Ronan Farrow reports: Missing Files Motivated the Leak of Michael Cohen’s Financial Records

[Anonymous]

Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

But when Nunes leaks classified information, it's the public's right to know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

But when Nunes leaks classified information, it's the public's right to know!

Nunes has not leaked any classified information.

Just for kicks and giggles.... how would you feel about your bank providing your financial information to the press?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

But when Nunes leaks classified information, it's the public's right to know!

Nunes has not leaked any classified information.

Just for kicks and giggles.... how would you feel about your bank providing your financial information to the press?

Liberals should love that - the press publicly published gun owners' home addresses and they were supportive, so they should have no problem with what you suggested!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the SARS weren't deleted - that's dumb. they were probably removed or restricted to prevent leaking. the whistleblower saw the 3rd report that was not restricted yet.

It’s probably in the New Yorker article, but in this Slate article https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/whistleblower-leaked-damning-cohen-financial-documents-because-they-were-disappearing-from-government-financial-crimes-database.html?via=homepage_taps_top the whistleblower says that doesn’t happen.

This is a big deal. That you aren’t outraged suggest you’re part of the problem.

Don’t really understand what happened here. Can anyone explain? How did someone know docs were missing? And if they were restricted wouldn’t there just be a kind of “you are not authorized to look at this please contact xyz if you have a need” message when someone tried to get them?

Ronan is a smart guy. But he doesn't understand technical issues. There is no way that the leaker or Ronan know the docs were deleted. Just because the leaker can't access them it doesn't mean they are deleted in the system. And the system won't display a message to basically confirm existence of records for obvious security reasons.

Database software has layers of security protection on access control. It uses access control to restrict access. The data will also be stored in multiple places so it's not even possible to delete records from all places. (One of the reasons that you use your own server to store data, is you can delete them permanently).

Database software also has extensive auditing capabilities. His activities (logging in, searching, viewing, printing, etc) were logged. This leaker is probably already caught by the trail he/she left. It is illegal to search the database without authorization. You can't log on to government databases, start searching your neighbors, Michael Cohen from Canada, etc, and send them to NY Times. This leaker is facing serious legal trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the SARS weren't deleted - that's dumb. they were probably removed or restricted to prevent leaking. the whistleblower saw the 3rd report that was not restricted yet.

It’s probably in the New Yorker article, but in this Slate article https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/whistleblower-leaked-damning-cohen-financial-documents-because-they-were-disappearing-from-government-financial-crimes-database.html?via=homepage_taps_top the whistleblower says that doesn’t happen.

This is a big deal. That you aren’t outraged suggest you’re part of the problem.

Don’t really understand what happened here. Can anyone explain? How did someone know docs were missing? And if they were restricted wouldn’t there just be a kind of “you are not authorized to look at this please contact xyz if you have a need” message when someone tried to get them?

Ronan is a smart guy. But he doesn't understand technical issues. There is no way that the leaker or Ronan know the docs were deleted. Just because the leaker can't access them it doesn't mean they are deleted in the system. And the system won't display a message to basically confirm existence of records for obvious security reasons.

Database software has layers of security protection on access control. It uses access control to restrict access. The data will also be stored in multiple places so it's not even possible to delete records from all places. (One of the reasons that you use your own server to store data, is you can delete them permanently).

Database software also has extensive auditing capabilities. His activities (logging in, searching, viewing, printing, etc) were logged. This leaker is probably already caught by the trail he/she left. It is illegal to search the database without authorization. You can't log on to government databases, start searching your neighbors, Michael Cohen from Canada, etc, and send them to NY Times. This leaker is facing serious legal trouble.

Serious Q - Do you have direct knowledge of how the FinCen database works? Seems like Ronan did his homework and due diligence on this story.
Also, couldn't Mnuchin do Trump a solid and pull a report or two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the SARS weren't deleted - that's dumb. they were probably removed or restricted to prevent leaking. the whistleblower saw the 3rd report that was not restricted yet.

It’s probably in the New Yorker article, but in this Slate article https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/05/whistleblower-leaked-damning-cohen-financial-documents-because-they-were-disappearing-from-government-financial-crimes-database.html?via=homepage_taps_top the whistleblower says that doesn’t happen.

This is a big deal. That you aren’t outraged suggest you’re part of the problem.

Don’t really understand what happened here. Can anyone explain? How did someone know docs were missing? And if they were restricted wouldn’t there just be a kind of “you are not authorized to look at this please contact xyz if you have a need” message when someone tried to get them?

Ronan is a smart guy. But he doesn't understand technical issues. There is no way that the leaker or Ronan know the docs were deleted. Just because the leaker can't access them it doesn't mean they are deleted in the system. And the system won't display a message to basically confirm existence of records for obvious security reasons.

Database software has layers of security protection on access control. It uses access control to restrict access. The data will also be stored in multiple places so it's not even possible to delete records from all places. (One of the reasons that you use your own server to store data, is you can delete them permanently).

Database software also has extensive auditing capabilities. His activities (logging in, searching, viewing, printing, etc) were logged. This leaker is probably already caught by the trail he/she left. It is illegal to search the database without authorization. You can't log on to government databases, start searching your neighbors, Michael Cohen from Canada, etc, and send them to NY Times. This leaker is facing serious legal trouble.

That's common knowledge, PP. Let's just let the facts play out, OK? If this leaker is in a position of authority and technical knowledge, and is genuinely concerned, perhaps this is more serious than you think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

But when Nunes leaks classified information, it's the public's right to know!

Nunes has not leaked any classified information.

Just for kicks and giggles.... how would you feel about your bank providing your financial information to the press?

If I had accepted millions of dollars on behalf of the president of the United States, I would probably expect those details to be made public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the real world IMPOTUS would have resigned a year ago. However we are now occupying tabloid politics LaLa land where reports like this are considered teasers.

No president resigns because the other party doesn’t like him and smears him in the press. That’s every day life for an American president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, let's be sure to punish the leakers and informants, and skate right over the actual substance of the leaks.

Absolutely we need to punish the leakers. Especially when the leaked information is confidential or classified.

But when Nunes leaks classified information, it's the public's right to know!

Nunes has not leaked any classified information.

Just for kicks and giggles.... how would you feel about your bank providing your financial information to the press?

Yes, this is a very serious breach. Another unhinged leftist breaks the law to “git trump”. We’re going to find out it’s a deranged Hillary supporter (again) when the audit trail comes out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Serious Q - Do you have direct knowledge of how the FinCen database works? Seems like Ronan did his homework and due diligence on this story.
Also, couldn't Mnuchin do Trump a solid and pull a report or two?

Not PP, but the leaker is an idiot:

Five former government officials and experts on financial crime told The Washington Post that access to reports on the president’s former attorney could have been restricted over concern they were particularly vulnerable to leaking. An FBI raid last month of Cohen’s home, office and hotel room — part of an investigation into possible bank fraud, wire fraud and campaign finance violations — was widely publicized.

“I would be cautious about reaching a conclusion that something nefarious was going on,” said attorney Carlton Greene, a former FinCEN chief counsel.

A government coverup of the Cohen reports “makes no sense,” said Aaron Wolfson, a lawyer who previously oversaw suspicious activity reporting for JPMorgan Chase. “I find that laughable.”

Banks are required by law to keep copies of SARs for five years, the experts said, so removing them from the Treasury database would not wipe out a record of those reports.

Experts also said the leaker’s concern that SARs could be permanently deleted suggested a lack of familiarity with financial crime prosecutions. If law enforcement working on the Cohen probe could not find an SAR in the database, officials could seek records from the bank or from their investigative files.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/probe-of-leaked-banking-records-related-to-michael-cohen-expands-after-new-yorker-report/2018/05/17/943c133c-59e2-11e8-8b92-45fdd7aaef3c_story.html?utm_term=.abc2171f6db2

[Anonymous]

I think the leaker was providing information to the culprits and Ronan was a stooge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the leaker was providing information to the culprits and Ronan was a stooge.

Who are “the culprits” in this estimation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the leaker was providing information to the culprits and Ronan was a stooge.

Who are “the culprits” in this estimation?

The GOP crime syndicate.