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.

 

Roger Stone Asks for Evidence Russians Hacked DNC Server

page: 9
43
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2019 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl


Asked? Yes.
Answered? No.


Someone is fantasizing about being a lawyer.




posted on May, 18 2019 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: tanstaafl

It wasn't up to Crowd Strike to grant or deny access. It was not their property.

edit on 5182019 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: tanstaafl

It wasn't up to Crowd Strike to grant or deny access. It was not their property.




posted on May, 18 2019 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

You are right, it was up to the DNC, they are the ones who refused the FBI access.



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


It doesn't surprise you by any chance that the people who have fallen for this charade the last 2 years aren't fully informed on the subject does it?



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 09:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


Actually, how do you get transfer speeds from a file?

The metadata might be in the connection and access logs or in some sort of metadata on the server, but not in the files themselves.

But I was being sarcastic. I don't actually think that the Republicans have the server. That is as bogus as the nonsense they are releasing as if it were actually even remotely possible.

Although I cannot confirm this, the following scenario seems to be what actually happened:

According to the DNC, the 4 servers (note the plural) were being worked upon onsite, at DNC premises, by CrowdStrike.

The servers were moved to CrowdStrike's premises for deeper 'offline' forensic analysis.

The actual move was under guard by the FBI due to the potential national security compromise posed.

There was no request for access denied, because the FBI knew where the servers were located, because CrowdStrike were working for the FBI and the FBI were given all pertinent information as it came to hand.



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 10:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


The servers were moved to CrowdStrike's premises for deeper 'offline' forensic analysis.

The actual move was under guard by the FBI due to the potential national security compromise posed.


There shouldn't be any national security information on the DNC servers. The DNC (and the RNC) are separate and independent entities from actual Democrat and Republican lawmakers and administration officials, who do have access to sensitive information. The party committees aren't supposed to have access to anything like that. The only thing that was in the DNC emails was politically sensitive and embarrassing information to the DNC. The FBI couldn't give two #s about the info contained in the emails, which would be the only reason to have the servers themselves protected or "under guard." All they would potentially care about was the efforts by a foreign government to gain access to the servers in order to meddle in the election, and if that's really what happened, the FBI should've been the ones doing the forensic analysis. The entire episode was, at best, irresponsible on the part of the DNC. They knew they had lousy security, they were warned, they took no action, they got compromised, whether by an outside hack or an insider, and then the way they handled it afterwards was amateur as #.
edit on 18 5 19 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2019 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


The servers were moved to CrowdStrike's premises for deeper 'offline' forensic analysis.

The actual move was under guard by the FBI due to the potential national security compromise posed.


There shouldn't be any national security information on the DNC servers. The DNC (and the RNC) are separate and independent entities from actual Democrat and Republican lawmakers and administration officials, who do have access to sensitive information. The party committees aren't supposed to have access to anything like that. The only thing that was in the DNC emails was politically sensitive and embarrassing information to the DNC. The FBI couldn't give two #s about the info contained in the emails, which would be the only reason to have the servers themselves protected or "under guard." All they would potentially care about was the efforts by a foreign government to gain access to the servers in order to meddle in the election, and if that's really what happened, the FBI should've been the ones doing the forensic analysis. The entire episode was, at best, irresponsible on the part of the DNC. They knew they had lousy security, they were warned, they took no action, they got compromised, whether by an outside hack or an insider, and then the way they handled it afterwards was amateur as #.


I am not excusing the DNC who were far too laissez-faire about security without a doubt. Hillary, herself, was one of the worst offenders.

This meant that there were national security compromises in the data on the servers. Something that was known about at the time CrowdStrike were brought in to try and remediate the mess and when the FBI began investigations.

At that time (and even now) it was believed that the compromise was only partial and had been contained.

This seems to be beyond the comprehension of so many. It's like if you get a spam e-mail, you don't respond by nuking the entire country from space.

The DNC knew that they had been compromised, but most of them had no idea that there were any national security compromising data on the servers. Even Hillary seemed to have no idea that she shouldn't have been carrying on communications like she did when she was in the State Department.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 08:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

That information does not come from the servers, it comes from the released files. Please keep up. So back to the original question, who other than CS did the DNC give direct access to the DNC servers to?


