Rudy Indicted.....Bout Time.

[Blisterfinger]

This is the point. You are bitching because you wanted all this Biden crime dirt tossed out there a month before the election, aka October surprise. All this evidence of crimes that you wanted “exposed” wasn’t taken seriously and now you’re bitter. But my argument is that if this evidence really existed and there was proof of all these crimes then why do we not see after years and years any court cases or impeachment hearings?

My thoughts are that all this evidence you claim is there isn’t really there. You wanting to spread it is quite literally propaganda. You should be more concerned with verifying the evidence and taking it to court… not Twitter.

You don't even know what propaganda is LOL

 

[Slade3200]

That laptop is proof that Joe Biden is an awful awful person. You censored the story about it going into the election and propagandized information discrediting it. The American people had the right to know and your dishonest ass suppressed the story. You are still censoring the information coming from that laptop . My Justice is coming..

I didn’t censor the story nor did the government. It was ignored because it wasn’t verified or quite frankly believable. It was a tool for Rudy and Trump to fling dirt and propaganda before an election. And the public saw right through it.

The shit on there still isn’t verified or else we would be seeing court cases and an impeachment. But we don’t see that, do we. Take a hint

 

[Slade3200]

You don't even know what propaganda is LOL

I’m watching you try and spread propaganda right now. You can’t explain the lack of court cases and you can’t acknowledge the lack of evidence holding up an impeachment hearing. Cause it shuts down your argument.

 

[Blisterfinger]

I didn’t censor the story nor did the government. It was ignored because it wasn’t verified or quite frankly believable. It was a tool for Rudy and Trump to fling dirt and propaganda before an election. And the public saw right through it.

The shit on there still isn’t verified or else we would be seeing court cases and an impeachment. But we don’t see that, do we. Take a hint

the laptop story ,which was verified! was ignored and censored I've proven that over and over again. Censored and ignored because it was true and would have damaged your candidate. A First Amendment violation for the FBI to have went into Twitter and influenced them. Are you okay with that? You keep clinging to the notion that it was some kind of disinformation when it wasn't. Keep lying to yourself just don't lie to us.

 

[Blisterfinger]

I’m watching you try and spread propaganda right now. You can’t explain the lack of court cases and you can’t acknowledge the lack of evidence holding up an impeachment hearing. Cause it shuts down your argument.

Oh? What propaganda am I spreading? That the laptop was real and contained damaging information that sent the FBI into a tailspin that they had to suppress the truth? Go ahead and explain how I'm spreading propaganda. Your side always accuses the other of what you are doing. LOL how dishonest

 

[Rambunctious]

Rudy Coffee

Rudy Coffee Brand - Artisan Roasted organic specialty grade Arabica coffees. Purchase our fresh roasted coffees online. Rudy Morning Coffee-medium Roast - Rudy Bold Coffee-dark roast - Rudy Swiss Water Process Decaf- 99.9% caffeine free

rudy.coffee

 

[Slade3200]

Blisterfinger Why did make your reply in post #224 look like a quote coming from me?

Edit it

 

[Slade3200]

Oh? What propaganda am I spreading? That the laptop was real and contained damaging information that sent the FBI into a tailspin that they had to suppress the truth? Go ahead and explain how I'm spreading propaganda. Your side always accuses the other of what you are doing. LOL how dishonest

You say with such blind faith. You haven't seen the computer or run a forensic analysis. You are just believing things your read that support your political agenda. There have been forensic reports that say everything from its a mess with tons of edits made to its all authentic and unmanipulated.

Don't just believe what you hear in the echo chamber like a puppet. If there is evidence of crimes and they are verified then there will be court cases. The fact that there isn't means that there is nothing to take seriously at this point.

