Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 322 posts

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#241

Post by sthnblllII »

gebruikersnaam wrote: post #75
twic wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just that - some people will still, today, insist that Trump was working with Russia. When you point out that investigations found nothing, they point to some random minor finding as if that vindicates them. It's genuinely concerning.

The Mueller investigation didn't find hard proof that Trump et al. conspired with Russia because there was plenty of perjury and obstruction. When a investigation is limited by politics and vague policies, you can't blame the investigator. Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. The fact that the Senate committee (led by the Republicans) also found plenty of c…

>Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president.

Is that true though? He didn't present any evidence of a crime. Congress could have impeached Trump successfully with some hard evidence, so was Muller protecting Trump by only insinuating there was evidence but not presenting any? I don't think vague connections "says enough". If the president really was conspiring with Russia I would want the FBI to present its findings instead of giving more vague insinuation.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#242

Post by [deleted] »

temp8964 wrote: post #35
spankyspangler wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just a presidential candidate, but a president. Did you know that after all those years of investigations, all those years of the house intelligence committee chairman and others insisting that there was "ample evidence" that Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election... in the end, The Mueller report admitted that no evidence was ever found to substantiate Trump or his associates or campaign ever working wit…

But the Mueller team was good at covering their own ass. At Least 27 Phones from Special Counsel’s Office Were Wiped before DOJ Inspector General Could Review Them https://news.yahoo.com/least-27-phones-special-counsel-21293...

[deleted]

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#243

Post by tw04 »

the_optimist wrote: post #239
tw04 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I follow your point, nothing you've stated contradicts the fact that his own lawyers admitted to him supplying Russians with polling data. You can't refute the facts so refute the site to try to distract the discussion? It is LITERALLY in the redacted court documents: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5677512/Manafort-... If you have an issue with that site you can go to literally dozens of othe…

My point is exactly this: this has been puffed to sound nefarious. It is a zero. Fuzzy thinking around it was and is being used to excuse extraordinary abuse of the law and legal system. To be illegal, information sharing has to violate some law. This does not. It is simply not illegal to share information with Russia citizens, the Russian government, or anyone affiliated with Russia. Not even "secret" information, u…

>To be illegal, information sharing has to violate some law. This does not. It is simply not illegal to share information with Russia citizens, the Russian government, or anyone affiliated with Russia.

I can't tell if you're intentionally stating falsehoods with the hope nobody will fact check you, or if you're just completely ignorant of the law. He was accused and convicted of acting as an unregistered foreign agent. Is it absolutely, unquestionably illegal to be a political operative for a foreign government and not register. For good reason. He broke the law, he went to prison. It was entirely illegal.

And NONE of that has anything to do with the original question or answer. Which is: what proof is there that he gave polling data to the Russians. Which I provided, and you still haven't refuted.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#244

Post by smoldesu »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #221
smoldesu wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buddy, you're the person who's comment history is full of begging people to investigate hallucinative realities and conspiracy theories. Maybe you'd be better received on Facebook, or perhaps a place like Tik-Tok where they respect hysteria.

The Universe being a holographic projection is a legit theory! Do you throw in the kitchen sink into every argument? To actually go through my comment history to find something to "win" is kind of a low move. So I'm done.

Excuse me for being curious, I simply had to see what other words of wisdom you were sharing around here.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#245

Post by dane-pgp »

daperor630 wrote: post #179
dredmorbius wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Onus of precedent would have to be that it does not . If you're able to find any such, I might have further interest in this line of questioning. Though I doubt even that.

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that Fourth Amendment protections do not apply to searches and seizures by United States agents of property owned by a nonresident alien in a foreign country.

If a country's constitution has the possibility of being interpreted in such a way that non-citizens outside its borders are entitled to zero protections, then that option should be rejected under a generalised version of what has been called "the Auschwitz rule of interpretation":

"in case there are two plausible interpretations of the text of a human rights treaty, one should favour that interpretation under which Auschwitz would be considered a human rights violation."

https://www.ejiltalk.org/foreign-surveillance-and-human-righ...

