I don’t know how reliable their search methods were, but I have doubts.
I don’t know how reliable their search methods were, but I have doubts.”
Just look at a sample of these or anyone’s emails. There’s no way to make an automated search tool do anything but a lame, superficial job that missing at least 90% of what they’re looking for. People express themselves in a myriad of ways. Words associated with crimes won’t appear in emails surrounding a crime. Just think for a moment. Crimes about money will include the words “money,” “cash,” “contribution” “quid pro quo,” “favor,” “Clinton Foundation,” “sexting,” “ Epstein,” “underage girls,” etc. It’ll all be in shorthand language with innuendos and most unsaid.
Things get inferred, because the sender and receiver already know each other and can understand far more subtle language. Things won’t have to be spelled out, since they’ve likely had phone or in person conversations prior to the emails and after the emails. Take a look at your own emails. Would someone be able to guess what key words to use to find emails on any topic?
I repeat. Any search that might have been done would have been a pitiful attempt. Reviewing the emails takes real time review by human eyes.