DNC Russian Hack Exposed: False

Before we begin let me point out that this has been a strong narrative the left both abroad and here on ATS have been pushing for like 2 years or more, recent mudpit threads showing the vast ignorance and non factually based narratives pushed by even their most prominent and "Intelligent" members, what this thread is about is not only to expose the media in pushing a LIE forward as fact, but also to point out that a little research would go quite a ways in disseminating their own biased ignorance, and could have saved us all a lot of time wasted arguing over nothing.
The Issue here being that you cant get the opposition to acknowledge our Presidents lies while pushing forth a lie yourselves for your agenda which has been rude, manipulative and outright self righteous from the get go.

on with the Execution and Expose'
starting with the source of the original investigation the DNC hired....

"CrowdStrike was first to link hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors last year, but some cybersecurity experts have questioned its evidence."

www.voanews.com...

"Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system."
"troubled by the paucity of serious public scrutiny of the January 2017 intelligence-community assessment (ICA) on purported Russian interference in our 2016 presidential election, which reflects the judgment of the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA. That report concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered the hacking of the DNC and the dissemination of e-mails from key staffers via WikiLeaks, in order to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. This official intelligence assessment has since led to what some call “Russiagate,” with charges and investigations of alleged collusion with the Kremlin, and, in turn, to what is now a major American domestic political crisis and an increasingly perilous state of US-Russia relations. To this day, however, the intelligence agencies that released this assessment have failed to provide the American people with any actual evidence substantiating their claims about how the DNC material was obtained or by whom. Astonishingly and often overlooked, the authors of the declassified ICA themselves admit that their “judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.”

"“What is missing from the public report is…hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack…. Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’”

"Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. Then the probabilities turned into certainties, and these evolved into what are now taken to be established truths."

"Qualified experts working independently of one another began to examine the DNC case immediately after the July 2016 events. Prominent among these is a group comprising former intelligence officers, almost all of whom previously occupied senior positions......

www.thenation.com...



Continued below


mod edit to shorten quotes, and add tags

a reply to: AutisticEvo

According to the Dutch story, Cozy Bear, or, to use its generic designation in the cybersecurity community, Advanced Persistent Threat 29, worked from "a space in a university building near the Red Square." That would fit the description of Moscow State University's historic campus across from Red Square, occupied today by some of its humanities departments and the Institute of Asian and African Countries, which has traditionally sent large numbers of its graduates to the SVR, the Russian foreign intelligence service."

"The Dutch hackers, reportedly, didn't just watch everything Cozy Bear -- a fluid group in which about 10 people were active at any given time -- was doing on its computers. They also took over the security camera that recorded all the comings and goings at the group's space. Dutch intelligence matched the faces of visitors against a database of known Russian agents and linked the group to the SVR. Crowdstrike, the cybersecurity firm retained by the DNC, hinted in its analysis of the breach that Cozy Bear could have been run by either SVR or the FSB, Russia's domestic intelligence service, so the Dutch report clarifies the attribution.

www.bloomberg.com...

"Crowdstrike Co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch in the Washington Post published June 14, 2016 spoke of the lack of evidence as to how it was that somebody got onto the Democratic National Committee (DNC) servers to get the emails that were ultimately published on Wikileaks in July 2016. According to the Washington Post, “CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with ‘spearphishing’ emails… ‘But we don’t have hard evidence,’ Alperovitch said,” the report stated. Nor was Alperovitch really sure who had hacked the DNC emails: "

gardnernews.com...

Sources sources
www.voanews.com...
www.thenation.com...
gardnernews.com...
www.bloomberg.com...


and that sums it up right there, the only hack I see is Mueller and anyone still pushing the narrative.
For those here on ATS, I have prepared a five course feast of CROW.
Crow Cordon Bleu, New England Crow Chowder, Crow Carbonara, Crow Hot Wings, and last but not least... Butter Crow.

I did my best to make it palatable, but you know, Crow is Crow.
opinions, screeching? all welcome ideas guys.

Everyone is hacking everyone else. There are awards given out at Intel retreat meetings for hacking certain targets effectively.

