Bill Barr and his October Surprise

Ah....but not if he took it to the shop for repair as I said in my post. If he want to destroy the info on it, you remove and destroy the hard drive as Skeptic Ginger said.
That's why it's brilliant, don't you see? It's like when you need to hide a body, it's best to take it straight into the police station. It's the last place they'll ever look!
 
Ah....but not if he took it to the shop for repair as I said in my post. If he want to destroy the info on it, you remove and destroy the hard drive as Skeptic Ginger said.

No, you get some unsuspecting repairman on the other side of the country to scrub the disk. You would make a lousy criminal.
 
Again, you're badly missing the mark. To you, the investigation never moves past the abstract. "Just prove the e-mails aren't there." Okay, but how is that done? You still haven't explained that part.

We'll try it like this: I want you to prove that the heroin e-mail I claimed to have sent you (for the sake of argument) never actually arrived in your inbox. Do not speculate on what could be done. Actually do it.
Again, you are misstating this. It's more like you are claiming that Walgreens sent me an email saying they sold me Heroin.

First of all I could safely deny it based on having searched my email and also not being involved in anything relating to Heroin. Then, were there money on the line I could get independent verification that there was no such email evident in my inbox. Since I am nobody of any significance, that is all I could do. Were I Biden though, I could get Walgreen to confirm that they hadn't sent the email. They would almost certainly have their email logged in an auditable way so we could get proof one way or the other. Were I Biden I would also be able to get Apple to confirm if the email had been received.

Maybe they will produce proof like this.

Pretending that what is easy for a campaign spending hundreds of millions of dollars and with institutional support should necessarily be easy for me is feeble.
 
Exactly.

Biden is in a no win situation anyway. No matter whether Biden denied the emails or not, it wouldn't matter; the Fox pundits and Trumpers would attack him anyway just as they did Obama on the birth certificate.

The FBI is investigating this and the Bidens are wisely letting them handle it. They have the experts and the means to determine if this is a Russian manipulation.

Plus, as hard as Fox is trying, nobody is picking this garbage up. There’s no reason to address it, nobody cares what Giuliani says.
 
1) You're assuming that the photo is a photo of an actual email message. AFAIK, that hasn't been proven.
I'm not sure I'm assuming that at all.

2) I can list all the email on my computer, but that doesn't prove that I never had a particular message and subsequently deleted it. Therefore, there is no way for me to prove that I never received a particular message.
These emails involved multiple cloud email providers, as well as a DC based international law firm and I don't know who else. There are going to be logs there, and in the case of the law firm probably non-alterable copies of the email, if anybody wants to look at them.
 
Again, you are misstating this. It's more like you are claiming that Walgreens sent me an email saying they sold me Heroin.

First of all I could safely deny it based on having searched my email and also not being involved in anything relating to Heroin. Then, were there money on the line I could get independent verification that there was no such email evident in my inbox. Since I am nobody of any significance, that is all I could do. Were I Biden though, I could get Walgreen to confirm that they hadn't sent the email. They would almost certainly have their email logged in an auditable way so we could get proof one way or the other. Were I Biden I would also be able to get Apple to confirm if the email had been received.

Have I mentioned before that retaining e-mails indefinitely is not a standard practice? Have I also mentioned that some people delete e-mails immediately? I'm pretty sure I mentioned that Apple would not have copies of e-mails or records of sending/receiving just because someone is using a Mac to deal with their e-mail.

Your continued insistence that it would be easy to disprove the authenticity of a faked e-mail is at odds with reality.

Given that nothing about the story makes sense in reality, as noted more than once, there is no benefit to the Bidens or the Biden campaign to substantively address this non-scandal.
 
I'm not sure I'm assuming that at all.


These emails involved multiple cloud email providers, as well as a DC based international law firm and I don't know who else. There are going to be logs there, and in the case of the law firm probably non-alterable copies of the email, if anybody wants to look at them.

Good point. Why would Hunter download his actual emails onto his hard drive when he can access them from any computer? How did Giuliani get access to them? Does he have Hunter's password?
 
Good point. Why would Hunter download his actual emails onto his hard drive when he can access them from any computer? How did Giuliani get access to them? Does he have Hunter's password?
E-mails would typically be downloaded to the hard drive as they are read. Depending on the provider's settings (and perhaps user settings), they can even be automatically deleted from the server upon download. This is less common now that e-mails are accessed from multiple devices since it would be inconvenient to open an e-mail on a PC and then not have it for reference if needed on a smartphone.

Still, a smart computer user shouldn't keep every e-mail message after dealing with it and should only retain those that have important information, and deleting an e-mail locally should always delete the e-mail on the remote server.
 
Have I mentioned before that retaining e-mails indefinitely is not a standard practice? Have I also mentioned that some people delete e-mails immediately? I'm pretty sure I mentioned that Apple would not have copies of e-mails or records of sending/receiving just because someone is using a Mac to deal with their e-mail.
Have you checked the email address he was using? One of them is rhbdc@icloud.com.