----
In March 2022, The Washington Post published the findings of two forensic information analysts it had retained to examine 217 gigabytes of data provided to the paper on a hard drive by Republican activist Jack Maxey, who represented that its contents came from the laptop. One of the analysts characterized the data as a "disaster" from a forensics standpoint. The analysts found that people other than Hunter Biden had repeatedly accessed and copied data for nearly three years; they also found evidence that people other than Hunter Biden had accessed and written files to the drive, both before and after the New York Post story.[4] In September 2020, someone created six new folders on the drive, including with the names "Biden Burisma", "Big Guy File", "Salacious Pics Package" and "Hunter. Burisma Documents". One of the analysts found evidence someone may have accessed the drive contents from a West Coast location days after The New York Post published their stories about the laptop.[4]

Using cryptographic signatures, one analyst verified that 1,828 of the roughly 129,000 emails on the drive came from the indicated email accounts of origin, suggesting they were authentic and had not been tampered with. The other analysis verified nearly 22,000 emails using similar methods, after overcoming technical issues the first analysis could not resolve. The analysts said emails from Burisma, where Pozharskyi was an advisor, were likely authentic but cautioned that if Burisma had been hacked, it would be possible for hackers to use stolen cryptographic signatures to forge emails that would pass as authentic. The New York Times reported in January 2020 that Russian military intelligence had hacked Burisma beginning in November 2019; a co-founder of the firm that discovered the hacking said Russians were stealing email credentials. Both analysts acknowledged that cryptographic signatures are not a perfect way to authenticate emails, as some email services do not implement the technology as rigorously as others. About 16,000 of the 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures came via Google, which rigorously implements the technology. The analysts noted that cryptographic signatures can only verify that an email originated from a certain email account, but not who controlled that account; there are other means for hackers to commandeer email accounts. According to the Washington Post, "Some other emails on the drive that have been the foundation for previous news reports could not be verified because the messages lacked verifiable cryptographic signatures."[4]

Among the emails that The Washington Post was able to authenticate was the Pozharskyi email that formed the basis of the New York Post's original article. An email referencing "10 held by H for the big guy?", a possible reference to a rejected proposal to give Joe Biden a 10% share of a Chinese deal his son was negotiating, was not authenticated, though a recipient of the email publicly vouched for its authenticity.[4]

One of the analysts found that timestamps on documents and operating system indexes matched, though he noted hackers could forge timestamps in undetectable ways. The analysts also noted that repeated access to the drive resulted in logs and other files used by forensic analysts to examine system activity being deleted. Neither analyst found evidence emails or other files had been manipulated by hackers, nor could they rule out that possibility.[4][64]

In reference to a cache of emails allegedly coming from the Hunter Biden Laptop, Matt Tait, a former information security specialist for the GCHQ (UK's Government Communications Headquarters), told CyberScoop, "it is clear the cache isn't in its original form".[65][66][67]

In November 2022, CBS News published the results of a forensic analysis they commissioned of a copy of the laptop data Mac Isaac initially handed to federal investigators in 2019. The analysis, conducted by Computer Forensics Services, found data, including over 120,000 emails, "consistent with normal, everyday use of a computer", found "no evidence that the user data had been modified, fabricated or tampered with", and found no new files created on the laptop after April 2019, when Mac Isaac received the laptop. The chief technology officer of Computer Forensics Services added: "I have no doubt in my mind that this data was created by Hunter Biden, and that it came from a computer under Mr. Biden's control".[3] Also on November 21, CBS News published the first photograph of the damaged Macbook Pro, which had been provided to them by Hunter Biden's legal team.[3]

According to reports on January 16, 2024, new filings by the U.S. Department of Justice's special counsel, headed by David C. Weiss, appear to be the first public confirmation of the laptop's authenticity by the DOJ. The filings refer to the laptop connected to Hunter Biden stating, “the defendant’s Apple MacBook Pro, which he had left at a computer store.”[68]

 

[Blisterfinger]

Blisterfinger Why did make your reply in post #224 look like a quote coming from me?

Edit it

Blisterfinger Why did make your reply in post #224 look like a quote coming from me?

