Thievery, most foul?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
Maybe he doesn't want to release them
Yeah, I've been wondering about that. If they're so freaking incriminating, what's he waiting for?
@George-K said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
Maybe he doesn't want to release them
Yeah, I've been wondering about that. If they're so freaking incriminating, what's he waiting for?
Watch the videos.
For one, these documents didn't just "go missing." According to Carlson, UPS admits that material was removed from the sealed package. That is, someone removed things from the shipping box. There's nowhere online that UPS refutes this. Their spokesman said:
After an extensive search, we have found the contents of the package and are arranging for its return
So yeah, the contents of the package were missing, not the whole package. After the package was sealed by Tucker's producer with two other people in the room. The UPS guy who picked up the package also admits the package was sealed. So the box was opened and contents were removed while in the custody of UPS.
Second, a lot of the stuff, according to Carlson, would really make Hunter Biden look bad but it's immaterial to the Tony Bobulinski stuff and has no ties to Joe Biden, so they're not running any of it.
That second part is, well, whatever, but the UPS thing is pretty weird.
-
@Mik said in Thievery, most foul?:
Not exactly above board, is it?
The documents? No. But clearly some jackass at UPS tried to sabotage the package, almost certainly without knowing its contents.
-
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
I was only joking
-
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
Carlson and his team didn't know the contents of the stuff until after they received them; Carlson was dealing with the Bobulinski story at the time, not this.
I'm not trying to defend the guy, just saying that the package story seems legit. UPS backs up the claims.
Please love yourself.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
Carlson and his team didn't know the contents of the stuff until after they received them; Carlson was dealing with the Bobulinski story at the time, not this.
I'm not trying to defend the guy, just saying that the package story seems legit. UPS backs up the claims.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
Carlson and his team didn't know the contents of the stuff until after they received them; Carlson was dealing with the Bobulinski story at the time, not this.
I'm not trying to defend the guy, just saying that the package story seems legit. UPS backs up the claims.
Agreed. I just don't know that there is anything we need to see nor that there is a conspiracy. The idea that the DNC had the ins at UPS to make this happen seems a bit far fetched.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
They've certainly managed to concoct a news story out of a bunch of stuff they don't feel comfortable airing.
Carlson and his team didn't know the contents of the stuff until after they received them; Carlson was dealing with the Bobulinski story at the time, not this.
I'm not trying to defend the guy, just saying that the package story seems legit. UPS backs up the claims.
Agreed. I just don't know that there is anything we need to see nor that there is a conspiracy. The idea that the DNC had the ins at UPS to make this happen seems a bit far fetched.
@Mik said in Thievery, most foul?:
The idea that the DNC had the ins at UPS to make this happen seems a bit far fetched.
I don't think it was that. (To Carlson's credit, he didn't insinuate such, either.) UPS doesn't even know how it happened. Likely it was just some douchebag who works in a sorting facility acting on his own.
As for the contents of the documents, it's tautologically true that they aren't important enough to report on.
-
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
@Jolly said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
According to Tucker's original video, the files were sent to a Fox producer, and he was sending them to Tucker as he was working remotely in California.
Now, I don't know about you, but I deal with highly confidential documents on a daily basis as part of my job, and we would never, ever, send them on a stick via a courier or via snail-mail. We have encryption processes set up, and internal networking that allows us to access these documents immediately.
As a matter of fact, our laptops are locked to prevent us from putting anything on a USB stick, due to security concerns.
If we had to send all our files via the mail, we'd never get anything done. And clearly, if you believe this story, the courier is a long way from being secure.
There's something about this whole story that doesn't make sense.
I was only joking
-
@Jolly said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
According to Tucker's original video, the files were sent to a Fox producer, and he was sending them to Tucker as he was working remotely in California.
Now, I don't know about you, but I deal with highly confidential documents on a daily basis as part of my job, and we would never, ever, send them on a stick via a courier or via snail-mail. We have encryption processes set up, and internal networking that allows us to access these documents immediately.
