It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Setting aside the nonsensical first half of the tweet, there’s actually an interesting question worth revisiting buried in the second half. Why wouldn’t the Democratic National Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?
Instead, whether because they were denied access or simply never asked for it, the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.
We are given very little actual detail about what happened or how the incidents were traced to Russia specifically,
Of course, there are many reasons the Intelligence Community might have decided not to reveal any actual evidence for these claims.
And if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little.
WASHINGTON — When Special Agent Adrian Hawkins of the Federal Bureau of Investigation called the Democratic National Committee in September 2015 to pass along some troubling news about its computer network, he was transferred, naturally, to the help desk.
His message was brief, if alarming. At least one computer system belonging to the D.N.C. had been compromised by hackers federal investigators had named “the Dukes,” a cyberespionage team linked to the Russian government.
The F.B.I. knew it well: The bureau had spent the last few years trying to kick the Dukes out of the unclassified email systems of the White House, the State Department and even the Joint Chiefs of Staff, one of the government’s best-protected networks.
originally posted by: face23785
The DNC is hiding something. There may not have even been a hack. We saw from the leaked emails there was an early plan to introduce a "Russia collusion" narrative. If the FBI determined they weren't hacked it would undermine the entire narrative. We found out Podesta wasn't hacked, he was phished, which could've been done by a 12 year old in his mom's basement. Who knows what really happened to the DNC.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
Why is it so important to try to deny the hacking?
What are you guys trying to accomplish when you deny the hacks?
Do you think it deligitimized the election results?
Is that what you all are afraid of?