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#246

Post by the_optimist »

dflock wrote: post #165

She's doing good for the world; leave her alone.

Unless US citizens regain oversight of their government, the only people who have any say in the matter are those throwing dollars. It's quite barbaric, excepting vague thrusts at plausible deniability.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#247

Post by tw04 »

tored wrote: post #236
tw04 wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I follow your point, nothing you've stated contradicts the fact that his own lawyers admitted to him supplying Russians with polling data. You can't refute the facts so refute the site to try to distract the discussion? It is LITERALLY in the redacted court documents: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5677512/Manafort-... If you have an issue with that site you can go to literally dozens of othe…

What do you think the punishment should be for giving mostly outdated, partially public and top line polling data (Trump 50% vs Clinton 48%) to Russians (as in citizens)?

I would need you to go back and edit your posts insinuating there was no proof before I have any interest in continuing the conversation. I get the impression you're more interested in trolling than having a conversation based in facts.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#248

Post by the_optimist »

tw04 wrote: post #243
the_optimist wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is exactly this: this has been puffed to sound nefarious. It is a zero. Fuzzy thinking around it was and is being used to excuse extraordinary abuse of the law and legal system. To be illegal, information sharing has to violate some law. This does not. It is simply not illegal to share information with Russia citizens, the Russian government, or anyone affiliated with Russia. Not even "secret" information, u…

>To be illegal, information sharing has to violate some law. This does not. It is simply not illegal to share information with Russia citizens, the Russian government, or anyone affiliated with Russia. I can't tell if you're intentionally stating falsehoods with the hope nobody will fact check you, or if you're just completely ignorant of the law. He was accused and convicted of acting as an unregistered foreign agen…

This is a non-argument. I do not dispute that he did or not.

I assert strongly that no one on earth should care in the slightest.

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#249

Post by gebruikersnaam »

sthnblllII wrote: post #241
gebruikersnaam wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mueller investigation didn't find hard proof that Trump et al. conspired with Russia because there was plenty of perjury and obstruction. When a investigation is limited by politics and vague policies, you can't blame the investigator. Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. The fact that the Senate committee (led by the Republicans) also found plenty of c…

>Mueller declared in his public hearing that he would have indicted Trump, if he wasn't president. Is that true though? He didn't present any evidence of a crime. Congress could have impeached Trump successfully with some hard evidence, so was Muller protecting Trump by only insinuating there was evidence but not presenting any? I don't think vague connections "says enough". If the president really was conspiring wit…

"Mueller: A president can be charged with obstruction of justice after leaving office" [1]

Statements that Congress could have impeached Trump can only be viewed as stated in bad faith. Congress did impeach Trump, but for political reasons the Senate refused to remove him.

[1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/24/rober...

Re: FBI Has Gained Access to Sci-Hub Founder's Apple Account, Email Claims

#250

Post by tylerhou »

the_optimist wrote: post #230
tylerhou wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as it turned out (as explained in Mueller's report), there never was any evidence for it. Can you actually quote the report to support your claims? The report actually says that there was evidence to support communication/collusion between the Trump campaign & Russian officials, but not enough evidence [that we know of] to support criminal charges. This is for two reasons: 1) The "dirt" given at the Trump tower mee…

There was no evidence that would support a criminal prosecution. You say it yourself. What exactly are you trying to rebut here?

The original poster said:

> in the end, The Mueller report admitted that no evidence was ever found to substantiate Trump or his associates or campaign ever working with Russians to interfere with the election?

and

> there never was any evidence for... the conspiracy theory that Trump or his campaign colluded with Putin to hack (or otherwise subvert) the election

These claims are strictly not true; Mueller found many instances where the Trump campaign directly worked with Russian officials in order to "get dirt on" Clinton or provided demographic information to Russian officials that helped those officials run (illegal) advertising/marketing campaigns for Trump. Just none of them were prosecutable based on the available evidence, according to Mueller.

Post reply on HN