27 ms·
Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter cl
by sangnoir 6y ago
Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter clearly took. Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. I haven't seen any reasonable arguments against these policies, instead I've seen nebulous accusations of biased censorship.
Twitter is clearly okay with the discussion of these emails - no hashtags or keywords are being suppressed: it was a link to a single story that was blocked since it violated stated policy.
Incidentally, the NYT reports that the US intelligence community heard chatter of the GRU using hacked Burisma emails as an October surprise before the NY Post story broke (a trick so nice, they had to do it twice). I guess no one cares for facts anymore, as long as they see patterns that fit their preconceptions
- rayiner 6y agoIf this is hacked emails, doesn’t that prove the article is credible?
- sangnoir 6y agoI'd say the article is self-consistent, but not necessarily credible. I don't think "hack" means literal network intrusion. If the article's own description of the provenance of the information is taken at face value, cloning a hard drive at a repair shop without authorization still qualifies as "hacked", and in violation of Twitter terms.
- Karunamon 6y agoThe "authorization" is provided by the owner of the laptop, which is legally the owner of the shop, since whoever dropped the machine off signed a contract indicating as much.
- whatusername 6y agoSurely you provide authorization to perform a data recovery but not to share the data with the media?
- surge 6y agoWeird the same standard doesn't apply to tax returns by the federal government. Either have principles and stand by them always, or admit you're covering for one side.
- qqqwerty 6y agoThe tax returns were obtained from a credible source, meaning that the documents were almost certainly authentic. Meanwhile, the NY Post has made no effort to verify the authenticity of the hacked material, and it is well known that the GRU will mix false documents when they release hacked material to try and amplify the impact. Also, NYTimes did not disclose any PII in their articles about Trumps taxes. The NY Post couldn't even be bothered to scrub that out. Furthermore, it has been widely reported that Giuliani was being targeted by the GRU to launder disinformation[1]. This article is from December 2019[2]. Here is a quote from the article: "Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) suggested over the weekend that any evidence presented by Giuliani should be scrubbed for possible Russian propaganda..." So there you go. A republican senator, on record. Anyone who has been paying attention was expecting Giuliani to try and stir up an October surprise, and it was widely known that he was probably going to be laundering GRU disinformation. [1] https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/521328-intelligence-officials-warned-trump-that-giuliani-was-target-of https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/521328-intellig... [2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/30/giulianis-ukraine-efforts-are-formalization-rumor-to-trump-pipeline/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/30/giulianis...
- Karunamon 6y agoThis is non-responsive to whether the documents were hacked or not. The tax returns were absolutely hacked. There is no question that those documents were not legitimately obtained.
- patagurbon 6y agoAny subset of it could've been fabricated or modified to for the narrative.
- cmac2992 6y agoFrom my understanding that is what happened in france in 2017
- Natsu 6y agoLet's see if the emails have DKIM validation again. If there's a body hash (bh) parameter, then you can pull the DKIM key from DNS and prove one way or another whether it went through a mailserver with that DKIM private key.
- tootie 6y agoIn the context of Twitter's actions and explanation, it doesn't matter. They aren't trying to ascertain the authenticity. Note the policy is against both hacking and doxxing and this story is doxxing regardless of how the emails were obtained.
- refurb 6y agoThis is the key point. Twitter blocked the NYPost article before doing any sort of investigation. Jack is just trying to justify it after the fact.
- dragonwriter 6y agoJust like the policy change he made to privilege government-connected after an extended period of letting Trump get away with violating Twitter’s supposed rules. For some reason, the Trumpeters never combined about that retrospective justification. The Jack giveth, the Jack taketh away... That's what happens with a free press when you are at first see as a benefit and later a liability to the person who owns a press...
- refurb 6y ago"policy change he made to privilege government-connected after" ???
- CivBase 6y agoHow does this constitute hacking? The repair shop almost certainly retains ownership of unclaimed deviced after some period of time. The shop owns the laptop. The data is theirs to do with as they please and they chose to publish it (at least, that's the story). No hacking necessary.
