an individual's memory no longer counts.
Of course, search for Neil Bush nowadays and there is almost no information (any more) linking him directly to stealing three trillion dollars from the American Public. Hell, you will be lucky to even find anyone alive anymore who even remembers the whole Savings and Loan thefts... Sadly, only one Arizona governor went to prison over that... and the American taxpayer is still paying off that three trillion dollars.
Good times. Good times indeed. Remind me why I should participate in this society again?
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
While I don't disagree with all of the bad things that you have to say about Trump, how could you possibly vote for Hillary? lesser of two evils? ROFLMAO.
Hillary represents all that is wrong with America today. Insider privileges, ignoring the rule of law, corruption of the American political system from the top down to the bottom, regulatory capture, backroom deals with supposed enemies, and I could go on and on.
Hillary will NOT take care of the citizens of this country. Her constituents are people with money, regardless of their nationality. If you vote for Hillary, you vote for the continuing tear down of America as a sovereign country.
Does this mean you should vote for Trump? Hell fucking no. Trump will gleefully go along with all of the internal spying, domestic police agency abuse, etc. He may even start world war 3.
Again, this is not a case of voting for the lesser of two evils. They are both greater evils. Vote your conscience. If that means throwing your vote away on a third party or not voting at all, you can at least sleep well knowing that you did not add to the evil by voting for one of the greater evils.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
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.
by definition, one of the Elite
Trump is not an insider. He may be wealthy, he may be of a certain protected class, but he is not an insider. This is why people would be stupid enough to vote for him: Anything is better than the what we currently have.
They may very well find out after Wednesday that things can indeed get worse and that no, anything is not actually better than what we already have.
Since it is a foregone conclusion that either Hillary or Donald will be president, I think it is safe to say that we are all, inside and outside of America, utterly fucked.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Remind me why I should participate in this society again?
Can't speak to that in general, but more specifically:
(Just my $0.02)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
"alt-right revisionists" That's rich. Considering that anyone who disagrees with Clinton is labeled as Alt-right these days. And as far as your comment goes about secret police...well it's clear whose side the secret police is on ;-) But hey, don't let me change your mind and make you the enemy of the Party, Comrade. I hear we're digging some fresh Gulags on an indian reservation in North Dakota.
Love, a Bernie supporter/socialist who is labeled alt right.
FYI, the guy you support thinks you're totally wrong about Hillary.
If you have some way of knowing what's going to happen 22 years in the future, I would sure like to know. Otherwise, I'm all for hating on Trump, but his casino closing is a poor example of his failings.
There's not really enough time to go through an entire business degree here, but the simplified version is that the viability of any business is subject to possible competition. Trump failed to take this into account and that is his failure to bear. Millions of other business people succeed or fail based on similar circumstances, the successful ones take responsibility to navigate such obstacles, while Trump and his fanboys blame everyone else but themselves for their situation.
Trump has over 500 businesses, yet he still performs lower overall than an index fund The illusion is that he is successful, but the fact is he started high and has since trailed the average. Don't believe the hype.
I am no fan boy, I couldn't care less about Trump and his overall business success rate, but you clearly know nothing about AC. In 1984 no one would have ever imagined PA would allow gambling - at this time it was still dominated by a strong religious puritan ethic that barely allowed alcohol sales in the state, much less gambling. Due to the political and economic situation in NJ over the next 20 years, there was a mass exodus into PA, gradually liberalizing the state. A lot of people were burned by this and it's a big issue in NJ.
So, did your business degree give you the ability to see into the future, or just sound like a pretentious ass? If you want to go on about how much your turd sandwich is better than the other guy's, at least try not to sound like a clueless jerk off.
Incredible. I had no idea this happened. Sadly, it's not particularly surprising.
Hassan al-Turabi, the firebrand preacher and speaker of parliament at the time – now he is a fierce critic of the government – told the Monitor after the attack that "Islam is now entrenched" in Sudan.
"The [US] president wanted a target, and on his list Sudan was there," Mr. Turabi said in 1998. "This is a terrorist act against Sudan, a terrorist act."
The effort to neutralize Mr. bin Laden with missiles would instead "create 10,000 bin Ladens," Turabi predicted.
I simply cannot comprehend why people will defend these warmongers, these murderers, who are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people. Not only defend them, but elect them for the position of president.
