• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED, were COPIED LOCALLY[W:11]

C

Casca XV

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 4, 2016
Messages
7,377
Reaction score
1,454
Location
State of Jefferson
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
On January 6 2017 Hillary Clinton started the Democrat Party talking point that " All 17 US Intelligence say Russia hacked Democrat Party computer servers."

This has since been proven a lie. There are only 3 intelligence agencies supporting this claim: FBI, CIA, NSA. But even this useless because they are basing that conclusion 100% on the word of Crowdstrike. The DNC has refused to grant access of their computer systems to any US intelligence agency.

Crowdstrike is a private cyber security company hired by the Hillary for President campaign. The company is owned by a Ukrainian billionaire who hates Russia.

Guccifer 2.0 is a Romanian hacker and the Wikileaks 3rd party source concerning Hillary Clinton.

The Crowdstrike allegations are: Guccifer was a Russian agent or was being supplied his information by the Russians.

Guccifer has claimed Seth Rich was his source and has provided email proof that he was in contact with Rich in the weeks before the leaks and Rich's murder.

Forensicator is a cyber forensic investigative group run by Shawn Henry a retired executive assistant to the director of the FBI. They have done forensic research on files displayed by both Guccifer and Wikileaks and determined they were not remotely hacked. That someone with local access to the Democrat Party computer system used a USB flash drive to extract the files. Detailed information is available in the links below.

New Research Shows Guccifer 2.0 Files Were Copied Locally, Not Hacked – Disobedient Media

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUyKmVPd_HA

Forensic Investigator Says DNC Computer Hacked Locally!  – Disobedient Media

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/01/06/why-the-dnc-emails-were-leaked-not-hacked/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t20e_dXws8

https://www.rt.com/usa/370447-russia-hack-intelligence-dissent/

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ell-guccifer-2-0-admits-seth-rich-dnc-leaker/

https://wearechange.org/guccifer-2-0-admits-seth-rich-source-dnc-files/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpHCpRdIZDU
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Well if it's on RT, it's gotta' be right!
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Haha, yep. It's all fake cause I'm sure the FBI and CIA just agreed with crowdstrike and have no evidence of their own. It's amazing. CNN and NBC and the NYT are all fake news then you post websites that are practically nothing more than blogs with gofundme pages.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

A fink in the rat's nest.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Harry Guerrilla said:
While the "news" outlets for this are ****.
There is actual data to suggest it wasn't hacked.
Click to expand...

Where?
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

The hate trump crowd along with the Hillary fluffing forces both cannot believe Trump could have actually won a fair election. SO these two groups (that often overlap but are not identical) have bought into the Russian conspiracy theory and are unwilling to give it up. TO do so, would require these two groups to admit that Trump was actually the more preferred candidate in more states and more electoral districts than the Bobbler of Benghazi
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Casca XV said:
There are only 3 intelligence agencies supporting this claim: FBI, CIA, NSA.
Click to expand...
This has been proven a lie.
There're four members of the USIC who support this claim.
Chomsky said:
Well if it's on RT, it's gotta' be right!
Click to expand...
Russia Today (RT) is a source after all.
It's one of the ones.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

TurtleDude said:
The hate trump crowd along with the Hillary fluffing forces both cannot believe Trump could have actually won a fair election. SO these two groups (that often overlap but are not identical) have bought into the Russian conspiracy theory and are unwilling to give it up. TO do so, would require these two groups to admit that Trump was actually the more preferred candidate in more states and more electoral districts than the Bobbler of Benghazi
Click to expand...
Which side of the Venn diagram do the FBI, CIA, NSA, and DNI fall under?

Are they the folks who hate Trump?

Or are they the Hillary fluffers?
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Simon W. Moon said:
Which side of the Venn diagram do the FBI, CIA, NSA, and DNI fall under?

Are they the folks who hate Trump?

Or are they the Hillary fluffers?
Click to expand...

my experience with those agencies is that the agency tends to like or dislike individual politicians rather than parties per se. The scooter libby debacle was based on the CIA having a hard on for W, rather than the GOP
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED, were COPIED LOCALLY[W:

Im not sure why this thread needed to be moved. Im not aware of anyine presenting any proof that any server was ever hacked.