- sangnoir 6y ago> The data is theirs to do with as they please. No hacking necessary. I'd love to see the jurisprudence on this. If there are any photos, do they also get the copyrights? Can they share any nudes they find? How about that Adobe license? As a non-lawyer, it is clear that owning the medium doesn't mean you own the information on it (or the cloud wouldn't be a thing). If we agree on that, then logically, it is possible to exfiltrate information that does not belong to you without authorization, which I think can be called "hacking".
- CivBase 6y agoOwnership of data is not the same as ownership of publication rights. However, the pictures and emails in question were clearly not copyrighted or licensed. If transferring ownership of a physical data storage device does not constitute transferring ownership of the data stored therein, then I don't know what does. When it comes to the cloud, that sounds more to me like leasing storage rights, but I'm no lawyer.
- nkurz 6y agoHowever, the pictures and emails in question were clearly not copyrighted or licensed. I think you misunderstand US copyright law. With few exceptions, almost all pictures and emails are copyright by whoever took the picture or wrote the email. Is there some reason that these would not qualify?
- CivBase 6y ago> I think you misunderstand US copyright law. I probably do. This is the first I've heard of that. Regardless, the NY Post article in question did not publish any of the pictures and I doubt the same copyright law applies to emails.
- thescriptkiddie 6y agoTheir policy applies to content published on twitter, but does it also apply to linking to (or simply discussing) content published elsewhere? Because twitter has been removing posts and suspending accounts for that.
- sellyme 6y agoLinking to doxxing is in and of itself doxxing, so you're now doxxing people on Twitter. This does not necessarily apply to all other rules (e.g., linking to someone making death threats wouldn't constitute you making death threats), but it definitely would to some (you're not going to last long linking CP). Jack's tweets were clear that "simply discussing" is okay, however.
- kache_ 6y agoIf you don't want to get dox'd.. get better opsec
- 0x262d 6y agoWell that policy is terrible. It doesn't matter if it is in line with one or another bureaucratic policy, it's still censorship.
- centimeter 6y agoTwitter adopted this policy because they know that progressives are more likely to be compromised by leaked information
- cdblades 6y ago...are you suggesting that progressives have more "dirty laundry" than conservatives in general? Or that conservatives are more likely to dox people?
- ars 6y ago> ...are you suggesting that progressives have more "dirty laundry" than conservatives in general? In general yes, that is true. Or said another way: Progressives say different things internally and externally, far more often than Conservative's do. Usually when Conservatives' emails are hacked there is nothing in them that people don't already know. Note: I'm not making any judgement on the content of what they say, just the difference between what they say internally vs. externally.
- Rebelgecko 6y agoOr that conservatives tend to be older and less likely to use technology for storing sensitive photos
- twirlock 6y agoLeftists argue from a position of moral infallibility (and are typically completely blind to how this is their defining characteristic).
- alacombe 6y ago> ...are you suggesting that progressives have more "dirty laundry" than conservatives in general? Yes. For one thing, if there ever collusion in 2016, it came from the Democrats now established pay-for-play policies, selling US influence to the highest bidder. Once again, knowledge of these actions required multiples hack/leaks to be disclosed.
- generj 6y ago
- ecshafer 6y agoI don't think we should ever take the CEO's official explanation of the reason something happened unless its under oath with clear evidence, otherwise its just PR.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- curiousllama 6y agoWhen PR is strategically relevant, the official explanation is a strategic move. So, yes, you should pay attention in this case, even if it's not the whole story.
- kart23 6y agoI dont know, I think this is some sort of thing to protect twitter honestly, in case someone hacks and posts something from Twitter. How is hacking any different from stealing? Surely news stories with stolen and even classified content are allowed, I don't understand why hacking is so different.
- mc32 6y agoSo obviously no Wikileaks or any “sources inside the $agency with access to information” (but with no clearance to leak) cannot be published on Twitter any more, right? No guessing in who poisoned Navalni, etc... Got it!
- cheeze 6y agoI mean, you can logical fallacy all you want here but this isn't what OP said at all. I'm not agreeing one way or another, but holy weak argument.
- adventured 6y agoIt's good to hear we can't publish any leaked information about Trump's tax returns, re the NY Times, a story Twitter intentionally allowed to run at max distribution, along with dozens of prominent anti-Trump stories that ended up being baseless over the last four years which the media happily concocted. Everyone here knows exactly what's going on and it's rotten as can be.