Edit it

Oops sorry yeah I don't know why it does that sometimes. I'll be responding and it will flip away from where I am and then go back and put me in your field. I don't know why. I acknowledge that I said this

the laptop story ,which was verified! was ignored and censored I've proven that over and over again. Censored and ignored because it was true and would have damaged your candidate. A First Amendment violation for the FBI to have went into Twitter and influenced them. Are you okay with that? You keep clinging to the notion that it was some kind of disinformation when it wasn't. Keep lying to yourself just don't lie to us.

 

[Blisterfinger]

You say with such blind faith. You haven't seen the computer or run a forensic analysis. You are just believing things your read that support your political agenda. There have been forensic reports that say everything from its a mess with tons of edits made to its all authentic and unmanipulated.

Don't just believe what you hear in the echo chamber like a puppet. If there is evidence of crimes and they are verified then there will be court cases. The fact that there isn't means that there is nothing to take seriously at this point.

----
In March 2022, The Washington Post published the findings of two forensic information analysts it had retained to examine 217 gigabytes of data provided to the paper on a hard drive by Republican activist Jack Maxey, who represented that its contents came from the laptop. One of the analysts characterized the data as a "disaster" from a forensics standpoint. The analysts found that people other than Hunter Biden had repeatedly accessed and copied data for nearly three years; they also found evidence that people other than Hunter Biden had accessed and written files to the drive, both before and after the New York Post story.[4] In September 2020, someone created six new folders on the drive, including with the names "Biden Burisma", "Big Guy File", "Salacious Pics Package" and "Hunter. Burisma Documents". One of the analysts found evidence someone may have accessed the drive contents from a West Coast location days after The New York Post published their stories about the laptop.[4]

Using cryptographic signatures, one analyst verified that 1,828 of the roughly 129,000 emails on the drive came from the indicated email accounts of origin, suggesting they were authentic and had not been tampered with. The other analysis verified nearly 22,000 emails using similar methods, after overcoming technical issues the first analysis could not resolve. The analysts said emails from Burisma, where Pozharskyi was an advisor, were likely authentic but cautioned that if Burisma had been hacked, it would be possible for hackers to use stolen cryptographic signatures to forge emails that would pass as authentic. The New York Times reported in January 2020 that Russian military intelligence had hacked Burisma beginning in November 2019; a co-founder of the firm that discovered the hacking said Russians were stealing email credentials. Both analysts acknowledged that cryptographic signatures are not a perfect way to authenticate emails, as some email services do not implement the technology as rigorously as others. About 16,000 of the 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures came via Google, which rigorously implements the technology. The analysts noted that cryptographic signatures can only verify that an email originated from a certain email account, but not who controlled that account; there are other means for hackers to commandeer email accounts. According to the Washington Post, "Some other emails on the drive that have been the foundation for previous news reports could not be verified because the messages lacked verifiable cryptographic signatures."[4]

Among the emails that The Washington Post was able to authenticate was the Pozharskyi email that formed the basis of the New York Post's original article. An email referencing "10 held by H for the big guy?", a possible reference to a rejected proposal to give Joe Biden a 10% share of a Chinese deal his son was negotiating, was not authenticated, though a recipient of the email publicly vouched for its authenticity.[4]

One of the analysts found that timestamps on documents and operating system indexes matched, though he noted hackers could forge timestamps in undetectable ways. The analysts also noted that repeated access to the drive resulted in logs and other files used by forensic analysts to examine system activity being deleted. Neither analyst found evidence emails or other files had been manipulated by hackers, nor could they rule out that possibility.[4][64]

In reference to a cache of emails allegedly coming from the Hunter Biden Laptop, Matt Tait, a former information security specialist for the GCHQ (UK's Government Communications Headquarters), told CyberScoop, "it is clear the cache isn't in its original form".[65][66][67]

