The FBI and Debbie Wasserman Schultz have different stories about what happened. DWS accused the FBI of lying.

Quote:The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has pushed back the estimated completion date of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents pertaining to its communications with the security firm that examined the Democratic National Committee’s hacked servers to October.

The Washington Free Beacon submitted the FOIA request in July 2017 with the FBI seeking all communication between the bureau and CrowdStrike, Inc., the California-based cyber security firm that examined the DNC’s servers following the infiltration that led to the release of John Podesta’s emails. The FBI said in December the documents should be available by March.

The FBI, which was never granted access to the DNC’s servers for inspection, instead relied on the third-party firm that was brought in by the DNC for information regarding the compromised network who concluded that Russia was behind the hack.

The FBI previously awarded an unrelated $150,000 contract to CrowdStrike in July 2015. Details and communications between the firm and the bureau regarding that past contract were requested as part of the FOIA.

Keep reading here...

Quote:Simple track requests are averaging approximately 80 days from the date of receipt for processing, the officer said. Requests in the large complex processing track are averaging 774 days for processing.

The Free Beacon request falls into the complex medium processing track and was given an estimated completion date of March 2018.

However, the documents were not made available in March. The Free Beacon again reached out to the records office.

A public information officer later left a message saying the estimated completion date is now October, seven months after the initial completion date.

"Our prior estimated date of completion was based on the best data we had at the time and represented the median processing time for the size of the track that request was being processed in," another officer said after inquiring about why the date had been pushed back to October. "Please remember that the FBI receives a voluminous amount of requests on a daily, weekly, monthly, and annual basis."

According to the OP article the original date of the FOIA request was July 7, 2017. Translation: this one may further burn our collective sphincters and we need more time to dot our "i's" and cross our "t's" because we've lost the public's trust.

Should make for some interesting reading if they ever release the documents, all the documents, that is.

I'm no computer expert, but the thought of the FBI relying on the word of a XYZ company about what took place with the DNC servers sounds, well, sounds like something the FBI does these days. There's a reason they've lost so much public trust. They deserve it.

And I didn't listen that carefully to DW-S because she makes my eyes and ears bleed, but I did read one story about the FBI "investigation" and it appeared the federal agent first contacted some DNC IT guy......then continued to contact him for months thereafter instead of going up the chain of command.

I would think that if the FBI believed an organization like the DNC had been hacked by Russians, and wanted to warn them, that they would have gone to the very top of the organization first and worked their down from there.

At least that's how I'd conduct an investigation, but then, what do I know? I'm not the Federal Bureau of Matters.

(04-29-2018 04:59 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

Quote:Simple track requests are averaging approximately 80 days from the date of receipt for processing, the officer said. Requests in the large complex processing track are averaging 774 days for processing.

The Free Beacon request falls into the complex medium processing track and was given an estimated completion date of March 2018.

However, the documents were not made available in March. The Free Beacon again reached out to the records office.

A public information officer later left a message saying the estimated completion date is now October, seven months after the initial completion date.

"Our prior estimated date of completion was based on the best data we had at the time and represented the median processing time for the size of the track that request was being processed in," another officer said after inquiring about why the date had been pushed back to October. "Please remember that the FBI receives a voluminous amount of requests on a daily, weekly, monthly, and annual basis."

According to the OP article the original date of the FOIA request was July 7, 2017. Translation: this one may further burn our collective sphincters and we need more time to dot our "i's" and cross our "t's" because we've lost the public's trust.

Rod Rosenstein’s wife has probably been hired to fight FOIA release.

Let’s be honest, if you were really an innocent by stander who got hacked, you’d let the FBI look at your server. Even DWS doesn’t say the FBI looked at the DNC servers nor does she say the DNC offered to let the FBI inspect the servers. What she says is the FBI never asked—which a Comey disputed in testimony under oath before Congress. Until DWS says the FBI never asked unde oath—-it means nothing.

(04-30-2018 10:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Let’s be honest, if you were really an innocent by stander who got hacked, you’d let the FBI look at your server. Even DWS doesn’t say the FBI looked at the DNC servers nor does she say the DNC offered to let the FBI inspect the servers. What she says is the FBI never asked—which a Comey disputed in testimony under oath before Congress. Until DWS says the FBI never asked unde oath—-it means nothing.

It wouldn't matter what she said under oath. Both she and Comey are lying liars.

(04-30-2018 10:17 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Let’s be honest, if you were really an innocent by stander who got hacked, you’d let the FBI look at your server. Even DWS doesn’t say the FBI looked at the DNC servers nor does she say the DNC offered to let the FBI inspect the servers. What she says is the FBI never asked—which a Comey disputed in testimony under oath before Congress. Until DWS says the FBI never asked unde oath—-it means nothing.

It wouldn't matter what she said under oath. Both she and Comey are lying liars.

who lie.....lol

wonder what all the controversy is over. The DNC graciously and turned over all the server information the FBI requested immediately. That's what I was told on this board.

(04-30-2018 12:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  wonder what all the controversy is over. The DNC graciously and turned over all the server information the FBI requested immediately. That's what I was told on this board.

And HRC handed over all her emails. Oh Lordy.

(04-30-2018 12:57 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 12:07 PM)solohawks Wrote:  wonder what all the controversy is over. The DNC graciously and turned over all the server information the FBI requested immediately. That's what I was told on this board.

And HRC handed over all her emails. Oh Lordy.

We should call them the Transparent Party.

Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

(04-30-2018 06:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

Good luck with that in a court of law.

(04-30-2018 06:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

Yeah, you're on to something there. Crowdstrike said the Russians hacked the DNC so that's good enough for the FBI. Christopher Steele says Russians whores pissed on Trump, so that's good enough for the FBI.

There is a pattern there.

(04-30-2018 08:20 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 06:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

Yeah, you're on to something there. Crowdstrike said the Russians hacked the DNC so that's good enough for the FBI. Christopher Steele says Russians whores pissed on Trump, so that's good enough for the FBI.

There is a pattern there.

ill take whores, piss and lies for 500 alex

what is the democrat party?

(04-30-2018 08:17 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 06:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

Good luck with that in a court of law.

Same group thinks Isreal's intel is wrong. See a pattern.

It's a team thing.

(04-30-2018 08:25 PM)gdunn Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 08:17 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 06:59 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Remember there are those who state that getting a report from a third party is good enough evidence.

Good luck with that in a court of law.

Same group thinks Isreal's intel is wrong. See a pattern.

It's a team thing.

Yeah, had Isreal paid Steele to put his name on the report, the dims would have broken their arms cheering the quality of the intel.

(04-30-2018 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:17 AM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(04-30-2018 10:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Let’s be honest, if you were really an innocent by stander who got hacked, you’d let the FBI look at your server. Even DWS doesn’t say the FBI looked at the DNC servers nor does she say the DNC offered to let the FBI inspect the servers. What she says is the FBI never asked—which a Comey disputed in testimony under oath before Congress. Until DWS says the FBI never asked unde oath—-it means nothing.

It wouldn't matter what she said under oath. Both she and Comey are lying liars.

who lie.....lol

And what's more, they don't tell the truth.