Edward Snowden Debunks Latest Trump Conspiracy In 1 Tweet

[Quixote1818]

General Flynn ✔ @GenFlynn
IMPOSSIBLE:
There R 691,200 seconds in 8 days. DIR Comey has thoroughly reviewed 650,000 emails in 8 days? An email / second? IMPOSSIBLE RT
3:29 PM - 6 Nov 2016
7,375 7,375 Retweets 6,832 6,832 likes
Follow
General Flynn ✔ @GenFlynn
It took 1 year to review 60K and 8 days to review 650K? Smart machines or not, something does not jive. Thoughts?
3:42 PM - 6 Nov 2016
6,240 6,240 Retweets 8,120 8,120 likes
Leaving aside the false assumption that j


Edward Snowden ✔ @Snowden
@jeffjarvis Drop non-responsive To:/CC:/BCC:, hash both sets, then subtract those that match. Old laptops could do it in minutes-to-hours.
6:19 PM - 6 Nov 2016
510 510 Retweets 795 795 likes
If Snowden is correct, the real question isn’t

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/edward-snowden-hillary-clinton-emails_us_581fe27de4b0aac62485334d

[vdogg]

1. Wow, I found something from Snowden I actually agree with.

😧

[roamer65]

2. The FBI has tools to do it quickly. Snowden knows it.

They would be nearly as powerful as the CIA and NSA software tools.

Not a fan of the guy, but he worked with those tools.

[lapfog_1]

3. Ridiculous

There are specialized instructions on Intel Xeon processors for doing exact string compares.

There is absolutely no reason to hash anything and compare hash tags.

Most emails (minus attachments) are under 10K in size. Doing a direct compare from a "found" email to a set of emails with the same meta data (time sent, author, etc), would take mere microseconds after a few millisecond load of the "compare set".

650,000 emails (even at 100K each) would result in 65 GB of email to compare too... that can fit in most server computers memory... so you could even deduct the microseconds to fetch the compare set.

So, match the date, match the sender Not someone of interest (spam, etc) throw it away, find all matches... do a direct compare of the text... match? Throw this one away.

On a Linux server this is a script written in Perl or your favorite scripting language. pulling all of the match set into memory for the compare is trivial (Linux will do this for you using buffer cache). Or you could create a large ramdisk and do it yourself (65GB ramdisk, while not common, is possible).

Anyway, this isn't a hard task... no reason to complicate it with a lot of unneeded hash tag creation.

[longship]

4. You could do it with a BASH script!

It wouldn't take long, either.

Egrep's your friend.

[lapfog_1]

6. I personally like awk

but it's almost a lost art now.

[longship]

8. AWK is good, but it's been a while.

I love bash, though. It's fucking powerful. And one can still use AWK within bash.

PERL? Pathetically Eclectic Rubbish Lister.
A tangled confusion.

And please save us all from object oriented languages. No good for tools which by necessity always come off the top of the head.

[lapfog_1]

11. Like I said, pick a scripting language of your choice.

But the main point is that this would take at most a few hours of people time to process the emails and pick out the ones that need to be looked at by people.

[longship]

13. Yes!!!!!

Indeed! Just don't use Windows batch.

[joshcryer]

14. And we know all previous emails were digitized already.

So there's no argument that since they provided print emails that it caused an issue. This was probably already done at the point of Comey's first letter. The result was already known. Had there been a red flag the letter would not have been so ambiguous and uncertain. He knew.

I foresee a Hatch Act violation in Comey's future. Someone is going to go down for this.

[brush]

7. The FBI knew this before the first letter two weeks ago. They could have examined the emails . . .

in minutes then without issuing that first letter on Oct. 28.

But no, they were just trying to get Trump elected.

Fuck Comey, fuck the FBI, and fuck Snowden too.

[lapfog_1]

9. yes, I agree

They did have to wait to get the warrant to examine the emails.

But after that, max 4 hours to process the emails, remove duplicates and spam.

After that, maybe a few hundred to examine (personal emails from Hillary or others in the State department). Team of 10 to 20 agents might take a day or two to do that.

[splat]

10. They needed a subpoena to look at them

They were investigating Weiner, so these were outside that warrant.

[joshcryer]

16. That's certainly a generous view.

But it's perfectly valid, of course. Once they got the warrant it would be trivial to do a duplication search. Anything not in there already would've been flagged. I'm guessing Abedin used the laptop to check her emails with outlook and because outlook simply copies emails from the email server, it downloaded them all. Even if she only used it once or twice it would've scooped up all emails and stored them locally.

[brush]

17. Since they were already investigating Weiner getting a subpeona for his computer would have . . .

went unnoticed but the FBI obviously had an agenda — get Hillary.

Comey allegedly was trying to get the news of this new batch of emails out before rogue agents leaked it.

How pathetic. The director of the FBI putting out a vague bullshit letter so as not to get outflanked by his own agents.

Now with the second letter he seems totally ineffectual and not up to the job of running the FBI.

He knew the first letter would hurt Hillary but he did it to do just that.

He didn't, however, anticipate all the backlash that came his way and was forced to send the second letter.

He won't served out his 10-year term.

[dlk]

12. Basic Computer Literacy

It's frightening to think that Trump, who could be the leader of the free world, is so completely computer illiterate, especially given today's highly technical world. The tweets also don't speak well of general Flynn's knowledge base either. In this case, ignorance is not bliss!

[world wide wally]

15. The point is, Comey could have easily delayed any kind of an announcement until he knew what he had

And didn't have.
Purely political and an obvious violation of the Hatch Act