Guccifer 2.0 - Game Over

[Quadzilla99]

Holy wall of text batman

[DarrinS]

A bit surprising that The Nation published that.

[TSA]

A bit surprising that The Nation published that.

Found it odd as well.

Something interesting from the article I hadn't seen before.

"Kirk Wiebe, the former SIGINT analyst at the NSA, thinks Forensicator could be “someone very good with the FBI,” but there is no certainty. Unanimously, however, all the analysts and forensics investigators interviewed for this column say Forensicator’s advanced expertise, evident in the work he has done, is unassailable. They hold a similarly high opinion of Adam Carter’s work.

Forensicator is working with the documents published by Guccifer 2.0, focusing for now on the July 5 intrusion into the DNC server. The contents of Guccifer’s files are known—they were published last September—and are not Forensicator’s concern. His work is with the metadata on those files. These data did not come to him via any clandestine means. Forensicator simply has access to them that others did not have. It is this access that prompts Kirk Wiebe and others to suggest that Forensicator may be someone with exceptional talent and training inside an agency such as the FBI. “Forensicator unlocked and then analyzed what had been the locked files Guccifer supposedly took from the DNC server,” Skip Folden explained in an interview. “To do this he would have to have ‘access privilege,’ meaning a key.”

[TSA]

TLDR.

Summary?Boom. Game over.

"In effect, the new forensic evidence considered here lands in a vacuum. We now enter a period when an official reply should be forthcoming. What the forensic people are now producing constitutes evidence, however one may view it, and it is the first scientifically derived evidence we have into any of the events in which Russia has been implicated. The investigators deserve a response, the betrayed professionals who formed VIPS as the WMD scandal unfolded in 2003 deserve it, and so do the rest of us. The cost of duplicity has rarely been so high.

I concluded each of the interviews conducted for this column by asking for a degree of confidence in the new findings. These are careful, exacting people as a matter of professional training and standards, and I got careful, exacting replies.

All those interviewed came in between 90 percent and 100 percent certain that the forensics prove out. I have already quoted Skip Folden’s answer: impossible based on the data. “The laws of physics don’t lie,” Ray McGovern volunteered at one point. “It’s QED, theorem demonstrated,” William Binney said in response to my question. “There’s no evidence out there to get me to change my mind.” When I asked Edward Loomis, a 90 percent man, about the 10 percent he held out, he replied, “I’ve looked at the work and it shows there was no Russian hack. But I didn’t do the work. That’s the 10 percent. I’m a scientist.”

[RandomGuy]

Boom. Game over.

"In effect, the new forensic evidence considered here lands in a vacuum. We now enter a period when an official reply should be forthcoming. What the forensic people are now producing constitutes evidence, however one may view it, and it is the first scientifically derived evidence we have into any of the events in which Russia has been implicated. The investigators deserve a response, the betrayed professionals who formed VIPS as the WMD scandal unfolded in 2003 deserve it, and so do the rest of us. The cost of duplicity has rarely been so high.

I concluded each of the interviews conducted for this column by asking for a degree of confidence in the new findings. These are careful, exacting people as a matter of professional training and standards, and I got careful, exacting replies.

All those interviewed came in between 90 percent and 100 percent certain that the forensics prove out. I have already quoted Skip Folden’s answer: impossible based on the data. “The laws of physics don’t lie,” Ray McGovern volunteered at one point. “It’s QED, theorem demonstrated,” William Binney said in response to my question. “There’s no evidence out there to get me to change my mind.” When I asked Edward Loomis, a 90 percent man, about the 10 percent he held out, he replied, “I’ve looked at the work and it shows there was no Russian hack. But I didn’t do the work. That’s the 10 percent. I’m a scientist.”

So it wasn't a remote hack. Hadn't we already mostly established that?

Whodunnit?

Didn't really see anything in there indicating the identity of the person with the flashdrive.

Simplify it.

[Pavlov]

So who did all the non-July 5 activities?

[RandomGuy]

So who did all the non-July 5 activities?

Also not explained.

Crowdstrike shared the other activity, that involved poking around in the servers. One of the outside experts who criticized Crowdstrikes initial assessment, agreed that this other activity was Russian, and consistent with previous known Russian agents, as pointed out here.

There is also the nagging matter of the FBi attempting to warn the DNC that someone was rooting around their servers.

The FBI/NSA detect internet activity, not intranet activity. Someone downloading things onto a flash drive would not trigger the monitoring of US counter intelligence. What did US counterintelligence see that caused them to attempt to warn the DNC?

"game over"

If the theory doesn't explain all the evidence, you need to adjust your theory.

It's almost as if TSA and 4chan don't know or don't care about that.

[TSA]

Also not explained.

Crowdstrike shared the other activity, that involved poking around in the servers. One of the outside experts who criticized Crowdstrikes initial assessment, agreed that this other activity was Russian, and consistent with previous known Russian agents, as pointed out here.

There is also the nagging matter of the FBi attempting to warn the DNC that someone was rooting around their servers.

The FBI/NSA detect internet activity, not intranet activity. Someone downloading things onto a flash drive would not trigger the monitoring of US counter intelligence. What did US counterintelligence see that caused them to attempt to warn the DNC?

"game over"

If the theory doesn't explain all the evidence, you need to adjust your theory.

It's almost as if TSA and 4chan don't know or don't care about that.

The theory was that the DNC was not hacked. The theory proved out.

Mods please lock thread this one is game over. Boom.

[Pavlov]

The theory was that the DNC was not hacked. The theory proved out.

Mods please lock thread this one is game over. Boom.What is the proof regarding non-July 5 events?

[TSA]

What is the proof regarding non-July 5 events?

Already posted in this thread. Search Adam Carter

"Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative."

[RandomGuy]

Already posted in this thread. Search Adam Carter

"Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative."



CNN) — Federal investigators tried to warn the Democratic National Committee about a potential intrusion in their computer network months before the party moved to try to fix the problem, U.S. officials briefed on the probe tell CNN.

The revelation raises questions about whether the DNC could have done more to limit the damage done by hackers suspected of working for Russian intelligence.

The DNC brought in consultants from the private security firm CrowdStrike in April. And by the time suspected Russian hackers were kicked out of the DNC network in June, the hackers had been inside for about a year.

A person briefed on the DNC's response says the warning from the FBI and other agencies wasn't specific, and that the extent of the problem wasn't clear when the initial warnings came. DNC officials hired outside help after additional indications surfaced that their systems were compromised.

So what did the FBI see?

How did they know to warn the DNC?

[RandomGuy]

August 2, 2016 / 9:55 PM / a year ago
WASHINGTON/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The FBI did not tell the Democratic National Committee that U.S officials suspected it was the target of a Russian government-backed cyber attack when agents first contacted the party [in the fall of 2015], three people with knowledge of the discussions told Reuters.