In November 2022, CBS News published the results of a forensic analysis they commissioned of a copy of the laptop data Mac Isaac initially handed to federal investigators in 2019. The analysis, conducted by Computer Forensics Services, found data, including over 120,000 emails, "consistent with normal, everyday use of a computer", found "no evidence that the user data had been modified, fabricated or tampered with", and found no new files created on the laptop after April 2019, when Mac Isaac received the laptop. The chief technology officer of Computer Forensics Services added: "I have no doubt in my mind that this data was created by Hunter Biden, and that it came from a computer under Mr. Biden's control".[3] Also on November 21, CBS News published the first photograph of the damaged Macbook Pro, which had been provided to them by Hunter Biden's legal team.[3]

According to reports on January 16, 2024, new filings by the U.S. Department of Justice's special counsel, headed by David C. Weiss, appear to be the first public confirmation of the laptop's authenticity by the DOJ. The filings refer to the laptop connected to Hunter Biden stating, “the defendant’s Apple MacBook Pro, which he had left at a computer

If there is evidence of crimes and they are verified then there will be court cases. The fact that there isn't means that there is nothing to take seriously at this point.

Not true, Merrick Garland is in charge of the doj. Most corrupt Administration in the history of the United States.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Not true, Merrick Garland is in charge of the doj. Most corrupt Administration in the history of the United States.

You say with such blind faith. You haven't seen the computer or run a forensic analysis. You are just believing things your read that support your political agenda. There have been forensic reports that say everything from its a mess with tons of edits made to its all authentic and unmanipulated.

Don't just believe what you hear in the echo chamber like a puppet. If there is evidence of crimes and they are verified then there will be court cases. The fact that there isn't means that there is nothing to take seriously at this point.

----
In March 2022, The Washington Post published the findings of two forensic information analysts it had retained to examine 217 gigabytes of data provided to the paper on a hard drive by Republican activist Jack Maxey, who represented that its contents came from the laptop. One of the analysts characterized the data as a "disaster" from a forensics standpoint. The analysts found that people other than Hunter Biden had repeatedly accessed and copied data for nearly three years; they also found evidence that people other than Hunter Biden had accessed and written files to the drive, both before and after the New York Post story.[4] In September 2020, someone created six new folders on the drive, including with the names "Biden Burisma", "Big Guy File", "Salacious Pics Package" and "Hunter. Burisma Documents". One of the analysts found evidence someone may have accessed the drive contents from a West Coast location days after The New York Post published their stories about the laptop.[4]

Using cryptographic signatures, one analyst verified that 1,828 of the roughly 129,000 emails on the drive came from the indicated email accounts of origin, suggesting they were authentic and had not been tampered with. The other analysis verified nearly 22,000 emails using similar methods, after overcoming technical issues the first analysis could not resolve. The analysts said emails from Burisma, where Pozharskyi was an advisor, were likely authentic but cautioned that if Burisma had been hacked, it would be possible for hackers to use stolen cryptographic signatures to forge emails that would pass as authentic. The New York Times reported in January 2020 that Russian military intelligence had hacked Burisma beginning in November 2019; a co-founder of the firm that discovered the hacking said Russians were stealing email credentials. Both analysts acknowledged that cryptographic signatures are not a perfect way to authenticate emails, as some email services do not implement the technology as rigorously as others. About 16,000 of the 22,000 emails carrying cryptographic signatures came via Google, which rigorously implements the technology. The analysts noted that cryptographic signatures can only verify that an email originated from a certain email account, but not who controlled that account; there are other means for hackers to commandeer email accounts. According to the Washington Post, "Some other emails on the drive that have been the foundation for previous news reports could not be verified because the messages lacked verifiable cryptographic signatures."[4]

Among the emails that The Washington Post was able to authenticate was the Pozharskyi email that formed the basis of the New York Post's original article. An email referencing "10 held by H for the big guy?", a possible reference to a rejected proposal to give Joe Biden a 10% share of a Chinese deal his son was negotiating, was not authenticated, though a recipient of the email publicly vouched for its authenticity.[4]

One of the analysts found that timestamps on documents and operating system indexes matched, though he noted hackers could forge timestamps in undetectable ways. The analysts also noted that repeated access to the drive resulted in logs and other files used by forensic analysts to examine system activity being deleted. Neither analyst found evidence emails or other files had been manipulated by hackers, nor could they rule out that possibility.[4][64]