- donmcronald 6y agoWhich publication do you think has better journalistic integrity? NY Post or NY Times? Do you think those screenshots of emails were well vetted given the simplicity of verifying email header info if it had been published?
- andrew_ 6y agoI wouldn't mind the policy if it was enforced equally.
- shrubble 6y agoDid Twitter block the NYT story on Trump's taxes, which they did not have any official authority for having?
- codecrusade 6y agoexactly. bias evident
- ryantgtg 6y agoDo you not know the answer to your question?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bigbubba 6y agoPeople ignore what @Jack says because he has a record of saying dumb shit that doesn't pass the sniff test.
- DeonPenny 6y agoYeh but what about wikileaks, trumps taxes, and so many other story. But even if it was policy the fact they banned the press secretary of the united states should give everyone pause.
- notherthrowaway 6y agoShould the press secretary’s Twitter account get special treatment?
- RonanTheGrey 6y agoYes.
- notherthrowaway 6y agoI figured the rules applied to everyone when they sign the TOS.
- RonanTheGrey 6y agoWhen the internet has a publicly owned space that no private entity controls, you get to make that argument. Until then, platforms like Twitter are the next best thing we have to a public square (and in fact really the ONLY online public square), and that means that when our public political figures speak their voices must be made heard. Arguing otherwise simply justifies using the rules as a sledgehammer to silence voices you don't like. The WH Press Secretary is a very, very loud voice that should be listened to whether you like it or not. She said nothing mean, nothing cruel, nothing divisive or illegal or inciting violence, she linked to a news story by the 4th largest publication in the US. This is about as vanilla as you can get and it is completely unjustifiable to block her account just for that.
- esotericimpl 6y agoTwitter.com is not a public square. It’s a private property and they can kick your ass off whenever they feel like it, for any reason.
- partiallypro 6y agoTwitter's "rules" would have stopped huge stories like The Pentagon Papers, Panama Papers, Watergate, etc from being posted on their platform. The statement read like it was typed up by an intern that didn't communicate with the legal team or any logical person. (edited for clarification)
- krapp 6y ago>Twitter's "rules" would have stopped huge stories like The Pentagon Papers, Panama Papers, Watergate, etc. Only in a universe in which Twitter is the sole means of broadcasting, publishing and communication - but we don't live in that universe, so no, they really wouldn't have.
- partiallypro 6y agoI don't mean they would have literally stopped the entire story from being a story, but that their own rules would have banned the posting of that news on their own platform, even from viable sources.
- krapp 6y agoSure, but it still wouldn't matter. It's not a good argument that Twitter "censoring" content actually has any relevant effect beyond its platform.
- BurningFrog 6y agoListen more to what people do than what they say. There is always a good sounding explanation, especially from those with full time PR people on staff.
- 6nf 6y agoTwitter took down the New York Posts twitter account. 4th biggest newspaper in the country.
- foolinaround 6y ago1) Was this Twitter policy new as in the last few days? 2) If not, how did they treat the NYT's Trump tax papers ( clearly hacked from some sources, since it was not revealed). For all one knows, at the time of release, it could have been fake? 3) Does twitter/FB have processes to identify hacked material? For these reasons, @jack's explanation is not being accepted.
- ausjke 6y agosecond this, twitter's bias did not start with the recent one, it has been a while, quite a while. facebook is no better, google search no better either. someone should be locked up, to avoid further tensions between two sides and who knows, maybe civil war or something alike. People can die because of its biased censorship.
- 75dvtwin 6y agoThis is exactly right. If FB, Twitter or HN apply their Terms of service rules selectively (or that the ToS are biased against specific political candidates or groups or opinions) -- then they are not a neutral platform. If they are not a neutral platform, these companies must not be able to claim protections reserved for neutral platforms (like this section 230). It is the same as a for-profit business must not claim same tax benefits as a Non-profit Charity. If they do, their execs will likely face jail time. Systemic violoaters, would face more jail time.