And in months of follow-up conversations about the DNC's network security, the FBI did not warn party officials that the attack was being investigated as Russian espionage, the sources said.

The lack of full disclosure by the FBI prevented DNC staffers from taking steps that could have reduced the number of confidential emails and documents stolen, one of the sources said. Instead, Russian hackers whom security experts believe are affiliated with the Russian government continued to have access to Democratic Party computers for months during a crucial phase in the U.S. presidential campaign, the source said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-reconstruct-idUSKCN10E09H


Crowdstrike didn't come on board until April of 2016.

Shit on them all you like.

What did the FBI see before then?

[Pavlov]

Already posted in this thread. Search Adam Carter

"Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative."There has been forensic examination of all the wikileaks documents?

That's news to me. Show me the people who examined them all.

And the 2015 breaches? Also inside jerb remember remember chalupa fusion game over?

[hater]

Yeah read the detailed technical summaries

This pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of the hoax that Russsia hacked the DNC

Game over

[Pavlov]

Yeah read the detailed technical summaries

This pretty much puts the nail in the coffin of the hoax that Russsia hacked the DNC

Game over:lmao You've never read any of this.

[hater]

Read it at lunchtime

It was physically impossible for Russia to have hacked the DNC via eastern europe as Crowdstrike, DNC and US Intelligence has claimed

The cornerstone of the Russia collusion hoax has been devastated and the house of cards is coming down

[Pavlov]

Read it at lunchtime:lol no

[Pavlov]

CLAIM: Wikileaks Source for DNC Mails - STATUS: Not Verified:lol "game over" :lmao

[hater]

Um dont evade the point.

This proves it was physically impossible for Putin to hack the DNC servers through Eastern Europe as DNC claimed.

Also Guccifer docs were clearly adulterated.

Do you have anything to say about those 2 conclusions?

[TSA]

There has been forensic examination of all the wikileaks documents?

That's news to me. Show me the people who examined them all.

And the 2015 breaches? Also inside jerb remember remember chalupa fusion game over?

What does this have to do with the Guccifer "hack"?

[TSA]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-democrats-reconstruct-idUSKCN10E09H


Crowdstrike didn't come on board until April of 2016.

Shit on them all you like.

What did the FBI see before then?

What does this have to do with the Guccifer "hack"?

[Pavlov]

What does this have to do with the Guccifer "hack"?Exactly.

[TSA]

Exactly.

Not sure I'm following. Do you have a point?

[hater]

Yup Russia had nothing to do with the DNC hack.

Ball is on the Governments court

:lmao Brenman :lmao

Stupid retard probably cant even send an email without help

[Pavlov]

Not sure I'm following. Do you have a point?Just made it. :lol "game over"

[hater]

DNC leak NOT hack

[TSA]

Just made it. :lol "game over"

Still not following. Try expanding a bit.

[hater]

I actually called this many months ago. Thankfully Intelligence Comunity is finally catching on

[Pavlov]

Still not following. Try expanding a bit.Expanded game over.


I actually called this many months ago. Thankfully Intelligence Comunity is finally catching onThis was posted many months ago.

[TSA]

Expanded game over.

I have no idea what you are talking about. State your point.

[hater]

895836679226961921

[Pavlov]

I have no idea what you are talking about. State your point.Stated game over.

[hater]

Lol chumpdumper meltdown

[Pavlov]

Lol chumpdumper meltdownYou guys say game over and TSA wants the thread locked, so what else is there for you guys?

[Pavlov]

I mean, I see nothing at all about the 2015 hack but you guys are done right?

[TSA]

You guys say game over and TSA wants the thread locked, so what else is there for you guys?

Were the DNC documents hacked or leaked?

[Pavlov]

Were the DNC documents hacked or leaked?In 2015? I don't know what was taken.

Do you?

[TSA]

In 2015? I don't know what was taken.

Do you?

I didn't ask you about 2015. This entire thread has been about 2016 and Guccifer.

On June 12 last year, Julian Assange announced that WikiLeaks had and would publish documents pertinent to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
On June 14, CrowdStrike, a cyber-security firm hired by the DNC, announced, without providing evidence, that it had found malware on DNC servers and had evidence that Russians were responsible for planting it.
On June 15, Guccifer 2.0 first appeared, took responsibility for the “hack” reported on June 14 and claimed to be a WikiLeaks source. It then posted the adulterated documents just described.
On July 5, Guccifer again claimed he had remotely hacked DNC servers, and the operation was instantly described as another intrusion attributable to Russia. Virtually no media questioned this account.

Were the DNC documents obtained by a hack or a leak?

[Pavlov]

I didn't ask you about 2015. This entire thread has been about 2016 and Guccifer.I asked you about 2015. Are you afraid to talk about 2015? Is that game not over?

[TSA]

I asked you about 2015. Are you afraid to talk about 2015? Is that game not over?

I don't know what was taken in 2015 or if anything was taken at all. This thread isn't about 2015. This entire thread has been about 2016 and Guccifer. Are you afraid to talk about 2016?

On June 12 last year, Julian Assange announced that WikiLeaks had and would publish documents pertinent to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
On June 14, CrowdStrike, a cyber-security firm hired by the DNC, announced, without providing evidence, that it had found malware on DNC servers and had evidence that Russians were responsible for planting it.
On June 15, Guccifer 2.0 first appeared, took responsibility for the “hack” reported on June 14 and claimed to be a WikiLeaks source. It then posted the adulterated documents just described.
On July 5, Guccifer again claimed he had remotely hacked DNC servers, and the operation was instantly described as another intrusion attributable to Russia. Virtually no media questioned this account.

Were the DNC documents obtained by a hack or a leak?

[Pavlov]

I don't knowThank you for your honesty.

[Reck]

895836679226961921

So the FBI lied, then?

[TSA]

Thank you for your honesty.You're welcome.

Are you going to answer my question honestly or continue to dodge the question like a pussy?

On June 12 last year, Julian Assange announced that WikiLeaks had and would publish documents pertinent to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
On June 14, CrowdStrike, a cyber-security firm hired by the DNC, announced, without providing evidence, that it had found malware on DNC servers and had evidence that Russians were responsible for planting it.
On June 15, Guccifer 2.0 first appeared, took responsibility for the “hack” reported on June 14 and claimed to be a WikiLeaks source. It then posted the adulterated documents just described.
On July 5, Guccifer again claimed he had remotely hacked DNC servers, and the operation was instantly described as another intrusion attributable to Russia. Virtually no media questioned this account.

Were the DNC documents obtained by a hack or a leak?

[TSA]

So the FBI lied, then?

The FBI did not get to run forensics on the DNC server and were forced to rely on the DNC funded Crowdstrike report.

[Pavlov]

You're welcome.

Are you going to answer my question honestly or continue to dodge the question like a pussy?

