#News #Times #NewsAndTimes #NT #TNT #Israel #World #USA #POTUS #DOJ #FBI #CIA #DIA #ODNI #Mossad #Netanyahu #Putin #Russia #GRU #Ukraine #SouthCaucasus #NewAbwehr #Bloggers #PoliticalPsychology #PoliticalPersonology #PoliticalCriminology #Counterintelligence #InvestigativeJournalism #Psychohistory
–
M.N.: The Records indicate that there should be TWO forensic exams of the Weiner – Abedin laptop:
1. By the NYPD, which found the emails, and
2. Ordered by Strzok on November 9 specifically for the possible “intrusions”, which might not even had been performed.
This information should not be classified.
FBI and NYPD: Release and share with the public the details and results of both forensic exams.
–
Clinton’s Emails, Weiner’s Laptop and a Falsehood – FactCheck.org factcheck.org/2018/08/clinto
“While the NYPD was conducting a forensic analysis of the Weiner/Abedin laptop, it was discovered that the hard drive contained 350,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails and 344,000 Blackberry communications,” the story says. “Here’s what you were never told by the HRC-BHO protective media. These were never reviewed by the FBI investigators assigned to help lead agent Peter Strzok. Nor, was any attempt made to analyze the newly discovered files until after the election was over.”
As evidence, the website includes an FBI document dated Nov. 9, 2016 — the day after the election — that indicates Strzok had requested that a copy of a laptop’s hard drive be reviewed for “evidence of intrusion.” The document was among a batch released earlier this month to the conservative group Judicial Watch.
But that document isn’t evidence that the emails weren’t reviewed before the Nov. 8 election.
A June 2018 report by the Justice Department Office of the Inspector General, which conducted a review of the bureau’s investigation, indicates that the FBI obtained a search warrant for the laptop on Oct. 30, 2016 — this time to look for information related to the Clinton email investigation — and that multiple investigators were involved in the review.
… the review of the emails was completed Nov. 6, 2016, before Comey sent his second letter to Congress. Still, it says, the lead analyst on the case told the inspector general’s office that even after that review, the FBI needed to do more investigative work.
“The Lead Analyst told us that the further investigative steps needed to complete the investigation included at least a ‘malware analysis’ to examine the laptop for intrusion and a re-interview of Abedin,” the report states.
The analyst said that such an analysis was needed to know if the laptop was “compromised by anyone” or if a “foreign power obtained” classified material.
So, while further examination took place after the election, it’s false to claim, as
fbnewscycle.com did, that Strzok’s intrusion analysis request “shows he sat on the laptop for more than 6 weeks – until the election was over!”The FBI’s handling of the emails on Weiner’s laptop has indeed fueled criticism about why the agency chose to wait weeks before taking action on the late-September discovery. The inspector general’s report said it found no “consistent or persuasive explanation” for the delay, but said it gathered no evidence that the laptop was “deliberately placed on the back-burner by others in the FBI to protect Clinton.”
Clinton, for her part, has argued that the timing of the announcement to review the emails did quite the opposite.
–
NYPD was conducting a forensic analysis of the Weiner – Abedin laptop
–
NYPD arrested Weiner and took possession of the laptop
google.com/search?q=NYPD+
–
Strzok had requested that a copy of a laptop’s hard drive be reviewed for “evidence of intrusion.” – GS [on November 9, 2016]
google.com/search?q=Strzo
–
Were Peter Strzok and Charles McGonigal the FBI rivals?
google.com/search?q=Were+
–
Clinton’s Emails, Weiner’s Laptop
google.com/search?q=Clint
–
When was Weiner arrested by the NYPD in 2016?
google.com/search?q=When+
– – –