In reference to a cache of emails allegedly coming from the Hunter Biden Laptop, Matt Tait, a former information security specialist for the GCHQ (UK's Government Communications Headquarters), told CyberScoop, "it is clear the cache isn't in its original form".[65][66][67]

In November 2022, CBS News published the results of a forensic analysis they commissioned of a copy of the laptop data Mac Isaac initially handed to federal investigators in 2019. The analysis, conducted by Computer Forensics Services, found data, including over 120,000 emails, "consistent with normal, everyday use of a computer", found "no evidence that the user data had been modified, fabricated or tampered with", and found no new files created on the laptop after April 2019, when Mac Isaac received the laptop. The chief technology officer of Computer Forensics Services added: "I have no doubt in my mind that this data was created by Hunter Biden, and that it came from a computer under Mr. Biden's control".[3] Also on November 21, CBS News published the first photograph of the damaged Macbook Pro, which had been provided to them by Hunter Biden's legal team.[3]

According to reports on January 16, 2024, new filings by the U.S. Department of Justice's special counsel, headed by David C. Weiss, appear to be the first public confirmation of the laptop's authenticity by the DOJ. The filings refer to the laptop connected to Hunter Biden stating, “the defendant’s Apple MacBook Pro, which he had left at a computer store.”[68]

Thanks for proving I've been right all this time and wasting my time with you. You are about as stupid as a bag of rocks, corrupt and dishonest as well

 

[dudmuck]

Oh? What propaganda am I spreading? That the laptop was real and contained damaging information that sent the FBI into a tailspin that they had to suppress the truth? Go ahead and explain how I'm spreading propaganda. Your side always accuses the other of what you are doing. LOL how dishonest

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Leave Rudy alone!

 

[Slade3200]

Not true, Merrick Garland is in charge of the doj. Most corrupt Administration in the history of the United States.

Trump‘s boy Bill Barr was in charge for about a year while they had the laptop. What’s the excuse now?

 

[Slade3200]

Thanks for proving I've been right all this time and wasting my time with you. You are about as stupid as a bag of rocks, corrupt and dishonest as well

Again, Bill Barr was in charge of the justice department. And Garland has no say over what the house does in terms of impeachment. No cases were brought under bar and no impeachment under a house controlled by the GOP. You got more excuses?

 

[Blisterfinger]

Trump‘s boy Bill Barr was in charge for about a year while they had the laptop. What’s the excuse now?

Merrick Garland is the most corrupt attorney general ever in the United States. Not even fit to clean up Bill Barr's piss. When did Bill Barr start lawfare activities against Trump's political rivals? LOL you lost with that statement.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Trump‘s boy Bill Barr was in charge for about a year while they had the laptop. What’s the excuse now?

The FBI is corrupt and out of control obviously. They don't follow marching orders from anybody but the left.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Again, Bill Barr was in charge of the justice department. And Garland has no say over what the house does in terms of impeachment. No cases were brought under bar and no impeachment under a house controlled by the GOP. You got more excuses?

Again Garland is corrupt and partisan. Any cases and special counsels against government officials have to go through him. What are your excuses for Garland not doing his job and the failed lawfare against Trump?

 

[Slade3200]

Merrick Garland is the most corrupt attorney general ever in the United States. Not even fit to clean up Bill Barr's piss. When did Bill Barr start lawfare activities against Trump's political rivals? LOL you lost with that statement.

Don’t change the subject. You’re saying no legal action has been taken against Biden because Garland is corrupt. Bar was in charge for a year while they had the laptop so I didn’t. He take action if the evidence is so clear? Don’t Dodge

 

[Slade3200]

The FBI is corrupt and out of control obviously. They don't follow marching orders from anybody but the left.

Trump appointed the guy that runs the FBI. Also, the DOJ doesn’t need the FBI to press charges if they have evidence. Bill had access to the laptop and could’ve pressed charges against Biden if there was evidence of a crime on there. He didn’t.