It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Was there ever really a Russian Hack regarding the email and DNC servers?

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

They knew about the meetings because the FBI and DOJ for the Obama Administration set them up...




posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

that was an option... yes, no, or I don't know....

your answer is an assumption based on unproven theories...



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Probably not.

Our entire IC, FBI and Mueller based their information from a report issued by CrowdStrike - a private contractor hired by the DNC. Against standard procedure, DISA and NSA (two agencies responsible for investigating and then securing breaches) were not brought in to do their jobs

No federal agency, law enforcement official or intelligence community representative EVER examined the DNC server.

As far as I'm concerned, it is a lie until *proven* otherwise which will never happen until DNC turns the untouched server over to the Feds for analysis

Remember folks, it is THEIR JOB to prove their very bold assertions not the other way around. And even if "Russia" did hack their server, this is nothing out of the ordinary. They do this to us 24/7/365 and we do the same to them 24/7/365...along with all the other countries out there including our allies

If they really did "meddle" in our election with such a small amount of money, then it is clear our people are running elections all wrong. We spend hundreds of millions come election season with only moderate effects... All I know is that the major component of their Russia delusion was debunked/discredited/proven false, and the massive amount of corruption uncovered/exposed leads me to believe it is all an invented narrative to justify that 3-time-loser Clinton's stunning loss in 2016

But hey, it is more important for Dems to run a protest candidate with no chance of winning like Hillary I guess
edit on 3/27/2019 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

And your answer is based on an analysis conducted by a company the DNC paid money to investigate. Did they pay for their conclusions also?

If it is to be used for US policy or especially law enforcement, then a chain of custody must be maintained that ONLY federal law enforcement can manage. If it is for Counter Intelligence purposes, the arena broadens a bit but DISA/NSA are solely responsible for investigating and securing these breaches

Nowhere does protocol say to bring in a private company on your dime and then push the results around while pretending they came from an official or authoritative source - they did not.

We have (and still have) absolutely zero shreds of evidence suggesting this is true. Absolutely none. I challenge you to produce even one piece of evidence showing "the Russians" were involved as opposed to an insider threat or some 400 pound loser in his Mommy's basement



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 01:42 PM
link   
For some reason most of you are not reading this part correctly.




1. Shawn Henry - past executive assistant director (EAD) of the FBI's Criminal, Cyber, Response and Services Branch. He is now the President of the company. Now, who named Shawn Henry to his position? Robert Mueller. Guess what Field Office he worked at? Yup. DC.

2. Steve Chabinsky - past deputy assistant director of the FBI's Cyber Division. Guess what his appointment was in 2016? The Presidents Commission on Enhancing National Cyber-Security


These two men are the ones who said Russia had hacked the servers and then 'cleaned' them.

If Donald Trump hired a private company like the DNC did heads would explode especially if he used people he either knew or had worked with him.

Furthermore, foreign agents attempt to have the US 24/7/365. This is as big a lie as 'you can keep your doctor' and it was perpetrated by the same group of people.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Great investigative work matafuchs


I had no idea those two were connected so intimately to the Russia hoax. It makes perfect sense now, including why DNC would contract out to Crowdstrike instead of taking up the Feds on their offer to handle the investigation

As usual, this is really excellent work



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

For some reason I fail to see why it matters who initially looked at the computer to you guys since I don't think you would believe it regardless since you don't want to believe anything out of the intelligence community on this one anyway. I mean it is accepted by them as well as many republicans that Russia hack the computers.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

the indictment:

www.justice.gov...

if you would prefer a brief summary with podcast included...

www.lawfareblog.com...



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

The US is hacked everyday. The government is combating this. That is not the point of the OP.

1. A Russian hack is reported. The DNC information is leaked.
2. Before the FBI or DOJ could investigate an IT firm was brought in
3. IT team cleaned up the servers and stated that they were hacked
4. IT team is founded by ex FBI and Cyber Security appointments including a Russian
5. DOJ and FBI NEVER saw the servers. How can they simply take the word of a Private company?

This is the basis for everything we have seen in the last almost 3 years and NONE of it was confirmed by the US government.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

That is something completely different. Why not talk about the sanctions that Trump levied on Russia no one talks about and how he started a committee to make sure it did not happen again?

Link



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs

How can they simply take the word of a Private company?



They assumed the "sympathy" factors would help Hillary (the one who couldn't lose) 😎

Plus by then, they knew there was an ongoing high level "operation" against Trump 😎



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

by what is in the article I posted,




Still, the intrusions did not go unnoticed. In May 2016, both the DCCC and the DNC hired cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike to discern the extent of the invasions, and the following month, the indictment alleges, the company worked to remove the intruders. Even so, according to the indictment, malware remained on the DNC network until October. The Russians also accessed DNC data through a third-party cloud service in September, the indictment says.


the trump tower meeting was in early June, the day before that meeting, DCLeaks was launched and started releasing information..




That month, according to the indictment, the group began releasing materials it had stolen from individuals tied to the Clinton campaign as well as documents stolen from other operations dating to 2015, including emails from individuals affiliated with the Republican Party.


you seem to want to believe that they brought in crowdstrike for neferious reasons, but the fbi didn't start investigating the hack till after it was announced publicly which was after crowdstrike was brought in.

www.nbcnews.com...

There's other information in that first article I posted from Lawfare that laws out a pretty compelling story...



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

no, the topic of this thread is the assertion that the DNC computers weren't hacked, let alone hacked by russians...
are you talking about the sanctions that congress passed with a veto proof support that trump took forever to put into place?



edit on 27-3-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


You know what Phage....I am old and all that.....but I read every page of that indictment and I fail to see where it states or even mentions anyone hacking into the DNC servers.


Feel free to point out where it specifies that statement.

www.documentcloud.org...


edit on R442019-03-27T17:44:50-05:00k443Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

try this one

www.justice.gov...



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

You are missing the point!

Why should the FBI have to come to them? If they were hacked, it is a Federal crime and the government connections/offices these people hold makes it all the more important. DNC should have gone to the FBI, not the other way around. Besides, at the time, there was allegedly a "warning" given to the campaigns about Russian activities so I am unsure where you are going with the "but nobody knew" part. They did know. Definitively, they did know.

You are excusing the fact DNC sat on their hands, brought in a private contractor of dubious intent and reputation and then used their findings as though they are absolute fact collected by LE. CrowdStrike is NOT government, they are NOT law enforcement.

It was wholly inappropriate to use them in the investigation. And charges based on their work/findings are a joke. Any prosecutor who would even entertain those charges should have their credentials examined (100:1 it was a Dem prosecutor)

Now what proof is there the "Russians" did anything? What proof is there a hack even took place? What proof shows definitively it was not an inside-job (which is the easiest and most likely case of such a serious compromise)

Why on Earth would the Russians blow multi-million dollar "zero day" exploits and risk exposing deep intelligence operations over some minor-moderate impact emails?

I read a lot of conclusions, but the fact is I do not trust CrowdStrike and I do not trust the DNC. How can I be sure they are telling the truth? How can we be sure a proper chain of evidence was maintained? Or that CrowdStrike wasn't simply mislead with something ridiculous like an IP address (which the CIA has tools - which were leaked - showing this can be forged/spoofed quite easily).

We need much, much more evidence. CrowdStrike and the DNC's NOT-good word is nowhere near enough to satisfy the "This didn't happen, change my mind"

And so what with the meeting? Again, getting leaked information is NOT a crime. I shared the "stolen" or leaked material hundreds of times personally, and I committed no crime in doing so. ONLY those who stole the material broke any laws. There was no crime - as Mueller determined - in the campaign meeting with an individual to get dirt on Clinton.

And let me just say... you all made a big mistake running a non-serious protest candidate like Hillary
edit on 3/27/2019 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 05:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: RickinVa

try this one

www.justice.gov...



That would be the correct one. Not the one Phage posted.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

read the danged indictment, or the other article I posted for crying out loud!!



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

I wrote the thread! Are you serious? So now you want to tell me what I 'think' and what I 'meant'. You are wrong and you can't admit it.

Obama put sanctions in place. Trump put sanctions in place. We are not talking about that.

Your link. I read it. Why did the grand jury not mention the RNC hacks? Because they were creating a narrative. That's it. There is no way they could have any of that evidence from the FBI because the servers were already wiped.

Crowdstrike is company 1 in the link. #42

and THEN Trump comes into play in #44

During this time it is also when Obama famously said this about Putin...



It's ok. Obama told Putin to 'cut it out'....ROFL....yeah...sure he did. Then if you watch the video Obama said there were no more hacks but your link says something else. They should have gotten their facts straight.



posted on Mar, 27 2019 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

so, maybe I am wrong but you seem to be saying that the dept of justice filed a document into court on July 13, 2018 that didn't have a lick of truth to them??? which, in order to get this indictment they would have convinced a grand jury of the merits of the case. which probably included people within our own intelligence community, probably lots of them, testifying under oath to the assertions that are made in the document....
like I said, what difference does it make who went in to examine the computer, weather it was outsourced out to a group that they found trustworthy or done by those within the intelligence community... you don't trust the intelligence community anyways!!!




Why did the grand jury not mention the RNC hacks?


I don't know maybe the RNC didn't want them screwing with their computer either. who knows maybe that was the home kushners found for his "back channel"!!!

okay, I dove down your rabbit hole alittle, even braved my terror kitty and got on my computer and found the link to the indictment.. now, are you gonna answer my question... simply multiple choice question, really isn't any right or wrong answer.
do you think anyone from the trump campaign informed the authorities about all the russians contacting them?
you choice of answers is yes, or no, or simply I don't know...
I'll tell you my answer if you tell me yours!




edit on 27-3-2019 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join