The servers were moved to CrowdStrike's premises for deeper 'offline' forensic analysis.

The actual move was under guard by the FBI due to the potential national security compromise posed.


There shouldn't be any national security information on the DNC servers. The DNC (and the RNC) are separate and independent entities from actual Democrat and Republican lawmakers and administration officials, who do have access to sensitive information. The party committees aren't supposed to have access to anything like that. The only thing that was in the DNC emails was politically sensitive and embarrassing information to the DNC. The FBI couldn't give two #s about the info contained in the emails, which would be the only reason to have the servers themselves protected or "under guard." All they would potentially care about was the efforts by a foreign government to gain access to the servers in order to meddle in the election, and if that's really what happened, the FBI should've been the ones doing the forensic analysis. The entire episode was, at best, irresponsible on the part of the DNC. They knew they had lousy security, they were warned, they took no action, they got compromised, whether by an outside hack or an insider, and then the way they handled it afterwards was amateur as #.


Even Hillary seemed to have no idea that she shouldn't have been carrying on communications like she did when she was in the State Department.


You don't actually believe this do you? First Lady for 8 years, senator on the Senate Armed Services committee with top secret clearance for 6 years, and then Secretary of State, had no idea how to handle classified information?



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0nautEven Hillary seemed to have no idea that she shouldn't have been carrying on communications like she did when she was in the State Department.

Love the Hillary apologism. Even Trump doesn't seem to have any idea he should not have been obstructing Justice.

I guess we should stop talking about it then right?



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
I still don't understand why the FBI didn't seize the physical servers from the get go. A lot of this speculation could've been avoided if they had.

I understand that CS does this type of forensic analysis as a business, but wouldn't the FBI have all the same tools available to them, as well as highly classified advanced tools not available to outside entities? If not, they can just call up the CIA/NSA who we know does have that type of stuff.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:25 AM
link   
a reply to: thov420

The FBI said the best practice is for them to get access and do the work themselves. The DNC refused though, so the FBI acquiesced to the DNC.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I think the million dollar question is why a law enforcement agency would do that? The FBI openly recruits computer/network students from colleges around the country, so it's not like they lack the technical knowledge
themselves.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: thov420

The FBI said the best practice is for them to get access and do the work themselves. The DNC refused though, so the FBI acquiesced to the DNC.


Which is suspicious in and of itself. If the Russians really were suspected to be behind it, and it's such a big national security threat, why would the FBI allow this? Why wouldn't the Obama administration insist the DNC turn em over? The whole thing stinks to high heaven.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: thov420

Because the DNC said they were never getting access. The FBI did everything else the DNC wanted, why not that too.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

The only reason to keep it from the FBI is if they had something to hide. It's like a murder happened in your house, so you call the cops, but then tell them they can't process the scene, you will do it and let them know what you find.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

You guys shriek all day about not trusting the flipping FBI. How they are crooked. How they manipulate data...
except when it comes to this.
When its your side they are intrusive and require you to fight back.. When its the other side... they have something to hide.
Really.... thats the bottom line message here.
Hypocrites. Every one...
edit on 5192019 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

www.thedailybeast.com...

Trump says

“You have groups that are wondering why the FBI never took the server. Why didn’t they take the server? Where is the server, I want to know, and what is the server saying?”

You... you are the people he is talking about...

The server is saying shut up. The “server” Trump is obsessed with is actually 140 servers, most of them cloud-based, which the DNC was forced to decommission in June 2016 while trying to rid its network of the Russian GRU officers working to help Trump win the election, according to the figures in the DNC’s civil lawsuit against Russia and the Trump campaign. Another 180 desktop and laptop computers were also swapped out as the DNC raced to get the organization back on its feet and free of Putin’s surveillance.


But keep up that argument. I will only laugh because I know the reality.



posted on May, 19 2019 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: thov420
a reply to: thov420

Remember the entire thing was rigged to further the cover-up(s) at the time 😎

The DNC, The Obama Administration, and all The Cabinet Departments were (and still partially are) infiltrated.

And they all assumed Hillary Clinton was going to be the next President.

Imagine if she had won 😆







 
43
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join