- intended 6y agoI really hope someone reached out to the NDA protected people working at FB/twitter to establish exactly where the bias lies. We know that despite loud voices arguing about conservative bias it is the opposite, that conservative voices get a pass. https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-fire-employee-conservative-right-wing-breitbart-charlie-kirk-dimaond-and-silk-a9659301.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne... The crowd tangle data shows conservative news being the most powerful when it comes to discussions, but Facebook is saying reach is not the same. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/02142744614/new-study-finds-no-evidence-anti-conservative-bias-facebook-moderation-if-anything-opposite.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/02142744614/new-s...
- mas3god 6y agoIf they actually didnt use those rules to suppress a political faction youd see tens of articles censored about Trumps tax returns, russiagate, snowden, wikileaks, etc. But we dont see that behavior, so theyre clearly censoring to conrtol US politics.
- kyle_martin1 6y agoThis wasn't hacked. It was legally obtained as it was left and became business property after repeated attempts of returning the machine. Jack's response came much after the censorship actions were taken. You have to analyze with timelime. his PR firm told him he needed to do damage control. Moreover why was this policy not applied to Trump's alleged tax return? This is one of many examples one could give. You may be too far in the SF bubble or not have a diverse news list.
- whatever1 6y agoHaving my data in your hard drive does not mean that it allows you to view my my data, unless I specifically I allowed you to do so.
- Karunamon 6y agoIt does, however, mean exactly that if you sign a contract saying "all this stuff belongs to me if you don't pay me and leave it here for 90 days". Most places, from computer shops to car shops, have similar rules regarding abandonment and/or nonpayment.
- kyle_martin1 6y agoThat’s right.
- kyle_martin1 6y agoPlease look into how this data was obtained rather than making up legal stuff to feel you’re on the right side.
- whatever1 6y agoEven if I sell you my hard drive it does not mean that I grant you access to my data. If that was the case we would just have to get some EOL hard drives from Apple/Microsoft/Google etc and get access to their IP.
- johndevor 6y agoThe Steele Dossier was widely spread on Twitter and was debunked.
- shostack 6y agoThat's news to me. Can you cite a credible source for the debunking? I'd love to read more.
- fareesh 6y agohttps://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-10-01/steele-dossier-was-the-fbi-a-victim-of-russian-disinformation https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-10-01/steele...
- seppin 6y agoMany things have been corroborated, nothing has been disproven. https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective https://www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective The idea that it was/is fake is a lie direct from Trump's mouth.
- seppin 6y agoDownvote with reason or response, what a great place for discussion.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
- 013a 6y agoIts one thing to have a policy. Its another thing that the policy is Right (maybe) and that the policy is Fairly Enforced (almost definitely not).
- ayyyolo 6y agoIt wasn't hacked. Why is it ok for ANYONE, let alone a political party and news orgs, to get away with one-sided comms? Just as bad, if not worse than Trump.
- Khaine 6y agoTrump's tax returns were hacked, in that the disclosure was not authorised, yet they were shared freely on twitter. It smells very much like "rules for thee but not for me", which is why people have a problem with it.
- eitland 6y ago> Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses I think the idea is that if this is the rule, a lot of Republicans think it has already been broken a number of times against them.
- bananabreakfast 6y agoHa, against "them". All republicans. As a monolith. As if they are a sports team. This sums up the central problem in modern politics as a whole right here.
- Fishysoup 6y agoIt does tend to be the case in the last years. Being affiliated with the party of Trump and McConnell is a choice, and means condoning their behavior to a certain extent. You can be a conservative and not a Republican, but if you call yourself a Republican you're effectively endorsing corruption and hatred.
- revscat 6y agoThe downvotes are baffling if unsurprising. The Republican Party is based on racism and hatred, and opposes democracy. For some reason this rather obvious fact is a controversial statement to make here. It’s like HN is stuck in 1990’s-era equivocation or something.
- ghomrassen 6y agoI would imagine the opposite side would say the same.
- zalkota 6y agoSupporting democrats is supporting the looting and burning of buildings. Pick your poisons champ!
- 6y ago
- pclmulqdq 6y agoTwitter allowed the NY Times to post about Trump's tax returns after they were leaked by an IRS employee: https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1310474354967359489 https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1310474354967359489 The official policy appears to be flexible when the leaked supports Twitter's political opinions.
- seppin 6y agoUnless the IRS was hacked, this comparison is invalid.
