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.
On July 13th, 2018, an indictment was filed by Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III.
This author is responding to the indictment because it features claims about Guccifer 2.0 that are inconsistent with what has been discovered about the persona, including the following:
* - Evidence was found over 500 days ago relating to the Guccifer 2.0 persona that showed they had deliberately manipulated files to have Russian metadata. We know the process used to construct the documents was not due to accidental mistakes during the creation process.
* - The original template document that Guccifer 2.0 used has been identified. It is also the source of the presence of Warren Flood’s name, and can be found attached to one of Podesta’s emails (it has RSIDs matching with Guccifer 2.0’s first couple of documents).
* - The Trump opposition research, which CrowdStrike claimed was targeted at the DNC, apparently in late April 2016, isn’t what Guccifer 2.0 actually presented to reporters. It also didn’t come from the DNC, but was an attached file on one of John Podesta’s emails – not the DNC’s. This specific copy appears to have been edited by Tony Carrk shortly before it was sent to Podesta. The fact that Guccifer 2.0’s initial releases were Podesta email attachments was even conceded by a former DNC official.
* - It appears that Guccifer 2.0 fabricated evidence on June 15, 2016, that coincidentally dovetailed with multiple claims made by CrowdStrike executives that had been published the previous day.
* - Guccifer 2.0 went to considerable effort to make sure Russian error messages appeared in copies of files given to the press.
* - Evidence – which Guccifer 2.0 couldn’t manipulate due to being logged by third parties – suggests he was operating in the US.
* - Additional evidence, which Guccifer 2.0 would have been unlikely to realize “he” was leaving, indicated that the persona was archiving files in US timezones before release, with email headers giving him away early on.
* - Virtually everything that has been claimed to indicate Guccifer 2.0 was Russian was based on something he chose to do.
* - Considering that Guccifer 2.0 had access to Podesta’s emails, yet never leaked anything truly damaging to the Clinton campaign even though he would have had access to it, is highly suspicious. In fact, Guccifer 2.0 never referenced any of the scandals that would later explode when the DNC emails and Podesta email collections were published by WikiLeaks.
originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Xcathdra
WOW that is ALOT of sources! For the base part of this thread I mostly agree. Now I have not gone through your mass amount of sources but I believe there is a potential puzzle piece missing. Now of course they would never see a day in court here. But if they wanted to cause an uproar and if they actually had anything to offer, they would/could come willingly. Now that would give me a reason to turn on CSPAN again.
Now I am off to do my armchair warrior duty and read your sources!
In December 2016, VIPS released a memorandum criticizing allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections as "evidence-free". The memorandum asserted that the 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak was the result of an internal leak and not a Russian hack.
On July 24, 2017, VIPS released another memorandum which also argued that the DNC was not hacked, this time based on a forensic analysis conducted by the anonymous entity "Forensicator" with whom they communicated via retired IBM employee Skip Folden. This analysis was based on DNC files released by Guccifer 2.0. According to Patrick Lawrence's article in The Nation, the memorandum argued that the metadata in these files were altered to add Russian fingerprints, and that file transfer rate reportedly proved they were transferred locally. Brian Feldman, writing in the New York Magazine, criticized the report for relying on "the 'metadata' of 'locked files' that only [Forensicator] had access to" pointing out that these phrases were meaningless. Feldman described the claims in Patrick Lawrence's article as "too incoherent to even debunk" and criticized its use of "techno-gibberish".
According to John Hultquist of FireEye: "The author of the report didn't consider a number of scenarios and breezed right past others. It completely ignores all the evidence that contradicts its claims." Rich Barger, director of security research at Splunk, pointed out that the VIPS theory "assumes that the hacker downloaded the files to a computer and then leaked it from that computer" but overlooks the likelihood that the files were copied several times before they were leaked, potentially creating new metadata each time. Barger's comments were echoed by other cyber-security experts. The Guardian Project founder Nathaniel Freitas independently reviewed Lawrence's article on behalf of The Nation, concluding that while "the work of the Forensicator is detailed and accurate," it did not prove the conclusions VIPS and Lawrence derived from it. Freitas stated that the high throughput suggested by the relevant metadata could have been achieved by a hacker under several different scenarios, including through the use of a remote access trojan, and that the leak hypothesis also requires "the target server ... to be physically on site in the building": "If the files were stored remotely 'in the cloud,' then the same criticism of 'it is not possible to get those speeds' would come into play." In sum: "At this point, given the limited available data, certainty about only a very small number of things can be achieved."
Posted by: Xcathdra
I am still thinking the Awan brothers are linked to this somehow as well. I believe the Awans are ISI assets and I am thinking it might be possible Seth Rich discovered evidence to show the leaks were internal and came from the Awans and that he was killed to keep it quiet. Hacking by Russia or leaks from Seth Rich are one thing.
Being compromised by a foreign intelligence agency whose exposure would place more than 40 democrats in serious legal trouble and affect control of the US government not to mention the survival of the Democratic party is something else.
The Democrats were compromised by the Awans. They tried to hide it and Seth discovered what was going on. Seth is murdered to prevent anything from coming out. The SC is then used to distract people and to let them think Trump is involved all the while Mueller's goal is to cover up what the Democrats were up to and to shift focus to a shiny object.
Just my theory.
The "Russia hacked the DNC" seems like a distraction to me given the evidence to date.
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez on Sunday sidestepped a question about whether or not the DNC has given the FBI access to the their computers to investigate Russian hacking during the 2016 election.
“Today’s tweet is rehashing old gruel, more conspiracy theories. The fact of the matter is that we cooperated fully with the FBI,” Perez said to CNN’s Ana Cabrera. “And when then Director Comey went to Congress, he himself said that what he should have done differently was, I think his term was ‘cast a flare up’ to the DNC even earlier about what was going on.”
Cabrera then pushed back asking, “Has the DNC done everything in its power to make sure this doesn’t happen again and to get to the absolute bottom of what happened? Have you turned over the DNC servers?”
“We have cooperated from day one and we continue to cooperate. And again, all you need to do is read the testimony of then Director Comey when he was in front of Congress. This is again another red herring,” he responded.
The Department of Justice announced Friday the indictment of 12 Russian nationals for hacking into the DNC’s emails, DCCC, and Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff John Podesta. (RELATED: Mueller Indicts 12 Russians Involved In Democratic Email Hacking)
originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: neo96
All Putin needs to do is give him all of the Russian information on that deal and it would be game over for the old administration and all involved!