4 ms·

I don't believe the source because they're known liars. I definitely don't believe the story that a laptop with Ukrainian emails was left in a DC repair shop an

I don't believe the source because they're known liars. I definitely don't believe the story that a laptop with Ukrainian emails was left in a DC repair shop and then given to Trump's personal propagandist lawyer Rudy Guliani. Also they're not publishing the emails headers as explained here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780927 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24780927

wdn 6y ago
But you believe Clinton can just delete the email and gone forever?
0xy 6y ago
Even if Guliani got the source from Russian intelligence, that does not mean the emails are automatically not authentic. Does it mean the Russians are interfering? Probably. Does it mean their evidence of corruption is void? Not really. If this is the Russians (unproven speculation on your part), it does not mean the emails are not authentic.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  Two organizations have these supposed emails, Fox and NYPost. They could mathematically prove their legitimacy by simply posting the entire raw messages, with headers. DKIM was active at the time these messages were supposedly sent, so if the signatures match up, authenticity is confirmed. The fact that this hasn't been done is concerning, unless it's being sat on for future impact.. the "drip drip drip" method of political bombshell news isn't a new tactic. If we're still here in a week with nothing other than screenshots, we can probably write the messages off as frauds. I'm withholding my judgement for a few days.
  - 0xy 6y ago
    You're assuming they have the emails in the raw form. It's possible they just have PDFs and not the full content. You're also assuming Fox and NY Post have journalists on staff who know what DKIM is, let alone how to verify it's genuine. They're journalists, not CompSci majors. The "drip drip" is an intentional strategy, of course. This smells like a setup to me. They leak the lukewarm email, get a denial from Biden, then leak a smoking gun that cannot be denied (speculation).
    - koolba 6y ago
      Care to place a bet on whether anybody at tomorrow's Biden townhall on ABC will be allowed to^W^W^W ask about any of this?
  - rlanday 6y ago
    I think you might be overestimating the level of technical sophistication at play here—if you asked me “how can we verify that these emails are real,” I might’ve been able to come up with this idea, but it certainly wasn’t the first thing that jumped into my head reading the article, and I doubt NYPost has anyone on staff who thought to do this either (unless perhaps verifying leaked emails is something they do regularly?).
    - Karunamon 6y ago
      I wouldn't trust NYPost to have that knowledge, fair. Fox, though.. Really though, even if DKIM wasn't a thing, there's little-to-no reason to only post screenshots if the actual raw files are available.
    - millstone 6y ago
      There is no indication of ANY attempt (technical or not) to verify that the emails were real. They did not even perform the basic due diligence of asking the Biden campaign to comment prior to publication.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

wdn 6y ago

But you believe Clinton can just delete the email and gone forever?

0xy 6y ago

Even if Guliani got the source from Russian intelligence, that does not mean the emails are automatically not authentic. Does it mean the Russians are interfering? Probably. Does it mean their evidence of corruption is void? Not really. If this is the Russians (unproven speculation on your part), it does not mean the emails are not authentic.

Karunamon 6y ago
Two organizations have these supposed emails, Fox and NYPost. They could mathematically prove their legitimacy by simply posting the entire raw messages, with headers. DKIM was active at the time these messages were supposedly sent, so if the signatures match up, authenticity is confirmed. The fact that this hasn't been done is concerning, unless it's being sat on for future impact.. the "drip drip drip" method of political bombshell news isn't a new tactic. If we're still here in a week with nothing other than screenshots, we can probably write the messages off as frauds. I'm withholding my judgement for a few days.
- 0xy 6y ago
  You're assuming they have the emails in the raw form. It's possible they just have PDFs and not the full content. You're also assuming Fox and NY Post have journalists on staff who know what DKIM is, let alone how to verify it's genuine. They're journalists, not CompSci majors. The "drip drip" is an intentional strategy, of course. This smells like a setup to me. They leak the lukewarm email, get a denial from Biden, then leak a smoking gun that cannot be denied (speculation).
  - koolba 6y ago
    Care to place a bet on whether anybody at tomorrow's Biden townhall on ABC will be allowed to^W^W^W ask about any of this?
- rlanday 6y ago
  I think you might be overestimating the level of technical sophistication at play here—if you asked me “how can we verify that these emails are real,” I might’ve been able to come up with this idea, but it certainly wasn’t the first thing that jumped into my head reading the article, and I doubt NYPost has anyone on staff who thought to do this either (unless perhaps verifying leaked emails is something they do regularly?).
  - Karunamon 6y ago
    I wouldn't trust NYPost to have that knowledge, fair. Fox, though.. Really though, even if DKIM wasn't a thing, there's little-to-no reason to only post screenshots if the actual raw files are available.
  - millstone 6y ago
    There is no indication of ANY attempt (technical or not) to verify that the emails were real. They did not even perform the basic due diligence of asking the Biden campaign to comment prior to publication.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]