Hillary's war was Libya. She championed that one. Approx 40,000 dead, the country in shambles, unstable, increased terrorism. People should be marching her into the Hague courts, not to the White House. Witnessing the stupidity of today's voters now completely explains to me why people wound up with murderous dictators throughout history. They're gullible, lazy, emotional, and simply don't care to look any deeper into the issues than what they're told by those who are propped up in front of them and labelled "experts".
In 1984 no one would have ever imagined PA would allow gambling
Here's a tip that has worked for most of the world's successful people, even back in the 80's: Casinos are a risky business, so probably not a reliable investment choice.
So, did your business degree give you the ability to see into the future, or just sound like a pretentious ass?
I don't have a business degree, I just know enough to know that you can't blame all of your failures in business on other people.
If you want to go on about how much your turd sandwich is better than the other guy's, at least try not to sound like a clueless jerk off.
It's not about me, or you, it's about the illusion that Trump is good at business when really his record is below average.
It's all academic now anyway.. Fear, uncertainty and doubt won, the whole world is now a more uncertain place.
I am so going to enjoy rubbing it into Trump supporter's faces on Wednesday.
Yes? As you were saying?
Take that.
I knew she'd lose. The only question was how badly. I expected it to be a lot worse than it was.
Well we're reaping what was sown. They saw to it that the Republicans had the worst possible candidate to run against their rigged candidate. They didn't realize what a real turd... I mean crook she was. I imagine she'll have a nice little cell soon along with her husband and maybe Chelsea. I have a feeling Chelsea is also guilty of violating a bunch of those laws, but we'll see. After all, they put Republicans in jail for the most inconsequential crap. Shutting down a bridge recently. How about violating the espionage act, pay for play, and so much, much more. Don't need to throw the book at her, she already has done the book.
Now for the first time since 1928 the Republicans will run both houses and the Presidency. Maybe we can get something done now. Fix a whole bunch of stuff that's broken. So much was damaged in the past 8 years. The Obama clown couldn't even pass a budget in the 8 years he's been there. It's pathetic the last budget was from GW Bush! You know, the one with the bailout that we keep paying for every year. It's going somewhere, question is where. Obama and his buddies.
I'm posting from the future, and it turns out he was horribly wrong.
I'm posting from the future, and it turns out he was horribly wrong.
Did they abolished the electoral college in the future? Hillary has 1M+ votes in the popular vote so far.
http://time.com/4572295/hillary-clinton-popular-vote-lead/
I thought of that before my response; your quote is (emphasis mine):
Even if we took "always" to mean "vast majority of the time", it's still wrong. In fact, about 24.8% of eligible American voters choose crazy over crooked (and roughly 50% of eligible voters either had their vote suppressed in some manner, or just kept their lazy ass at home. I'm betting on the latter being more prevalent.)
I thought of that before my response; your quote is (emphasis mine):
My quote came from a Republican consultant.
Even if we took "always" to mean "vast majority of the time", it's still wrong. In fact, about 24.8% of eligible American voters choose crazy over crooked (and roughly 50% of eligible voters either had their vote suppressed in some manner, or just kept their lazy ass at home. I'm betting on the latter being more prevalent.)
That's why voting should be a national weekend holiday and made mandatory for all citizens. It's unfair that the future of the country is decided by so few citizens.
Yes, my apologies, I didn't mean to make it out as one you said (I should have written "the quote you referenced is").
I mostly agree. I would like to see all elections that include federal positions be open for a minimum of one week, Sunday-thru-Friday, with the last day being a national holiday where no government services except polling places are open, and all employers are required to give at least one day off during the week beyond that holiday (which could be normal weekend/breaks, but ideally a paid day off even beyond those.)
I hold an individual's self-governance in high regard*, so I think people should have the ability to refuse to vote (though I will chastise them for doing so). If we can implement that extended voting period+holiday, get rid of bad voter ID laws, and turnout is still abysmal, then I'm willing to consider mandatory voting. I could understand mandatory voting more from an anti-coercion standpoint (so people can't be forced to stay home if $NEFARIOUS_GROUP thinks they'll vote the "wrong" way) but would still like to see those other things solidified, first.
* to the extent that it does not negatively impact the lives of others and, no, I don't think not-voting falls into that category