Podesta was tricked into willingly giving whoever it was acess to his puter but he wasnt hacked. He was phished.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

roughdraft274 said:
Haha, yep. It's all fake cause I'm sure the FBI and CIA just agreed with crowdstrike and have no evidence of their own. It's amazing. CNN and NBC and the NYT are all fake news then you post websites that are practically nothing more than blogs with gofundme pages.
Click to expand...

Ya, these "Blogs" as you put it are the independent media that is bankrupting the MSM.

They are doing to the Newspapers/Cable/Network news what DVD & Blu-ray did to VHS. What cars did to horse and buggy.

They have nothing but their integrity, that gofundme dry's up in a second if they get caught spouting BS. There are no Mexican billionaires or corporations to prop them up if they get caught lying, which seem to be a weekly event with the MSM you listed.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

roughdraft274 said:
Haha, yep. It's all fake cause I'm sure the FBI and CIA just agreed with crowdstrike and have no evidence of their own. It's amazing. CNN and NBC and the NYT are all fake news then you post websites that are practically nothing more than blogs with gofundme pages.
Click to expand...

And if the FBI and CIA had evidence of their own it would have been leaked all over and you would be shouting about it.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

roughdraft274 said:
Haha, yep. It's all fake cause I'm sure the FBI and CIA just agreed with crowdstrike and have no evidence of their own. It's amazing. CNN and NBC and the NYT are all fake news then you post websites that are practically nothing more than blogs with gofundme pages.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the OP or links, but it's true the FBI, CIA et all did no forensic analysis of the DNC's server/s and literally took the word of Crowdstrike.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED, were COPIED LOCALLY[W:

trouble13 said:
Im not sure why this thread needed to be moved. Im not aware of anyine presenting any proof that any server was ever hacked.

Podesta was tricked into willingly giving whoever it was acess to his puter but he wasnt hacked. He was phished.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

answer: it destroys a critical Leftist propaganda talking point.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Simon W. Moon said:
This has been proven a lie.
There're four members of the USIC who support this claim.
Click to expand...
WTF?
1. You quote an accurate claim regarding Agencies, and then respond with "members of the" intelligence community, making your reply wrong.
2. The ODNI is not an actual Intelligence Agency but one of Agency integration.
3. If one reads the Assessment they would have found it specified it was only three Agencies.*
* Showing the press didn't even bother to accurately report.​


Scope
This report includes an analytic assessment drafted and coordinated among The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and The National Security Agency (NSA), which draws on intelligence information collected and disseminated by those three agencies.​
page i of the Assessment | page 6 of the pdf.​

As for what was assessed?

The assessment spoke of the NSA only having moderate confidence of Putin's involvement. Which is not the same as the other two agencies which had "High Confidence". (So which assessment would be more accurate? iLOL) Then, none of the agencies had the even higher level of confidence of "Almost Certainty" or "Nearly Certain", let alone a claim coming anywhere near a certainty or an absolute.

Moderate Confidence generally means that the information is credibly sourced and plausible but not of sufficient quality or corroborated sufficiently to warrant a higher level of confidence.

Annex B, page 13 of the Assessment - page 23 of the pdf​


It also came with a disclaimer, which is something most on the left aren't giving much attention.

Estimative language consists of two elements: judgments about the likelihood of developments or events occurring and levels of confidence in the sources and analytic reasoning supporting the judgments. Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, was well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.

Annex B, page 13 of the Assessment - page 23 of the pdf​
 
Last edited:
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

There are some absolute known facts. The DNC absolutely began using the Russia/hack story IMMEDIATELY to divert attention from what was actually in the emails. The DNC absolutely did not turn over their servers to the US intel agencies nor did they allow the US intel agencies the opportunity to examine them. The US intel agencies absolutely created definitive narratives off of data provided to them by a private company.