On June 12 last year, Julian Assange announced that WikiLeaks had and would publish documents pertinent to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
On June 14, CrowdStrike, a cyber-security firm hired by the DNC, announced, without providing evidence, that it had found malware on DNC servers and had evidence that Russians were responsible for planting it.
On June 15, Guccifer 2.0 first appeared, took responsibility for the “hack” reported on June 14 and claimed to be a WikiLeaks source. It then posted the adulterated documents just described.
On July 5, Guccifer again claimed he had remotely hacked DNC servers, and the operation was instantly described as another intrusion attributable to Russia. Virtually no media questioned this account.

Were the DNC documents obtained by a hack or a leak?The emails dated January 2015 to May 2016?

I don't know tbh. That's why I'm asking you.

[TSA]

The emails dated January 2015 to May 2016?

I don't know tbh. That's why I'm asking you.

You are such a pussy :lol

[Pavlov]

You are such a pussy :lolI don't know about that either. I have trouble giving a shit about this Guccifer2.0 stuff tbh. It's not like that was the good stuff. If you get the metadata from the Wikileaks, you'll have my interest. Are those available?

[AaronY]

What's going on with pizzagate Opie? Is it a Boom game overtime there or not? Maybe a boom shakalaka or a KA-BOOM too maybe?

Can you even use the word pizzagate in a sentence please just once again at this point we'd appreciate it

[TSA]

I don't know about that either. I have trouble giving a shit about this Guccifer2.0 stuff tbh. It's not like that was the good stuff. If you get the metadata from the Wikileaks, you'll have my interest. Are those available?

You are being a complete pussy by repeatedly dodging the question. You fell for Russia hacked the DNC, why not just admit it and move on?

[AaronY]

Better than falling for pizzagate tbh

[Pavlov]

You are being a complete pussy by repeatedly dodging the question.I said I don't know because I don't. I have questions like can metadata be faked or altered? Didn't really find any answers independently, but didn't look for too long.
You fell for Russia hacked the DNC, why not just admit it and move on?Who hacked the DNC in 2015, TSA?

[TSA]

What's going on with pizzagate Opie? Is it a Boom game overtime there or not? Maybe a boom shakalaka or a KA-BOOM too maybe?

Can you even use the word pizzagate in a sentence please just once again at this point we'd appreciate it

https://vault.fbi.gov/william-bill-milton-cooper

https://vault.fbi.gov/diane-fossey

https://vault.fbi.gov/daniel-baruch-aaron

https://vault.fbi.gov/curtis-roosevelt

https://vault.fbi.gov/burl-ives

https://vault.fbi.gov/bishop-eddie-lee-long

[AaronY]

Yeah I'm clicking those for sure

[TSA]

I said I don't know because I don't. I have questions like can metadata be faked or altered? Didn't really find any answers independently, but didn't look for too long.

All of your questions are answered in OP's link. I really don't understand how you can read the articles by the forensicator, Adam Carter, and the Nation and not be able to answer the question. Unless of course it just pains you too much to admit to being duped.




Who hacked the DNC in 2015, TSA? Why don't you do a little research of your own and start a thread on it.

[Pavlov]

All of your questions are answered in OP's link. I really don't understand how you can read the articles by the forensicator, Adam Carter, and the Nation and not be able to answer the question. Unless of course it just pains you too much to admit to being duped.Guess I'll have to see what hard stance I took on Guccifer 2.0 -- I have trouble seeing why I should care so much about this when the 2015 and early 2016 hacks were the money shots. Maybe you can explain why Guccifer 2.0 documents are more important that the Wikileaks documents.


Why don't you do a little research of your own and start a thread on it.It pains you to admit you can't exclude the Russians.

[TSA]

Guess I'll have to see what hard stance I took on Guccifer 2.0 -- I have trouble seeing why I should care so much about this when the 2015 and early 2016 hacks were the money shots. Maybe you can explain why Guccifer 2.0 documents are more important that the Wikileaks documents.It's not about guccifer documents being more important than Wikileaks documents. It's about the lie that was pushed on the American people when they were told that Russia hacked the DNC. Now that it's been proven to be a leak, and that guccifers documents were purposely doctored to have Russian fingerprints, the next question is who created the plan and why?




It pains you to admit you can't exclude the Russians.I'm sure Russia, China, Iran, Israel etc were all up in the DNC servers in 2015. The DNC seemed pretty lackadaisical when it came to cyber security. What are these money shot documents you keep referring to that you think were hacked in 2015/early 2016?

[Pavlov]

It's not about guccifer documents being more important than Wikileaks documents. It's about the lie that was pushed on the American people when they were told that Russia hacked the DNC. Now that it's been proven to be a leak, and that guccifers documents were purposely doctored to have Russian fingerprints, the next question is who created the plan and why?



I'm sure Russia, China, Iran, Israel etc were all up in the DNC servers in 2015. The DNC seemed pretty lackadaisical when it came to cyber security. What are these money shot documents you keep referring to that you think were hacked in 2015/early 2016?
So you can't rule out the Russians. Thank you for your honesty.

[DarrinS]

If you can't rule out the Russians, then it was obviously the Russians (with high confidence).

[TSA]

So you can't rule out the Russians. Thank you for your honesty.

I've never seen you dodge so many questions before. What hack and what documents are you even talking about?

[Pavlov]

Nor dodging, just not interested in your leading question games. Rule Russia out of all the hacks and I'll accept it.

[Pavlov]

If you can't rule out the Russians, then it was obviously the Russians (with high confidence).Nope. But you've always been a dishonest hack, Darrin.

[TSA]

Nor dodging, just not interested in your leading question games. Rule Russia out of all the hacks and I'll accept it.

You dodged again. What hack from 2015/early 2016 and what documents are you even talking about?

[TSA]

No need to respond Pav. Your dodges and refusal to admit you were duped are all I needed.

[Pavlov]

You dodged again. What hack from 2015/early 2016 and what documents are you even talking about?
If you don't know about those you have no business talking about any other hack or leak tbh.

[Pavlov]

No need to respond Pav. Your dodges and refusal to admit you were duped are all I needed.
Heard any good Cat Stevens songs lately?

[TSA]

If you don't know about those you have no business talking about any other hack or leak tbh.

If you actually wanted to discuss it you would specify which hack and what documents you are referring to. But you won't, you'll just ask more questions and try to steer this thread away from the recent revelations concerning the DNC leak

[Pavlov]

If you actually wanted to discuss it you would specify which hack and what documents you are referring to. But you won't, you'll just ask more questions and try to steer this thread away from the recent revelations concerning the DNC leakI already said I don't care much about the Guccifer2.0 stuff. If is common knowledge and widely reported that the DNC was hacked in 2015 and spring 2016 and frankly it's comical that you know nothing about them. I have no more questions for you since you clearly need to work on your timeline.

[TSA]

I already said I don't care much about the Guccifer2.0 stuff. If is common knowledge and widely reported that the DNC was hacked in 2015 and spring 2016 and frankly it's comical that you know nothing about them. I have no more questions for you since you clearly need to work on your timeline.

I've repeatedly asked you to point to specific documents from them and you've repeatedly refused.

[Pavlov]

I've repeatedly asked you to point to specific documents from them and you've repeatedly refused.
The mere fact you have to ask about them makes this even funnier. I can't believe you've been going on about this for months without knowing about the earlier hacks. No wonder you never knew what I was talking about. I suggest you read more than one thing from now on.

[TSA]

The mere fact you have to ask about them makes this even funnier. I can't believe you've been going on about this for months without knowing about the earlier hacks. No wonder you never knew what I was talking about. I suggest you read more than one thing from now on.

What documents were obtained during the hacks of the DNC you are referring to?

[djohn2oo8]

Lol 11 page thread. More like this thread over.

[Pavlov]

What documents were obtained during the hacks of the DNC you are referring to?I can't say for sure, but Wikileaks got 44,000 emails dated January 2015 to May 25, 2016 from somewhere. Can we see the metadata for those files? Can anonymous bloggers write "game over" with those?

Anyway, the day Guccifer2.0 news broke the head of Crowdstrike himself said there was a good chance it was bullshit, so I don't get all the "game over" at proving it was.

[monosylab1k]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7OyKAFu50M

[RandomGuy]

If you can't rule out the Russians, then it was obviously the Russians (with high confidence).

If the experts in a field, and our own intelligence agencies conclude that, it is reasonable to accept their conclusions, barring contravening evidence.

"good enough" is sometimes all you get.

Feel free to provide any evidence to contradict that, short stack.

[RandomGuy]

The mere fact you have to ask about them makes this even funnier. I can't believe you've been going on about this for months without knowing about the earlier hacks. No wonder you never knew what I was talking about. I suggest you read more than one thing from now on.

Its almost like he can only see data that proves his assumed conclusion. Nah.

[RandomGuy]

Not sure I'm following. Do you have a point?


Already posted in this thread. Search Adam Carter

"Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative."



CNN) — Federal investigators tried to warn the Democratic National Committee about a potential intrusion in their computer network months before the party moved to try to fix the problem, U.S. officials briefed on the probe tell CNN.

The revelation raises questions about whether the DNC could have done more to limit the damage done by hackers suspected of working for Russian intelligence.

The DNC brought in consultants from the private security firm CrowdStrike in April. And by the time suspected Russian hackers were kicked out of the DNC network in June, the hackers had been inside for about a year.

A person briefed on the DNC's response says the warning from the FBI and other agencies wasn't specific, and that the extent of the problem wasn't clear when the initial warnings came. DNC officials hired outside help after additional indications surfaced that their systems were compromised.

So what did the FBI see?

How did they know to warn the DNC?

[RandomGuy]

I have no idea what you are talking about. State your point.

Long before Crowdstrike was brought in, the FBI and other agencies were warning the DNC their servers were being intruded on.

The entire raison d'etre for this thread seems to be "it was an inside job, not the Russians" for the "DNC hack", as if that event were just one event, with no related things.

You have proved roughly:

Guccifer was not external.

You haven't ruled out the Russians.

You have not presented any proof that all the other reports of Russian intrusion were somehow wrong.

It's like you are some OCD Sheldon Cooper hyper-focusing on a single brush-stroke, but missing the wider picture.

[djohn2oo8]

976959454100054017
Thread over....

[Reck]

976959454100054017
Thread over....

Wake me up when TSA is not constantly getting shit on. :lol

[TSA]

976959454100054017
Thread over....

As a result, he left a real, Moscow-based Internet Protocol address in the server logs of an American social media company, according to a source familiar with the government’s Guccifer investigation.

:rollin

[Pavlov]

As a result, he left a real, Moscow-based Internet Protocol address in the server logs of an American social media company, according to a source familiar with the government’s Guccifer investigation.

:rollinWhy is this so funny, TSA?

[djohn2oo8]

Why is this so funny, TSA?

I busted his shit. Another thread. He is dazed and incoherent. Down for the count.

[Reck]

Why is this so funny, TSA?

Anonymous sources bad now.

[djohn2oo8]

Anonymous sources bad now.

Ol sport sure took a beating on dis one.

[djohn2oo8]

Ol' sport avoiding this thread like the plague

[monosylab1k]

976959454100054017
Thread over....

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao TSA :lmao :lmao :lmao

[monosylab1k]

Holy fuck I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time :lmao

[TSA]

Holy fuck I haven’t laughed this hard in a long time :lmao

What a pathetic fucking life you live :rollin

:lol daily beast good now
:lol daily beast source “familiar” with Mueller’s investigation

[monosylab1k]

What a pathetic fucking life you live :rollin

:lol daily beast good now
:lol daily beast source “familiar” with Mueller’s investigation

^wrong about pizzagate

:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

What a pathetic fucking life you live :rollin

:lol daily beast good now
:lol daily beast source “familiar” with Mueller’s investigation

https://freeformapps.blob.core.windows.net/beyond/2017/17/b38db841-1531-4ef4-b21a-dd8ecc70fe12.gif

[djohn2oo8]

Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Another TSA conspiracy is a bust.

[TSA]

^wrong about pizzagate

:lmao

^life’s bright spots stemming from an online message board

:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

TSA mad about dis one.

[dabom]

Gold. :lol

[djohn2oo8]

Gold. :lol

He aint living this thread down.

[monosylab1k]

^life’s bright spots stemming from an online message board

:lmao

^wrong about pizzagate :lmao

[RandomGuy]

What a pathetic fucking life you live :rollin

:lol daily beast good now
:lol daily beast source “familiar” with Mueller’s investigation

When I looked into your sources on the matter, one of them quoted an expert who was skeptical of the initial story from Crowdstrike. Later that same expert said that, after looking at the evidence, they got it right, pizzaboychick.

Yet you continue to dance, like a good little marionette.

There will be a formal investigation, and unlike your 4chan bullshit, anything they conclude will have to be proved in court, with actual evidence, unlike most of the risible bullshit you think is true.

[RandomGuy]

“Almost immediately various cyber security companies and individuals were skeptical of Guccifer 2.0 and the backstory that he had generated for himself,” said Kyle Ehmke, an intelligence researcher at the cyber security firm ThreatConnect. “We started seeing these inconsistencies that led back to the idea that he was created hastily… by the individual or individuals that affected the DNC compromise.”

Proving that link definitively was harder. Ehmke led an investigation at ThreatConnect that tried to track down Guccifer from the metadata in his emails. But the trail always ended at the same data center in France. Ehmke eventually uncovered that Guccifer was connecting through an anonymizing service called Elite VPN, a virtual private networking service that had an exit point in France but was headquartered in Russia.

But on one occasion, The Daily Beast has learned, Guccifer failed to activate the VPN client before logging on. As a result, he left a real, Moscow-based Internet Protocol address in the server logs of an American social media company, according to a source familiar with the government’s Guccifer investigation. Twitter and WordPress were Guccifer 2.0’s favored outlets. Neither company would comment for this story, and Guccifer did not respond to a direct message on Twitter.

Working off the IP address, U.S. investigators identified Guccifer 2.0 as a particular GRU officer working out of the agency’s headquarters on Grizodubovoy Street in Moscow.
---------------------------------------------------

https://www.thedailybeast.com/exclusive-lone-dnc-hacker-guccifer-20-slipped-up-and-revealed-he-was-a-russian-intelligence-officer

[TSA]

When I looked into your sources on the matter, one of them quoted an expert who was skeptical of the initial story from Crowdstrike. Later that same expert said that, after looking at the evidence, they got it right, pizzaboychick.

Yet you continue to dance, like a good little marionette.

There will be a formal investigation, and unlike your 4chan bullshit, anything they conclude will have to be proved in court, with actual evidence, unlike most of the risible bullshit you think is true.

Until the results from a formal investigation are presented I'm going to side with the below people over an anonymous daily beast source that is familiar with Mueller's investigation.

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

[Pavlov]

Until the results from a formal investigation are presented I'm going to side with the below people over an anonymous daily beast source that is familiar with Mueller's investigation.

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. DiplomatDid any of them know about the IP address or have access to it?

[TSA]

Did any of them know about the IP address or have access to it?

Do you have any other publication claiming this discovered IP address other than the Daily Beast's anonymous source familiar with the government's investigation? If not until the results from a formal investigation are presented I'm going to side with the below people over an anonymous daily beast source that is familiar with government's investigation.

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

[Pavlov]

Do you have any other publication claiming this discovered IP address other than the Daily Beast's anonymous source familiar with the government's investigation? If not until the results from a formal investigation are presented I'm going to side with the below people over an anonymous daily beast source that is familiar with government's investigation.

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. DiplomatThere is currently no other source.

Are you saying it's all made up?

Yes or no.

[RandomGuy]

Did any of them know about the IP address or have access to it?


Do you have any other publication claiming this discovered IP address other than the Daily Beast's anonymous source familiar with the government's investigation? If not until the results from a formal investigation are presented I'm going to side with the below people over an anonymous daily beast source that is familiar with government's investigation.

William Binney, former NSA Technical Director for World Geopolitical & Military Analysis; Co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Center

Skip Folden, independent analyst, retired IBM Program Manager for Information Technology US (Associate VIPS)

Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)

Larry C Johnson, CIA & State Department (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Air Force Intelligence Officer (Ret.), Master SERE Resistance to Interrogation Instructor

John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Lisa Ling, TSgt USAF (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Edward Loomis, Jr., former NSA Technical Director for the Office of Signals Processing

David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former U.S. Army Infantry/Intelligence officer and CIA analyst

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA

Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)

Cian Westmoreland, former USAF Radio Frequency Transmission Systems Technician and Unmanned Aircraft Systems whistleblower (Associate VIPS)

Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA

Sarah G. Wilton, Intelligence Officer, DIA (ret.); Commander, US Naval Reserve (ret.)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

Chickenshit dodge.

None of those former intelligence officials have the specific expertise to evaluate the technical details, nor do they even have access. They wrote a letter you agree with.

Can you show me where they have done a technical analysis of the data, and what their specific conclusions were based on that analysis? No?

Fucking pizzaboichik.

[Spurminator]

I know I'd feel pretty crummy about voluntarily spreading rumors from a Russian disinformation operation to affect my own country's election, but, again, I still possess the capacity for shame.

[TSA]

There is currently no other source.

Are you saying it's all made up?

Yes or no.

I'm saying I'll need more than an anonymous Daily Beast source familiar with the government's investigation before making any decisions, as you should be doing as well.

[RandomGuy]

I'm saying I'll need more than an anonymous Daily Beast source familiar with the government's investigation before making any decisions, as you should be doing as well.

You're right, we should be listening to anonymous sources posting on 4chan. :rollin Dance Marionetka.

[TSA]

Did any of them know about the IP address or have access to it?



Chickenshit dodge.

None of those former intelligence officials have the specific expertise to evaluate the technical details, nor do they even have access. They wrote a letter you agree with.

Can you show me where they have done a technical analysis of the data, and what their specific conclusions were based on that analysis? No?

Fucking pizzaboichik.

If the FBI couldn't get access to evaluate the technical details I doubt the VIPS crew could get access.

[Pavlov]

I'm saying I'll need more than an anonymous Daily Beast source familiar with the government's investigation before making any decisions, as you should be doing as well.But your anonymous sources are fucking gold.

:lmao

[RandomGuy]

If the FBI couldn't get access to evaluate the technical details I doubt the VIPS crew could get access.

So, no. :rollin

[monosylab1k]

:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

Ol' sport with the swing and miss. Back to the dugout. Benched the rest of the game.

[monosylab1k]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7OyKAFu50M

[djohn2oo8]

lol big fail

[Winehole23]

according to today's indictment, Guccifer 2.0 was a GRU cutout:

1017805186964836352

[Winehole23]

looks bad for whoever this was:

1017807100158906368

[Winehole23]

Well, they've been hard selling the Russia narrative for over a year -- all based on Crowdstrike. I hope the public eventually gets more compelling evidence.There was enough evidence for an indictment, but one wonders whether it will ever be presented at trial -- if all the defendants are not in the USA.

[dabom]

:lol

[Winehole23]

if true, the VIPS skepticism -- and admittedly, my own -- might not be so well founded:


The hackers used a server in AZ but then ran that through a server “overseas.” The hackers targeted a DCCC computer in Illinois. Which suggests much of the hot air around transfer times is just that.

[spurraider21]

if true, the VIPS skepticism -- and admittedly, my own -- might not be so well founded:
can you fill me in on that issue?

[Winehole23]

here's the link, not to the indictment itself, but to Marcy Wheeler's working thread:

https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/07/13/the-russian-hack/



:

[Winehole23]

background:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-08-10/why-some-u-s-ex-spies-don-t-buy-the-russia-story
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-leak-or-a-hack-a-forum-on-the-vips-memo/

[spurraider21]

here's the link, not to the indictment itself, but to Marcy Wheeler's working thread:

https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/07/13/the-russian-hack/



:
doesn't really explain why the concerns were "hot air"

just says so

[Winehole23]

agree

[ElNono]

:lmao OP played like a fiddle by Russian agents

[Trainwreck2100]

:lmao OP played like a fiddle by Russian agents

now that registrations been approved we gonna have to welcome some of those russian agents.

[Winehole23]

GAME OVER!

[Pavlov]

TSA still says game over!

[djohn2oo8]

RandomGuy I thought you'd find this very interesting as you seem to be convinced it was Russia who was responsible for the hacking, even after being shown how highly flawed the lol CrowdStrike report was.

I'll post the summary here but it's important to go to the actual site so you can follow all of the links/evidence.

http://g-2.space/

Guccifer 2.0: Game Over
Metadata suggests it took only 30 minutes to go from a DNC tech/data strategy consultant creating documents to Guccifer2.0 tainting them - all occurring on a date that Guccifer2.0 claimed to be after he was locked out of the DNC Network - occurring on the same day that Guccifer2.0 emerged.

Data found deeper in files now also demonstrates there was a misdirection effort, that, in its larger scope - seems to have been intended to discredit leaks by having leaks blamed on Russian hackers
LATEST: An extremely rare pair of meetings has been discovered solely by following where Flood would likely have installed MS-Word (he worked for Biden at the White House for a year) and checking Biden's visitors on the 15th of June around 1:38pm. - Considering the attendees potential motives to frame Russia in both meetings, this is either a phenomenal coincidence or Guccifer 2.0's first batch of files came from the White House.

INTRODUCTION

There are individuals, who, in reality, have a higher likelihood of being linked to Guccifer2.0 than anyone in Russia. - The intention of this article is to inform readers, extensively about everything there is to know about Guccifer2.0 and from that, be armed with enough information to give motive and means the regard they deserve.

To understand who Guccifer2.0 is likely to be - it is imperative to understand WHAT Guccifer2.0 is. - What did he do? - What did he say? - Are his claims now confirmed, debunked or yet to be verified? - What were the results of his actions? - What do any lies told and the likelihood of them being debunked or remaining secret really imply about his intent? - Was there anything misreported or omitted that may have been relevant?

The answers to the above questions will probably be surprising to many considering what the USIC, CyberSecurity researchers and the MSM have repeatedly insisted over and over again.

The first step is to catalog events - and then, retrospectively review the data.
CONTENTS

1. Timeline - What Happened & When Did It Happen
2. Guccifer2.0's Claims Debunked & Discredited
3. 3rd Party Assessments - Assumptions & Conjecture vs Evidence & Facts
4. Actions, Consequences & Convenience For Anti-Leak Narratives
5. Rushing To Be Russian - The Donkey In A Bear Costume Made A Mistake
6. Language & Text Analysis
7. Recognizing Intent From Deceptions
8. With Motive & Means - Those More Likely Linked to G2 than Russians
9. Updates & Inquiries With Third Parties
10. 3rd Party Research & Further Reading
11. Frequently Asked Questions

(8) With Motive & Means - Those More Likely Linked to G2 than Russians

It seems like there's a good chance Warren Flood has involvement to some degree but even if that's true - he personally had nothing to lose due to the emails, so, who would really be behind such a scheme?

The more thought I've given it, it seems most probable that one particular group would have been particularly desperate precisely at that time, for the emergence of a narrative about Russian hackers to discredit proper leaks / justify claims that all leaks are 'probably doctored' and they will have very likely known Flood too.

That group is the Clinton Campaign.

As of June 12th, they were in a position where Julian Assange had just announced WikiLeaks' upcoming release of Hillary's emails, she was still under FBI investigation, Trump was attacking Hillary for her use of a private server with his supporters frequently chanting "lock her up!" at rallies).

The campaign was in a desperate position and really needed something similar to a Russian hacker narrative and one where they would be fortunate to have a seemingly clumsy hacker that leaves lots of 'fingerprints' tainting files and bringing the reputation of leaks into question... Sure enough, 2-3 days later, Guccifer2.0 - the world's weirdest hacker - was spawned and started telling lies in an effort to attribute himself to the malware discoveries, etc.




================================================== ===============================





Also...I posted this tweet from Anonymous Scandanavia yesterday thinking it was more pedo related since it focused on Biden being creepy with the children, but it seems to be directly tied to this article and the Ukranians that were visiting Biden in the White House during the time of the server breach and Warren Flood (Biden's technology director)

859135853322547201


Details in link

http://g-2.space/jb/

White House Meetings on Ukraine Coincide With Time of Russian Fingerprint Fabrications - Pursuing Guccifer2.0's 'Warren Flood' Connections
By Adam Carter --- April 29th, 2017

In my research to investigate the real identity of Guccifer 2.0, I discovered that the name Warren Flood applied to more documents than had originally been reported and highlighted the unusual nature of those documents both in terms of the metadata and the RSIDs (and Russian Stylesheet that existed in multiple documents even before the content in each document did) and explained that this demonstrates an effort to try to discredit Wikileaks by blaming leaks on Russian hackers.

Considering where copies of Microsoft Word installed by Flood (highlighted in the photo above with Biden) might exist besides on computers he owns, I considered his past role as Sen. Joe Biden's Technology Director (as noted on his Linked-In profile) and thought one place to look for interesting activity would be computers residing in Biden's office or generally at the White House.

So, I wondered who may have visited Biden that day around that time. I thought I'd check out visits to the White House hosted by Biden, wondering whether there'd be any interesting activity anywhere near 1:38pm on June 15th 2016.

It turns out that Biden was hosting visits from a number of Ukrainians around that time, on that date. To see how frequent this sort of activity occurred I checked the whole of June. - It seems such visits were not a regular occurance.

(Times below are appointment times, some individuals turned up before their 2pm appointment)

An attempt to quickly identify visitors in June showed the folllowing had a Ukraine connection:

While this doesn't prove anything, it certainly is a curious coincidence to stumble upon while looking for activity of people that might have had a motive (or helped with an effort) to frame Russia.

US visitors that day also have ties back to events surrounding the Ukrainian 2014 revolution and/or reporting on it (with the exception of Kuklish who is an English-Ukrainian translator).

I'm not going to get into speculation. I've let journalists who have written extensively on the Ukraine coup know about this and will leave this up to them to pursue, if they wish to.

UPDATE: A closer look at the actual booking/arrival times, room numbers, other visits, etc. shows that, on the 15th, there were effectively 2 meetings. One of which had at least 18 individuals attending (Stoliarchuk is listed at 1:30pm and 2:00pm) and another with at least 4 attending.

Wrong. Guccifer Russian. :lol

[djohn2oo8]

now that registrations been approved we gonna have to welcome some of those russian agents.

TSA, Chris and Darrin already here.

[Quadzilla99]

Would it be more likely to be a Russian operative copying data from with the DNC or a disgruntled DNC employee such as Seth Rich?

:cry but muh seth rich narrative :cry

[djohn2oo8]

:cry but muh seth rich narrative :cry

:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

The goddamn game is over

[djohn2oo8]

This thread will be the antithesis of djohn2oo8's Flynn thread.

This thread will deliver.

Game over.
I guess the delivery driver got lost somewhere.

[Winehole23]

The goddamn game is overHow so?

[djohn2oo8]

How so?
Well for one...This dumbass thought Guccifer was either Seth Rich or a Ukrainian. Both false.