Your continued insistence that it would be easy to disprove the authenticity of a faked e-mail is at odds with reality.
No it isn't. I'm imagining the law firm who sent at least one of the emails. Are you telling me that they have no idea what emails they have sent in the past and no way of proving it? If one of their lawyers makes a mistake, or does something foolish, the lawyer can just delete the email and the law firm has no way of finding the data? I find that hard to believe.

Given that nothing about the story makes sense in reality, as noted more than once, there is no benefit to the Bidens or the Biden campaign to substantively address this non-scandal.
That's a strategic question, and all I can say to it is "we will see".
 
Last edited:
Good point. Why would Hunter download his actual emails onto his hard drive when he can access them from any computer? How did Giuliani get access to them? Does he have Hunter's password?
People who do a lot of travelling often want to do their email without access to the internet. One way to achieve that would be to install a client on the laptop and sync the mail to it.
 
E-mails would typically be downloaded to the hard drive as they are read. Depending on the provider's settings (and perhaps user settings), they can even be automatically deleted from the server upon download. This is less common now that e-mails are accessed from multiple devices since it would be inconvenient to open an e-mail on a PC and then not have it for reference if needed on a smartphone.

Still, a smart computer user shouldn't keep every e-mail message after dealing with it and should only retain those that have important information, and deleting an e-mail locally should always delete the e-mail on the remote server.
That shouldn't apply to the law firm, or the investment fund's email systems though.
 
Last edited:
First of all I could safely deny it based on having searched my email and also not being involved in anything relating to Heroin. Then, were there money on the line I could get independent verification that there was no such email evident in my inbox. Since I am nobody of any significance, that is all I could do. Were I Biden though, I could get Walgreen to confirm that they hadn't sent the email. They would almost certainly have their email logged in an auditable way so we could get proof one way or the other. Were I Biden I would also be able to get Apple to confirm if the email had been received.

Maybe they will produce proof like this.

I'm starting to feel that shutIt has me on ignore, but for the record denying something is not disproving something. You've repeatedly claimed it should be easy to disprove emails (of which nothing but screenshots have been released) but so far you seem unable to explain what would disprove them. How can you claim it should be easy to do something if you can't come up with anything other than 'say uh-huh that wasn't me?'
 
No it isn't. I'm imagining the law firm who sent at least one of the emails. Are you telling me that they have no idea what emails they have sent in the past and no way of proving it? If one of their lawyers makes a mistake, or does something foolish, the lawyer can just delete the email and the law firm has no way of finding the data? I find that hard to believe.

Just to keep hammering away, how would you prove someone else didn't send an email? How would you prove you didn't send an email? We don't have the emails. We don't have metadata. We have a screenshot of a purported email. How do you disprove that? You are claiming it is easy to prove a negative, but so far your "proof" consists of "deny it." That's not proof.
 
Last edited:
Good point. Why would Hunter download his actual emails onto his hard drive when he can access them from any computer? How did Giuliani get access to them? Does he have Hunter's password?

The email in the original NY Post article had the message as having been sent to Hunter Biden's work email account. I don't know how things work with Apple computers, but with my Windows 10 computer my work email is not stored on my computer even though with mandatory telework I exclusively use my computer to read my work email (my personal email is also not stored on my laptop - that would only happen if I used Outlook for my email).
 
Last edited:
No it isn't. I'm imagining the law firm who sent at least one of the emails. Are you telling me that they have no idea what emails they have sent in the past and no way of proving it? If one of their lawyers makes a mistake, or does something foolish, the lawyer can just delete the email and the law firm has no way of finding the data? I find that hard to believe.
I'll tell you what: Produce one of these supposed e-mails intact and it might be worth further discussing data retention policies with you. Unfortunately for this story, this has yet to be proven to have happened at all.
 
I'm starting to feel that shutIt has me on ignore, but for the record denying something is not disproving something. You've repeatedly claimed it should be easy to disprove emails (of which nothing but screenshots have been released) but so far you seem unable to explain what would disprove them. How can you claim it should be easy to do something if you can't come up with anything other than 'say uh-huh that wasn't me?'
You are on my ignore list, but none the less.... these emails have been sent from a law firm and an investment fund. If you don't think they have the capacity to confirm/deny to a legally defensible standard that these emails were sent by them, then I don't know what to tell you. These are companies who Biden worked for/with and who are being accused of wrong doing here. That is ignoring what ever logs Apple and Google will have.

If they want to refute that they sent these emails, they easily can.
 
I'll tell you what: Produce one of these supposed e-mails intact and it might be worth further discussing data retention policies with you. Unfortunately for this story, this has yet to be proven to have happened at all.
We know who it was sent from and to, the subject and the time it was sent. It isn't 5 minutes work to check the archive if their email archive is any good, and a few hours to a couple of days if it isn't.
 
We know who it was sent from and to, the subject and the time it was sent. It isn't 5 minutes work to check the archive if their email archive is any good, and a few hours to a couple of days if it isn't.
The companies involved have no skin in the game at the moment. They open their mouths and they open themselves to attack from one or both sides.

Not worth it.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom