WSJ: GOP Operative Sought Clinton Emails from Russian Hackers, Implied Flynn Connection

a reply to: kosmicjack

No, it was the principal of the story, Peter Smith, who died last month. I don't know that it contributes to the murkiness much and I would bet that the WSJ reporter taped all on the record conversations. However, it does of course mean that if Mr. Smith wasn't interviewed by investigators before his death, it's obviously out of the question now.

Like I said, if he was somebody claiming a Clinton affiliation, I think we can all imagine how quickly many posters would jump to speculate that he'd been murdered.

originally posted by: Violater1
a reply to: theantediluvian
How convenient that his source, Peter Smith, 81-year old man died a week and a half after their interview.
www.vox.com...
This is just a new DNC spin on using dead voters.
Pffff, more fake news.

Mods, HOAX bin please.

So when a source against Trump dies its "convenient" because you wanted to investigate it, yet when a source against Clinton dies its "she murdered him".

You are so wrapped up in your own lies you've lost a grasp on reality and balance. Blindly denying anything that could possibly hurt your chosen position.

Problem I see first is its not illegal to try to get something from hackers. Releasing that information might be different. However if they never got it there couldn't be an issue. This article was I suspect fake news. Notice they keep everyone out of legal trouble but yet play to a conapiracy. Means they cant be sued because they can all ways claim there was nothing illegal mentioned. But at the same time feed the base so they can believe something happened.

Skunk Works.

*]quote[*
The FBI recovered most of her deleted emails
*]/quote[*

a reply to: xuenchen



The US is the first country to offer data backup for free to its citizens.

originally posted by: Violater1
a reply to: theantediluvian
How convenient that his source, Peter Smith, 81-year old man died a week and a half after their interview.
www.vox.com...
This is just a new DNC spin on using dead voters.
Pffff, more fake news.

Mods, HOAX bin please.

Right? It's so out of the ordinary that an octogenarian would just die like that. Weird.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: kosmicjack

No, it was the principal of the story, Peter Smith, who died last month. I don't know that it contributes to the murkiness much and I would bet that the WSJ reporter taped all on the record conversations. However, it does of course mean that if Mr. Smith wasn't interviewed by investigators before his death, it's obviously out of the question now.

Like I said, if he was somebody claiming a Clinton affiliation, I think we can all imagine how quickly many posters would jump to speculate that he'd been murdered.

If a conspiracy theorist is worth their salt, they would say that the whole story is in reality a 'nothing burger' that the left is pushing, and that the Clinton cabal had Smith killed to make it look like Trump handles loose ends just like Hillary does.
So there.

I brought this headline to another thread last night.

My issue with this is that James Comey said the Clinton server had never been hacked so the chances of anybody having those deleted emails are well...less than slim.
But that doesn't change the action of this guy seeking them to provide them to Mike Flynn.
He's dead and Mike sure can say I never heard of the guy.

But he hasn't as far as I know.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
I brought this headline to another thread last night.

My issue with this is that James Comey said the Clinton server had never been hacked so the chances of anybody having those deleted emails are well...less than slim.
But that doesn't change the action of this guy seeking them to provide them to Mike Flynn.
He's dead and Mike sure can say I never heard of the guy.

But he hasn't as far as I know.

The FBI has them already.

a reply to: Umberto

Careless is a Comey indictment word because he COULDN'T prosecute her.
And careless isn't a crime.
Oh snap...

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Yes that is collusion.
Now whether it happened or not is another story but yes the action you describe would be collusion.
And using the information against clinton by seeking someone who would publish them is also collusion. And here it doesn't even matter if they were real.
The mens rea is nefarious.
That means the intent was to harm.

a reply to: flatbush71

No it was not.

a reply to: Kettu

Yes we did see this over and over during the campaign.
It may even been the reason he tweeted those disgusting g comments.
To get everybody talking about this and not the connection to trumps team looking to get info for the Russians to use against Hillary.
The money trail looks hotter actually.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

He was quite proud of his attempts it was reported.

a reply to: kosmicjack

The man the story is about died ten days after telling his story.
Back in March I think.

If a server is illegal, is it illegal to hack it ?
Would that be like a drug dealer calling the cops and saying that someone stole his stash?

originally posted by: JHumm
If a server is illegal, is it illegal to hack it ?
Would that be like a drug dealer calling the cops and saying that someone stole his stash?

Only to tell the cops afterwards, GTFO you don't touch my stuff, I'll have a private looking after them.

How many people in the US are able to tell the FBI NOT to do its job ?

didnt wikileaks admit to leaking the dnc emails?
didnt wikileaks also say the source was NOT russian?

jesus you people want to erase assange from history now?

a reply to: dragonridr

Isn't it like receiving stolen goods?
No I'm really asking.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

None.
The FBI were fine with crowd strike doing it.
Their only minor issue was having to wait for it.
They got everything they needed from crowd strikes report because well that's what crowd strike does.... computer forensics.
No problem except of course to the conspiracy minded. Ya know wut ah mean Vern?