Not only is there still no actual proof the DNC servers were hacked by the Russians, theres no proof the servers were actually hacked at all. The Russia story is what they wanted the left to regurgitate to avoid the damning content of the actual emails. They trusted the democrat muppets would swallow it and repeat it like good little muppets. It worked.



 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

roughdraft274 said:
Where?
Click to expand...

It's within the metadata in the Guccifer 2 leaks.
The documents and files have serious anomalies, that shouldn't be present, if it were Russian elite hacker sourced.

At least 3 of the sets of documents, the alleged Russian Guccifer2, intentionally inserted Russian metadata.
In hacking terms, it's like dragging someone by the hair to the evidence that your Russian and not characteristic of "elite state hackers."
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Good thread, but old news.

William Binney, formerly of NSA but now a whistleblower, said this was likely the case (leak not hack) back when it happens.

The dems and those immersed in Russiagate will be experiencing cognitive dissonance when they read this. Some will be in denial, others will realize the error of their earlier analysis.

Analysis is probably the wrong word. It was propaganda that the Russians hacked the info. Some bought it, others did not.

Likely Seth Richards was the leaker, and that's why he's dead.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Harry Guerrilla said:
It's within the metadata in the Guccifer 2 leaks.
The documents and files have serious anomalies, that shouldn't be present, if it were Russian elite hacker sourced.

At least 3 of the sets of documents, the alleged Russian Guccifer2, intentionally inserted Russian metadata.
In hacking terms, it's like dragging someone by the hair to the evidence that your Russian and not characteristic of "elite state hackers."
Click to expand...

John Macafee has done a pretty good examination of why it is so ridiculous to claim this was a Russia sanctioned operation. By the data presented by the Ukrainian firm (which hates Russia and Putin) there was no attempt to hide or mask identities. Everything was done using Russian time stamps and Russian equipment and Russian coding...it's almost as if they are shrieking LOOK OVER HERE!!! ITS RUSSIA!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED, were COPIED LOCALLY[W:

trouble13 said:
Im not sure why this thread needed to be moved. Im not aware of anyine presenting any proof that any server was ever hacked.

Podesta was tricked into willingly giving whoever it was acess to his puter but he wasnt hacked. He was phished.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Or there is something to the Seth Rich story. :lol:
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

VanceMack said:
John Macafee has done a pretty good examination of why it is so ridiculous to claim this was a Russia sanctioned operation. By the data presented by the Ukrainian firm (which hates Russia and Putin) there was no attempt to hide or mask identities. Everything was done using Russian time stamps and Russian equipment and Russian coding...it's almost as if they are shrieking LOOK OVER HERE!!! ITS RUSSIA!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If you look at the first 3 sets released, the metadata was identical, which should be a red flag.
Someone created a Russian language document template and copied/paste from the originals, into the template.
All 3 have the same creation time, which was the same month and year that the docs were released and they don't match the originals released by wikileaks.
The wikileaks docs were unaltered.

The next question is, why would someone do that, there's absolutely no point.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

Harry Guerrilla said:
If you look at the first 3 sets released, the metadata was identical, which should be a red flag.
Someone created a Russian language document template and copied/paste from the originals, into the template.
All 3 have the same creation time, which was the same month and year that the docs were released and they don't match the originals released by wikileaks.
The wikileaks docs were unaltered.

The next question is, why would someone do that, there's absolutely no point.
Click to expand...
Except to create a scapegoat that would divert attention from the content of the emails.
 
Re: New Research Shows the Democrat computers were NOT HACKED. They were COPIED LOCAL

VanceMack said:
Except to create a scapegoat that would divert attention from the content of the emails.
Click to expand...

Pretty much.
Now with the OP's file, there are irregularities as well.
The zip doc has an EST time stamp, the estimated data transfer rate seems unlikely to be Russia.
23mb/s upload is fairly unusual, for someone downloading behind a vpn and few companies retain such upload speeds.

Indicates that it was more likely to be an internal transfer, rather than a download/upload.

Edit add: It's kinda bull**** that this was moved to conspiracy theory section.
The data in the original link is solid and disputes the claims being made.
That isn't conspiracy theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom