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 do ents 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)
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 iden y of Guccifer 2.0, I discovered that the name Warren Flood applied to more do ents than had originally been reported and highlighted the unusual nature of those do ents both in terms of the metadata and the RSIDs (and Russian Stylesheet that existed in multiple do ents even before the content in each do ent 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.
Reply With Quote
but muh seth rich narrative
Posting Permissions
