August 11, 2017
What Russian Hack!
Timothy Birdnow
There was no "Russian hack" but rather a leak from the inside, forensics show,
From The Nation:
"There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call "Russiagate.†This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above, leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:
* There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial "hack,†as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.
* 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.
This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting investigations and now drawing conclusions from them."
End excerpt.
Who had access to this? The Awan family, perhaps? Is that why Debbie Wasserman Schultz is so desperate to keep the contents of her laptop private?
The more I look at this supposed hack the more I believe it ties to the Awans and the Democrats are trying to use it to destroy Trump knowing full well what happened.
There was no "Russian hack" but rather a leak from the inside, forensics show,
From The Nation:
"There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call "Russiagate.†This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above, leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:
* There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial "hack,†as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.
* 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.
This article is based on an examination of the documents these forensic experts and intelligence analysts have produced, notably the key papers written over the past several weeks, as well as detailed interviews with many of those conducting investigations and now drawing conclusions from them."
End excerpt.
Who had access to this? The Awan family, perhaps? Is that why Debbie Wasserman Schultz is so desperate to keep the contents of her laptop private?
The more I look at this supposed hack the more I believe it ties to the Awans and the Democrats are trying to use it to destroy Trump knowing full well what happened.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:36 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.
21kb generated in CPU 0.0151, elapsed 0.861 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.8556 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.8556 seconds, 157 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