[Winehole23]

Well for one...This dumbass thought Guccifer was either Seth Rich or a Ukrainian. Both false.it's totally unsurprising that TSA's take turned out to be laughably wrong. his whole game is to return to the conspiracy well again and again with the same results.

[RandomGuy]

Putting this together with the news that CrowdStrike had to rewrite their original Russia report (FBI based their conclusion off original report because DNC wouldn't allow them in their server) twice now because of errors really takes a fat shit on the Russian hacking narrative that has been pushed.

Hit that Crowdstrike blunt too hard man.

I can marvel that after getting burned on stupid shit like this, you are more reticent to make sweeping predictions based on the stupid shit you read, but are still unable to see how stupid the shit you read actually is.

#oblivious.

[djohn2oo8]

Oh he is staying away from this thread

[TSA]

Hit that Crowdstrike blunt too hard man.

I can marvel that after getting burned on stupid shit like this, you are more reticent to make sweeping predictions based on the stupid shit you read, but are still unable to see how stupid the shit you read actually is.

#oblivious.

says the guy who endlessly pimped Hamilton68 lol

[RandomGuy]

says the guy who endlessly pimped Hamilton68 lol

I don't read your propaganda shit regularly. Refresh my memory. Why, in your opinion is Hamilton68 not credible?

[TSA]

I don't read your propaganda shit regularly. Refresh my memory. Why, in your opinion is Hamilton68 not credible?Bill fucking Kristol

Jonathan Morgan is the same guy who submitted a report to the Senate on Russian interference and then fucked with the Alabama Senate race using fake Russian accounts.

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/20/how-fake-news-and-western-propaganda-about-russian-interference-in-catalonia-coerced-ecuador-to-silence-julian-assange/

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/17/with-new-d-c-policy-group-dems-continue-to-rehabilitate-and-unify-with-bush-era-neocons/

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-new-blacklist-202612/

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/russian-trolls.php

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/miriamelder/stop-blaming-russian-bots-for-everything#.exyL46pow

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/12/19/researcher-affiliated-with-russian-interference-senate-report-used-questionable-online-tactics-during-alabama-senate-race/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.09721b8675cd

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/alabama-senate-roy-jones-russia.html

[RandomGuy]

Bill fucking Kristol

Jonathan Morgan is the same guy who submitted a report to the Senate on Russian interference and then fucked with the Alabama Senate race using fake Russian accounts.

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/20/how-fake-news-and-western-propaganda-about-russian-interference-in-catalonia-coerced-ecuador-to-silence-julian-assange/

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/17/with-new-d-c-policy-group-dems-continue-to-rehabilitate-and-unify-with-bush-era-neocons/

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-new-blacklist-202612/

https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/russian-trolls.php

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/miriamelder/stop-blaming-russian-bots-for-everything#.exyL46pow

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/12/19/researcher-affiliated-with-russian-interference-senate-report-used-questionable-online-tactics-during-alabama-senate-race/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.09721b8675cd

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/19/us/alabama-senate-roy-jones-russia.html

Sooooo, how does this invalidate their methodology?

[Spurs Homer]

boom

:lmao:lmao

[TSA]

Sooooo, how does this invalidate their methodology?

You don't even know what their methodology is as they've kept it secret.

[djohn2oo8]

Seth Rich

[Guccifer 2.0]

We’re on the precipice of the GAME OVEREREST moment in world history! TSA keep the faith!

[djohn2oo8]

:lmao

[RandomGuy]

You don't even know what their methodology is as they've kept it secret.

...so you have no idea what their methodology is.. and you believe that it is invalid... because reasons?

[Trainwreck2100]

You guys remember that time an American citizen got played by a Russian agent?

[DMC]

You guys remember that time an American citizen got played by a Russian agent?

In a movie?

[RandomGuy]

You don't even know what their methodology is as they've kept it secret.

Holy fuckballs, Mueller report outlines exactly how Guccifer 2.0 was the GRU. Start on page 42, dipshit.
:lmao TSA

[spurraider21]

:lmao still going with the "clinton had her staffer murdered" conspiracy theory

[Pavlov]

:cryBut Kim Dotcom sez:cry

[RandomGuy]

:cryBut Kim Dotcom sez:cry


WikiLeaks and Fox News Are Silent on the Debunked Seth Rich Conspiracy Theory
WASHINGTON — Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s redacted final report drove a dagger through the heart of one of the most notorious conspiracy theories of the Trump era: that a murdered DNC staffer named Seth Rich — not Russia — stole tens of thousands of Democratic Party emails and gave them to WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential race.

But don’t hold your breath for an apology, correction or retraction from high-profile promoters of the now-disproven theories like Sean Hannity or WikiLeaks. In the aftermath of Mueller’s report, they’ve gone silent on the subject of Seth Rich.

The baseless theories about Rich first appeared online within 24 hours of his killing on July 10th, 2016. But it wasn’t until a month later that those theories spread like wildfire after WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange suggested on Dutch TV that Rich was the source for a trove of leaked Democratic Party emails WikiLeaks had begun publishing on its website. The emails proved embarrassing enough to prompt the resignations of multiple top DNC officials including chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL).
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/wikileaks-and-fox-news-are-silent-on-the-debunked-seth-rich-conspiracy-theory-825686
LOL TSA

[RandomGuy]

Hack/breach sloppily made to look like Russians
Most likely Ukranians responsible


The links give way more detail. Trying to copy/paste did not format well and left links cold.


"Guccifer 2.0

On jun14, 2016, the DNC and its cyber-response team announced the breach of the DNC network and suspected theft of DNC documents. In the statement, the cyber-response team alleged that Russian state-sponsored actors (which they referred to as "Fancy Bear") were responsible for the breach. Apparently in response to that announcement, on June 1, 2016, GRU officers using the persona Guccifer 2,0 created a WordPress blog. In the hours leading up to the launch of that WordPress blog, GRU officers searched for a number of specific words and phrases in English, including "some hundred sheets," "illuminati" and "worldwide known". Approximately two hours after the last of those searches, Guccifer 2.0 published its first post, attributing the DNC server hack to a lone Romanian hacker using several of the unique English words and phrases that the GRU officers had searched for that day.

(goes on to detail the GRU's other actions)

It was the Russians, fucktard. They were doing this in support of Trump.

Why is that?

[RandomGuy]

Are all of the US private security experts who tore apart the DNI also Russian operatives? Is Glenn Greenwald a Russian operative? Are the ex-NSA people who dismantled the CrowdStrike report Russian operatives?

Crowdstrike ultimately proven right in their assertions. :rollin

[RandomGuy]

I also think the Awan brothers could have been the source of the stolen emails.



:lmao

My poor ass ... i have laughed it off so much here.