- surge 6y agoWhat hack? The amount of disinformation and lack uninformed opinions is astounding. Try coming back to the middle on politics and reading news sources from one side. The PC was left at a repair shop unclaimed, it then became the shops property. They were explicitly given access to the material, but Hunter never picked it up, this isn't a hack, and far less a violation of privacy than the Federal Government employee's leaking personal tax information which they are legally obligated to keep private.
- seppin 6y agoYes this is the incredible flimsy cover story that Hunter Biden drove 2500 miles from his home to leave a laptop with a random person then never came back for it. This after "US intelligence agencies warned the White House last year that Rudy Giuliani was the target of an influence operation by Russian intelligence, as he gathered information he thought would expose the Bidens." https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/giuliani-biden-ukraine-russian-disinformation/2020/10/15/43158900-0ef5-11eb-b1e8-16b59b92b36d_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/giuliani-bi... Forgive me if i'm fast forwarding past the obvious lies and openly mocking all those who can't do the same.
- seppin 6y agoAs if this needed clarification (it very much did not): https://time.com/5902557/hunter-biden-rudy-giuliani-ukraine/ https://time.com/5902557/hunter-biden-rudy-giuliani-ukraine/
- innocentoldguy 6y agoHunter's laptop wasn't hacked. After abandoning it, the laptop and all its contents became the property of the store owner. This is similar to a storage unit. If you don't pay, the owner is legally justified in taking possession of all your stuff and is not guilty of breaking and entering or theft.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- NeverFade 6y agoThere's no evidence that any actual hacking took place to obtain the Biden emails. The article stated that they were obtained from a laptop negligently left at a repair shop. Twitter just decided to claim that the post is lying, with no evidence and no fact-checking, and then banned the Post Twitter account and every other account that shared the article. At the same time, they allow content like the Panama Papers, Pentagon Papers, multiple Wikleaks, Snowden leaks - which were all obtained by admitted unauthorized hacking.
- xg15 6y agoIf you consider the Snowden leaks the result of "hacking" but the current leaks not, what exactly is your definition of "hacking"?
- Karunamon 6y agoI for one, would specifically exclude the legal owner of a set of data from copying that data and giving it to a third party from the definition of "hacking".
- xg15 6y agoAgreed, assuming there is informed consent - meaning the legal owner was aware of what was happening, was intending to provide the data and was not deceived. Without those conditions, you'd exclude the whole field of social engineering from hacking, which is all about making the owner "voluntarily" copy data to a third party - and is widely regarded a subset of "hacking". Also pending the specific circumstances under which you "own" data, which may not be identical with owning the storage medium, as discussed in other posts.
- avs733 6y agoBecause the us media and public are disarmed by bad faith arguments.
- chenzhekl 6y agoI don't think platforms like Twitter should act like such a gatekeeper. It's like being a rule maker and a judge at the same time, which could lead to abuse easily.
- strathmeyer 6y agoFree speech prevents the US government from acting like gatekeepers, not private publishers.
- croes 6y ago"A spokesman for the Biden campaign, Andrew Bates, said that Mr. Biden’s official schedules showed no meeting between Mr. Biden and the advisor." Sounds different to Biden did not meet the advisor. Overly specific dementi are suspicious. And is GRU using authentic emails or fake ones? Because if they are valid, it doesn't matter who obtained them. Just like when the DNC screwed Bernie Sanders during Hillary Clinton's campaign.
- heurist 6y agoI don't understand why any of this matters. Is it just to paint Biden with a 'corruption' brush? Trump's family has already been shown to have done as much or worse than these claims against Hunter, and Trump's network of hotels have been raking in cash for access (recent NYT story: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/10/10/us/trump-properties-swamp.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/10/10/us/trump-prop...). This is such a strange argument.
- monocasa 6y agoTrump's base doesn't care that he's corrupt. Biden's does. They don't get held to the same standards because they're playing to different audiences.
- croes 6y agoIf Trump is worse doesn't matter. If there is something true about Hunter and Joe Biden, he would be open to blackmail That's a security risk.
- phy6 6y agoThey are trying to drag down Biden by implying he is the person mentioned in Hunters family texts, saying that half of their salaries go to "Pops".
- Nuzzerino 6y ago> Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. Give me a break. The unauthorized leak of Trump's Tax Returns were all over social media and nothing was done about that.
- ycombonator 6y agoTheir policy didn’t stop them from allowing millions of tweets related to unverified Trump taxes, debunked pee dossier and other Democratic talking points. This is straight up election interference.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> This is straight up election interference. How is a domestic firm exercising it's Constitutionally-protected free press rights “interference”?
- chithanh 6y agoTwitter and Facebook are not just any domestic firms, they do control a major part of social media. They may not have a legal responsibility to hold every post to the same standards, but if they enforce their policies selectively on political grounds, that should surely raise some eyebrows. Anyway, if Twitter/Facebook ever had the intention to stop dissemination of that NY Post article, it surely backfired.
- magnusmagnusson 6y agoIt is always hilarious when people pretend there is symmetric application of retroactive rules. "We've always been at war with Eastasia" tier gaslighting.
- roamerz 6y agoHacked meaning something like illegally obtained tax returns? It is clear who twitter is carrying water for.
- frogpelt 6y ago> I guess no one cares for facts anymore, as long as they see patterns that fit their preconceptions How about you? Do you think Donald Trump called white supremacists "fine people" or do you care for facts?
- dude3 6y ago- Can you point me to a link of how this was hacked? My understanding is that the laptop was given to a mac repair place and then they didn't pay for it. I have no idea why someone would do not pay for their repair though. - A lot of people are focusing on the Donald Trump tax returns which were hacked in a way but accepted on Twitter. They have personally identifiable information too as in when you go to the IRS website it asks you for a return's amount as a means of verification etc.
- TwoBit 6y agoSomebody dropped off a laptop and never identified themselves nor was there any paperwork, and the owner happens to be unable to see anybody well enough to recognize them, and this laptop has highly personal and sensitive information, and nobody ever returns for it or inquires about it? How is anybody taking this story seriously?
- jayko 6y ago> How is anybody taking this story seriously? By the fact that Hunter Biden is a crackhead an he probably didn't even remember that. The guy went high to test into the army, the incredulity barrier is lower than you think.
- malwrar 6y ago> Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information The root of the issue here is that Twitter is the one deciding this in the first place. What appears on their platform influences large numbers of people. I know it, you know it, and know it too--influencing people to e.g. buy stuff is how they make money after all. It's not hard to understand why a company with such influence making such large impacts without being accountable to the public scares people, particularly those who evidently think differently than those who run these companies.
- Craighead 6y agoWeird that nobody ever talks this way about ISPs... only politically motivated attacks against technology companies that are in the limelight
- boulos 6y ago> without being accountable to the public Edit (I should have included this), Disclosure: I work at Google Cloud and have worked with folks at Twitter (but never their policy teams or anything). I would say that compared to many cable news sources, the mean time to response of Twitter and Facebook is actually better. No media company is perfect. Unfortunately, no media company is particularly accountable to the public (anymore). It’s fair (right?) to be concerned about control of media. I think it’s less clear that Twitter is less accountable, less responsive, or more impactful than other major media sources.
- fit2rule 6y ago>intelligence community heard chatter + >see patterns that fit their preconceptions = ++good; // badstory rectify
- wang_li 6y agoIt wasn’t hacked. It was left at a computer repair shop then never picked up or paid for.
- m0zg 6y ago> this material was hacked False. Laptop became the property of the repair shop when nobody paid the bill or turned up to pick it up.
- LdSGSgvupDV 6y agoGood policy. Sucked execution for different norm.
- Consultant32452 6y agoThe materials were not hacked. They were abandoned at the repair shop and therefore lawfully came to be owned by the repair shop.
- cm2187 6y ago1) the emails weren't hacked 2) the NYT articles about Trump's tax returns that were obviously obtained illegally weren't given the same treatment. 3) apparently tweets were also blocked based on hashtags: https://twitter.com/ChrisGolas/status/1316806523243225095 https://twitter.com/ChrisGolas/status/1316806523243225095
- krimeo 6y ago> 2) the NYT articles about Trump's tax returns that were obviously obtained illegally weren't given the same treatment. This, the unbelievably biased treatment of this throughout the media and social media and good old qui bono tells me all I need to know. Everything else is just technical details.