New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

News I Never Heard....how about you?

D

Deleted member 21794

Guest
You indict them because they committed crimes against the USA.

They didn't "show up", they didnt turn themselves in. They wanted discovery, which contains sources and methods, turned over to the lawyers, which would end up in the hands of the former KGB.

Of course we aren't going to do that.

Do you hate your country or something?
Their attorneys showed up and demanded a speedy trial. Mueller then immediately began stalling. Why do you hate due process?
 

Spamature

President
More proof you don't read or think about it if you do.

Intrinsic metadata in the publicly available files on WikiLeaks demonstrates ....

Don't you think it's time you recused yourself?
And who made these file publicly available ? Wikileaks perhaps ? If so they control what is in the metadata before they released them. It was there's to freely alter before they became publicly available.

To edit the metadata on image files, do the following:
  1. Right-click the file and select Properties.
  2. In the image properties, click on the Details tab.
 

Boca

Governor
And who made these file publicly available ? Wikileaks perhaps ? If so they control what is in the metadata before they released them. It was there's to freely alter before they became publicly available.

To edit the metadata on image files, do the following:
  1. Right-click the file and select Properties.
  2. In the image properties, click on the Details tab.
Wow...what a find!

Now you've shown that Assange could have manipulated the metadata for several properties, none of which have anything to do with whether the file was downloaded on the internet on put on thumb driv

Sorry but I have to go with a highly ranked cyber guru from the NSA that you are implying submitted a false afadavit to a court of law.
 
Last edited:

Spamature

President
Wow...what a find!

Now you've shown that Assange could have manipulated the metadata for several properties, none of which have anything to do with whether the file was downloaded on the internet on put on thumb driv

Sorry but I have to go with a highly ranked cyber guru from the NSA that you are implying submitted a false afadavit to a court of law.
Path defines the location of a file.

I don't have any idea what he submitted.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
And who made these file publicly available ? Wikileaks perhaps ? If so they control what is in the metadata before they released them. It was there's to freely alter before they became publicly available.

To edit the metadata on image files, do the following:
  1. Right-click the file and select Properties.
  2. In the image properties, click on the Details tab.
I don't think you can change the date information. The fact is that they started off with a conclusion and then constructed a scenario that fit. The fact is that if the hackers had access to the system they could run a program to extract email to a local drive on the email server. They could then ZIP the extracted email and copy the .ZIP file to their own PC, UNZIP the email and copy to a thumb drive...now the time stamps don't tell you a damned thing about internet speed or anything else.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
So, you're contending that Guccifer boarded a plane halfway around the world, then gained entrance to the US on some sort of visa and then to DNC headquarters after hours with a thumb drive?
Where is the evidence that the emails were copied directly from the DNC email server on to a local USB connected thumbdrive? That is simply impossible to know.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
More proof you don't read or think about it if you do.

Intrinsic metadata in the publicly available files on WikiLeaks demonstrates ....

Don't you think it's time you recused yourself?
Metadata which tells you nothing at all.
 
Top