As a matter of fact, our laptops are locked to prevent us from putting anything on a USB stick, due to security concerns.
If we had to send all our files via the mail, we'd never get anything done. And clearly, if you believe this story, the courier is a long way from being secure.
There's something about this whole story that doesn't make sense.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Jolly said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
According to Tucker's original video, the files were sent to a Fox producer, and he was sending them to Tucker as he was working remotely in California.
Now, I don't know about you, but I deal with highly confidential documents on a daily basis as part of my job, and we would never, ever, send them on a stick via a courier or via snail-mail. We have encryption processes set up, and internal networking that allows us to access these documents immediately.
As a matter of fact, our laptops are locked to prevent us from putting anything on a USB stick, due to security concerns.
If we had to send all our files via the mail, we'd never get anything done. And clearly, if you believe this story, the courier is a long way from being secure.
There's something about this whole story that doesn't make sense.
Doing it this way makes chain of custody a hell of a lot easier to follow. You can't go around giving everyone and their mother access to materials you're going to report on, because as soon as someone cries "tampering," you're going to have to walk back the entire history of the document: who had access, when manipulation happened if it occurred, who was accessing which version, etc. For reporting, it's got to be as linear as possible.
-
@Mik said in Thievery, most foul?:
Then I’m not sure UPS is the way to go.
Remember, they didn't know what they were receiving.
I'm not saying this is a DNC conspiracy. I'm saying the UPS thing happened. UPS confirms it and it would be better for them if they didn't have to. They reluctantly had to admit publicly that items were removed from the package under their care.
Whatever this means I dunno. Like I said probably some jackass tampered with it, end of story. But the handling of the material isn't that weird considering this was a news outlet.
-
I agree with your assessment. Just not sure that a commercial carrier qualifies for chain of custody.
@Mik said in Thievery, most foul?:
I agree with your assessment. Just not sure that a commercial carrier qualifies for chain of custody.
No idea why they went with UPS. I mean FFS, did they not have FedEx in California?
-
It would have been funnier if they'd gone with USPS. They could have claimed it was sabotaged by Deep State postmen.
-
It would have been funnier if they'd gone with USPS. They could have claimed it was sabotaged by Deep State postmen.
-
@Jolly said in Thievery, most foul?:
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
He's not smart enough to use an ftp site or dropbox to transfer files.
Honestly - they mail this stuff on USB sticks? LOLz.
Dear of hacking?
According to Tucker's original video, the files were sent to a Fox producer, and he was sending them to Tucker as he was working remotely in California.
Now, I don't know about you, but I deal with highly confidential documents on a daily basis as part of my job, and we would never, ever, send them on a stick via a courier or via snail-mail. We have encryption processes set up, and internal networking that allows us to access these documents immediately.
As a matter of fact, our laptops are locked to prevent us from putting anything on a USB stick, due to security concerns.
If we had to send all our files via the mail, we'd never get anything done. And clearly, if you believe this story, the courier is a long way from being secure.
There's something about this whole story that doesn't make sense.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Thievery, most foul?:
We have encryption processes set up, and internal networking that allows us to access these documents immediately.
Then what if you have a document you want to leak and you want to offer it as bait to a UPS dupe?
-
It's interesting how some people conjure up things, talk about what Tucker said or did, but have not watched Tucker's explanation of what happened from the outset. As usual, it's based upon what another news source says he said, instead of WATCHING WHAT THE FRUCK HE ACTUALLY SAID!
That's what I like about Aqua. I don't always agree with him, but he cuts through the bullshit by assessing what is factual, and what is nonsense or politically biased. Amidst all the implications of what something means or doesn't mean in this thread, he avoids doing so most of the time. He should be a writer or something, it would be a gooder job than whatever he's doing now.
So, there are only three outstanding world-champion geniouses on this forum: Me, Aqua, and of course, Ax.
The rest of you can join at any time, the smartest objective thinkers are already on the consideration list.BTW - pinch and hold your tongue and say "Tucker" over and over. If you do that, you too are a geniouse.
Bwaahaa555588hahabwahaha447775!!!!
