Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DNS records are public, but the access of DNS records is not. Even though the traffic is not encrypted, there is a certain level of anonymity because that lookup traffic usually traverses only between the requestor and the name servers provided by the ISP. It is also highly likely that the EOP IT network is in an enclave of sorts, and that the DNS server provided by the tech company is within that enclave or has a VPN connection of some sort since it's likely that DNS is just one among a suite of services provided.

All this is to say that while the government certainly can subpoena and obtain DNS lookup information from ISPs since there is no reasonable expectation of privacy for information volunteered to a third party, such information is nonetheless protected from disclosure to non-government entities, including private investigators, law firms, and political campaigns.

the contract in place was to scan for nefarious activity and protect against it. there is zero proof of any information being shared or use by private investigators, law firms or political campaigns

Well, that's what Durham said happened in the court filing. If we don't trust Durham, that's a different argument. These allegations need to be proven, of course. Personally, I fail to see an alternative explanation as to why this private investigator was in possession of EOP DNS access records and provided it in a meeting with a government agency (CIA?).

They will never be proven, because they are utterly irrelevant to the charged conduct. They don't appear anywhere in the indictment and have nothing to do with the alleged false statement to Baker. Durham just slipped them into a filing regarding alleged conflicts of interest that Sussman had already waived. So he can unaccountably make wild accusations without ever having to present any evidence for them.

In any case, the allegations don't make sense. The EOP access and records all pertained to the time period when Obama was president. How would that indicate any kind of spying on Trump?

Obama didn’t know Trump was running?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like the ride or die conspiracy theorist to explain in one sentence what he believes happened and why it was illegal.

Sussman lied to the FBI, which is a crime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the same folks accusing Trump of insurrection, we now find out were spying on him. Interesting development

They weren't spying on him. Read the primary source documents. It was a contract under the Obama administration that tracked DNS records (public) to mitigate hacking threats. You would know that if you consumed reliable sources of news, but instead, you go with the ones that also told you Trump was a legit billionaire, that Seth Rich was murdered and there was a child sex ring operating out of Comet Pizza's nonexistant basement.

Why do you like being lied to, and why do you propagate the lies?

PP has a hard time understanding the computers… and when s/he is being played by Trump.

I think on some level they understand they’re being played and they enjoy it.

I think it's more that they don't care. They've listened to Rush Limbaugh and all the right wing news for the last 30 years and their entire identity and existence in tied up in hating "the left." This is simply one more thing they can drone on and on about until they drop dead and are in their graves just like their drug-addicted, cancer ridden waste of a human being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like the ride or die conspiracy theorist to explain in one sentence what he believes happened and why it was illegal.

Sussman lied to the FBI, which is a crime.

Lied about what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like the ride or die conspiracy theorist to explain in one sentence what he believes happened and why it was illegal.

Sussman lied to the FBI, which is a crime.

Ok, so the stuff about the DNS lookups is bull. Glad we got that straight

[Anonymous]

Are we still waiting on a quote from the 6th paragraph from the filing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where and when was this information shared and by whom?

Here:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/fbi-investigation-continues-into-odd-computer-link-between-russian-bank-and-trump-organization/index.html

I don't really think the biggest issue is the access to DNS info of Trump's private companies and organizations. Those ISPs probably have agreements in place that allow them to disclose such information to a third party, buried in their service agreement. The bigger issue is the EOP. Any electronic communications from that entity are almost certainly privileged.

What you are missing here....they were not in possession of the actual content of the communications and transmissions. This was ONLY DNS information. Numbers. that is it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where and when was this information shared and by whom?

Here:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/fbi-investigation-continues-into-odd-computer-link-between-russian-bank-and-trump-organization/index.html

I don't really think the biggest issue is the access to DNS info of Trump's private companies and organizations. Those ISPs probably have agreements in place that allow them to disclose such information to a third party, buried in their service agreement. The bigger issue is the EOP. Any electronic communications from that entity are almost certainly privileged.

What you are missing here....they were not in possession of the actual content of the communications and transmissions. This was ONLY DNS information. Numbers. that is it.

I am not referring to the contents of emails or messages. DNS lookup is a type of electronic communication, and in the case of the EOP, likely protected against public sniffing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are we still waiting on a quote from the 6th paragraph from the filing?

Some of us are able to read a paragraph without further assistance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like the ride or die conspiracy theorist to explain in one sentence what he believes happened and why it was illegal.

Sussman lied to the FBI, which is a crime.

Ok, so the stuff about the DNS lookups is bull. Glad we got that straight

It's just tangential/contextual/background information. Whether it's bull remains to be seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where and when was this information shared and by whom?

Here:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/09/politics/fbi-investigation-continues-into-odd-computer-link-between-russian-bank-and-trump-organization/index.html

I don't really think the biggest issue is the access to DNS info of Trump's private companies and organizations. Those ISPs probably have agreements in place that allow them to disclose such information to a third party, buried in their service agreement. The bigger issue is the EOP. Any electronic communications from that entity are almost certainly privileged.

What you are missing here....they were not in possession of the actual content of the communications and transmissions. This was ONLY DNS information. Numbers. that is it.

I am not referring to the contents of emails or messages. DNS lookup is a type of electronic communication, and in the case of the EOP, likely protected against public sniffing.

I'm not sure about that. Might be. Or might be considered public communications.

In any event, Sussman had nothing to do with the CIA meeting that happened later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the same folks accusing Trump of insurrection, we now find out were spying on him. Interesting development

They weren't spying on him. Read the primary source documents. It was a contract under the Obama administration that tracked DNS records (public) to mitigate hacking threats. You would know that if you consumed reliable sources of news, but instead, you go with the ones that also told you Trump was a legit billionaire, that Seth Rich was murdered and there was a child sex ring operating out of Comet Pizza's nonexistant basement.

Why do you like being lied to, and why do you propagate the lies?

BTW they are still lying about Seth Rich despite having to pay his family a settlement.

[Anonymous]

Lenny Dykstra quoting from a Q-Anon Telegram channel

LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the same folks accusing Trump of insurrection, we now find out were spying on him. Interesting development

They weren't spying on him. Read the primary source documents. It was a contract under the Obama administration that tracked DNS records (public) to mitigate hacking threats. You would know that if you consumed reliable sources of news, but instead, you go with the ones that also told you Trump was a legit billionaire, that Seth Rich was murdered and there was a child sex ring operating out of Comet Pizza's nonexistant basement.

Why do you like being lied to, and why do you propagate the lies?

BTW they are still lying about Seth Rich despite having to pay his family a settlement.

Wait. So Russia didn’t hack the DNC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we still waiting on a quote from the 6th paragraph from the filing?

Some of us are able to read a paragraph without further assistance.

The people who keep insisting it says that Joffe and Sussman shared DNS records from Trump's EOP certainly cannot do so.