- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Did the FBI ever confirm that the Russians hacked the DNC?
Posted on 6/6/18 at 12:50 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Posted on 6/6/18 at 12:50 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
I have NEVER heard of the FBI not taking physical custody of computer in a hacking case. EVER.
This is how those things are typically handled. The FBI takes physical custody of the server and then mirrors the hard drive(s) and puts the original server in storage and runs a forensic analysis on the copy. Because having physical custody of the unmanipulated original hard drive is THAT important when making a case.
That and the all important "chain of custody" that must be established for any evidence in a criminal investigation to proceed to trial.
Think about it. The FBI investigated a crime and chose to proceed in such a way that would be inadmissible.
0
Posted on 6/6/18 at 12:50 pm to TeLeFaWx
Yet they spied with hard/soft assets on Trump campaign, should make every American pissed....
Posted on 6/6/18 at 12:50 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Did the FBI ever confirm that the Russians hacked the DNC?
I imagine they had it confirmed by the fall of 2015 *when the FBI told the DNC they were being hacked*.
Golly gee how did the FBI know about it before the DNC and without the benefit of having physical access to Muh Server?
Posted on 6/6/18 at 12:58 pm to Decatur
quote:
Golly gee how did the FBI know about it before the DNC and without the benefit of having physical access to Muh Server?
So they knew about a hacking but maybe not all hacking on that server, which is fricking why your retarded argument is retarded.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:03 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:Good enough for me. The entire Trump campaign is guilty.
"yes, maybe"
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:04 pm to Jbird
quote:
So they knew about a hacking but maybe not all hacking on that server, which is fricking why your retarded argument is retarded.
They knew about APT 29 at that time. APT 28 didn’t gain access until March 2016.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:07 pm to Decatur
quote:So.
They knew about APT 29 at that time. APT 28 didn’t gain access until March 2016.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:12 pm to McChowder
quote:
Negative. There was no mention of emails at all per Downer. Someone in the FBI purposely leaked false info to the press about that which seems to be a reoccurring theme.
Thanks for mentioning this. This is why I said, "(BTW, Andrew Downer is now denying this)" in my OP.
I was just going with the original FBI claim which is now apparently a big lie.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:19 pm to GumboPot
Nope, they just took the DNC's and Crowdstrike's word for it. Computers were not made available to FBI for examination.
This post was edited on 6/6/18 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:19 pm to GumboPot
And the dnc servers were conveniently hacked just a day or two AFTER Mike Rogers put a stop to the NSA database “about queries” that were being illegally used by the fbi.
Sounds suspiciously like they lost their access to the info they’d been illegally obtaining for months, so they planted a “server hack” theory in order to kickstart an investigation that would allow them to obtain the FISA warrants and continue on with their spying....
Sounds suspiciously like they lost their access to the info they’d been illegally obtaining for months, so they planted a “server hack” theory in order to kickstart an investigation that would allow them to obtain the FISA warrants and continue on with their spying....
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:20 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
quote:
Nope, they just took the DNC's and Crowd Strike's word for it. Computers were not made available to FBI for examination.
And we are here millions and millions of dollars later because the FBI will not verify the DNC hack.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:25 pm to GumboPot
Do you purposely keep yourself in ignorance in order to push your politics?
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:26 pm to McChowder
quote:
There was no mention of emails at all per Downer.
Downer has clarified that (1) they weren't drunk but were having their discussion over drinks and (2) it was "dirt", not e-mails that were mentioned.
Conflicts NY Times original reporting from an anonymous source.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:29 pm to GumboPot
quote:
And we are here because the FBI trust Hillary IT contractor Crowdstrike.
And is sworn into fact and promoted by CNN and all the rest.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:30 pm to Decatur
quote:
Do you purposely keep yourself in ignorance in order to push your politics?
You and your ilk are the ones in willful ignorance. Can you name one time that the FBI just took someone's word for evidence, other than in this case?
Of course you can't. Imagine if you were accused of rape and the woman told police, I had a rape kit done and this report says it was Decatur and the police just looked at that report and said "yep we agree Decatur is the rapist" you would be , rightfully, livid. And more importantly that evidence would ever see the inside of a court room. And THIS is why no one will EVER be charged with hacking that server, because A) the FBI has no idea who, if anyone , hacked that server, AND they couldn't prove it even if they did. Because they did not examine the server themselves.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:32 pm to Stuttgart Tiger
quote:
it was "dirt"
Any proof of dirt on Clintons gets one two bullets to the back of the head suicided.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:32 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Blah blah ATP28 blah blah Crowdstrike blah blah signed Recatur.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:34 pm to Jbird
————————————————
That count Wasserman Schulz refused to cooperate and hand over information and servers. The FBI believes the DNC was hacked by foreign operatives but lacked cooperation by the DNC to figure out who.
————————————————
So the FBI decided to spy on the Trump campaign....
Makes perfect sense.
That count Wasserman Schulz refused to cooperate and hand over information and servers. The FBI believes the DNC was hacked by foreign operatives but lacked cooperation by the DNC to figure out who.
————————————————
So the FBI decided to spy on the Trump campaign....
Makes perfect sense.
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:46 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
because A) the FBI has no idea who, if anyone , hacked that server, AND they couldn't prove it even if they did. Because they did not examine the server themselves.
Yet in the fall of 2015 the FBI contacted the DNC and told them that they were being hacked by “The Dukes” aka APT 29. They made this determination without having physical access to DNC servers and before the DNC had any clue they had been hacked.
How do you think the FBI was able to do that?
Posted on 6/6/18 at 1:48 pm to Decatur
The FBI asked for the severs and were told NO.
Page 2 of 3
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News