[RandomGuy]

The GRU continued its release efforts through Guccifer 2.0 into August 2016. For example, on August 15, 2016, the Guccifer 2.0 persona sent a candidate for the US Congress documents related to the candidate's opponent. On August 22,106, the Guccifer 2.0 persona transferred approximately 2.5 gigabytes of Florida-related data stolen from the DCCC to a US blogger covering Florida politics. On August 22, 2016, the Guccifer 2.0 persona sent a US reporter documents stolen from the DCC pertaining to the Black Lives Matter movement.

[Winehole23]

TSA, pushing a GRU psyop to the bitter end.

[RandomGuy]

TSA, pushing a GRU psyop to the bitter end.



"The Russian government interfered with the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systemic fashion"

[ElNono]

Don't want to pile on, tbh, but the thread title is solid gold, IMO :lol

[spurraider21]

Don't want to pile on, tbh, but the thread title is solid gold, IMO :lol
are you disrespecting AnonymousScandinavia twitter?

[spurraider21]

This thread will be the antithesis of djohn2oo8's Flynn thread.

This thread will deliver.

Game over.
indeed. here is some footage of what that delivery looked like


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VeSuczctXk

[ElNono]

are you disrespecting AnonymousScandinavia twitter?

yes

[RandomGuy]

LOL TSA totally avoiding this thread. :rollin

[TSA]

LOL TSA totally avoiding this thread. :rollin

I'm here and laughing at how hard you are trying to push this to the top to avoid discussing how you fell for the largest bullshit conspiracy theory this country has ever seen.

[Pavlov]

”Beginning in the summer of 2016, Assange and WikiLeaks made a number of statements about Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016. The statements about Rich implied falsely that he had been the source of the stolen DNC emails."

:rollin

[RandomGuy]

I'm here and laughing at how hard you are trying to push this to the top to avoid discussing how you fell for the largest bullshit conspiracy theory this country has ever seen.

The report shows about what I expected from open source reporting already. Over a hundred different contacts between Russian officials, agents, and operatives, and the Trump campaign.

The Mueller team spent several pages going over how their ability to fully investigate was limited by witnesses who lied, deleted relevant communications, or were unavailable for interviews after stating they were unable to "establish".


Accordingly, while this report embodies factual and legal determinations that the Office believes to be accurate and complete to the greatest extent possible, given these identified gaps, the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in this report.

Sorry. Maybe if you had actually read it, you might know that. As it is... I get to point out all the parts you won't get in your propaganda feed, because you are hopelessly brainwashed.

Lastly:
One big surprise from having read this is how inept and bumbling the campaign people involved were in their ham handed attempts to curry favor. Makes the shit-show of his administration a LOT more understandable, and concerning, as the quality of people willing to work for him has been markedly and notably falling.

[TSA]

The report shows about what I expected from open source reporting already. Over a hundred different contacts between Russian officials, agents, and operatives, and the Trump campaign.

The Mueller team spent several pages going over how their ability to fully investigate was limited by witnesses who lied, deleted relevant communications, or were unavailable for interviews after stating they were unable to "establish".



Sorry. Maybe if you had actually read it, you might know that. As it is... I get to point out all the parts you won't get in your propaganda feed, because you are hopelessly brainwashed.

Lastly:
One big surprise from having read this is how inept and bumbling the campaign people involved were in their ham handed attempts to curry favor. Makes the shit-show of his administration a LOT more understandable, and concerning, as the quality of people willing to work for him has been markedly and notably falling.

These are direct quotes from Mueller's report. Which of them are propaganda?

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

[RandomGuy]

These are direct quotes from Mueller's report. Which of them are propaganda?

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."

The way you are presenting them here, they all qualify as propaganda.

Good propaganda cherry-picks the truth, as you have done here.

You have not detailed any of the important qualifiers in the report to any of those statements, nor had the intellectual honesty to consider the report as a whole.

Mostly because your lazy ass hasn't actually read it. You are relying on other's analysis, and making yourself look more and more foolish each time you re-post this.

[RandomGuy]

These are direct quotes from Mueller's report. Which of them are propaganda?

1. "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

2. "The investigation examined whether [contacts between Russia and Trump figures] involved or resulted in coordination or a conspiracy with the Trump Campaign and Russia, including with respect to Russia providing assistance to the Campaign in exchange for any sort of favorable treatment in the future. Based on the available information, the investigation did not establish such coordination."

3. "The investigation did not establish that [Carter] Page coordinated with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere with the 2016 election."

4. "The Office did not identify evidence in those [contacts between Russians and people around Trump after the GOP convention] of coordination between the Campaign and the Russian government."

5. "The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's interference in the election ... [and] the investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts."

6. "The investigation did not establish that these [contacts between Russians and people around Trump during the transition] reflected or constituted coordination between the Trump Campaign and Russia in its election interference activities."

7. "The investigation did not identify evidence that any U.S. persons conspired or coordinated with the [Russian disinformation campaign]."


Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking

Yes, or no, buttercup, is there a difference between "failure to prove" and "innocent"?

yes or no, do you feel the report details credible evidence regarding obstruction of justice? Your propaganda bits here don't address fully half of the report.

[TSA]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking

Yes, or no, buttercup, is there a difference between "failure to prove" and "innocent"?

yes or no, do you feel the report details credible evidence regarding obstruction of justice? Your propaganda bits here don't address fully half of the report.

I don't give a fuck about obstructing an investigation that started with made up bullshit from the Clinton camp and the CIA.

And LOL at you throwing innocent until proven guilty right out the window because Drumpf.

[Pavlov]

I don't give a fuck about obstructing an investigation that started with made up bullshit from the Clinton camp and the CIA.

And LOL at you throwing innocent until proven guilty right out the window because Drumpf.:lol like you did with Clinton and Podesta and Rice and that guy you said fucked that infant he was holding at the pizza restaurant.

You are projecting all over the place, dude.

[RandomGuy]

I don't give a fuck about obstructing an investigation that started with made up bullshit from the Clinton camp and the CIA.

And LOL at you throwing innocent until proven guilty right out the window because Drumpf.

Was Guccifer 2.0 a creation of the GRU?

[RandomGuy]

I don't give a fuck about obstructing an investigation that started with made up bullshit from the Clinton camp and the CIA.

And LOL at you throwing innocent until proven guilty right out the window because Drumpf.

Going right for the strawman. :lol I said no such thing. Our justice system is based on standards of proof, and I fully support that.

Yes, or no, cupcake, is there a difference between being found "not guilty" in a court of law and being factually innocent of a crime? If so, what is that difference?

[RandomGuy]

I don't give a fuck about obstructing an investigation

So you don't care about your hero actively breaking the law and abusing his office.

Wow.

Rule of law is important to me, I think it is one of the things that makes the US a great country. Guess that is the difference between us, aside from your willingness to be dishonest to make arguments.

[boutons_deux]

rule of law is just another total bullshit myth

only applies to those who can't afford enough slimey lawyering

[Spurs Homer]

Is this Guccifer thing - though -

game over?



:rollin:rollin