I just watched a Fox interview with Putin. It was pretty good. Putin said that they did hack the Democrats and other things but said that some of his people only brought to light the misconceptions and lies that Democrats were spewing, they were passing on the truth to the people, not actually tricking anyone or lying about things. He stated that they basically were just presenting the truth to people so they could make up their own minds. He also said that the Democrats later basically admitted to what they had released. I am sure they did do some instigating, but that was independant of the hacking, their people actually put the bug in the hand of people to protest both the Democrats and Republicans, but again, they were not doing it to target just one party, they do that kind of stuff to have something to chuckle about in the Kremlin. Normal political riling like we do there.

I thought it was a good interview, Putin kept trying to tell the person interviewing him to let him finish instead of interupting his speech. How rude, it was a Fox interview too, reporters are reporters, they feel they are more important than the leaders of countries I think.

When asked why they released a picture of nukes hitting florida, Putin said the intent of the video was to show that they could avoid detection by the US defense system which the US flaunts as the best. He said they decided to develop this since some treaty was not renewed by the USA. The USA spews propaganda just like Russia does. As far as the picture of Florida being targetted, why would Russia target Florida, it is full of snowbirds and people vacationing. I can see much better places to target, Florida would not be the first place they would strike. Although, they could incite fear when florida turned into one big sinkhole by nuking. Putin said that their intent with the commercial was not to scare American people, it was basically just propaganda and something to warn our military that they have new technology that they should be aware of.

I think Russia had a lot worse leaders in the past than Putin. He says that their government does take down people causing trouble but said so does America, police shoot citizens doing crimes here too he said. He did not mention people dying around Hillary and Bill because then he would be admitting that he has a right to kill people who disagree with their beliefs.

a reply to: rickymouse

I thought it was a good interview, Putin kept trying to tell the person interviewing him to let him finish instead of interupting his speech. How rude, it was a Fox interview too, reporters are reporters, they feel they are more important than the leaders of countries I think.

FOX news is a complete sham! They are just wolves in sheeps clothing. They pretend like they're in the corner of the conservatives, but they're nothing of the sort.

FOX wants to control the narrative just like CNN does.

I'm stunned by how many people are fooled by FOX.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: rickymouse

I thought it was a good interview, Putin kept trying to tell the person interviewing him to let him finish instead of interupting his speech. How rude, it was a Fox interview too, reporters are reporters, they feel they are more important than the leaders of countries I think.

FOX news is a complete sham! They are just wolves in sheeps clothing. They pretend like they're in the corner of the conservatives, but they're nothing of the sort.

FOX wants to control the narrative just like CNN does.

I'm stunned by how many people are fooled by FOX.

Actually in this interview, the one giving the interview to Putin was acting a little like a CNN reporter, looking for a conspiracy and trying to screw up Putin's interview to make it look more like Putin was a bad guy. Putin handled the interview well, kind of reminding the interviewer to let him finish so he can tell everything. Yes, Fox is almost as bad as other MSM but usually opposite. In this case, it was almost as Fox was backing the other Medias in questioning style, trying to discredit Putin with a smirk on his face sometimes. I never expected that from Fox, although I never would have believed Putin would agree to an interview with any of our media organizations with the way they twist things nowadays.

Fox used to be the worst of MSM a few years back, but the others could not be shown up now that Trump challenged them. Now watching fox seems like watching spongebob compared to watching other deceptive news providers.

a reply to: AutisticEvo

Yeah.... no

a reply to: rickymouse

No one has to make it "look" like Putin is a bad guy.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: AutisticEvo

Yeah.... no

Im down for any replies, but in my thread you need to do better than one liners without sourcing a contradiction to my claims, soits not exactly a thing you cant do, but its not necessarily a thing you can, so I am gonna make a ruling on this crap right now.
provide a source for your claim or get lost

theres a vid, my point starts at 0;49 www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Exactly, people seem to be ignoring that now just to "own the Libs" or because "Trump Idolatry Syndrom"

a reply to: rickymouse

So, Putin admitted to hacking the DNC... how does that fit the Leak-not-hack narrative?

From day one of all this I have said it was either a frustrated insider, or it was a common hacking attempt with no knowledge of the emails as they worked to hack the DNC along with 1000 other agencies including the RNC. Hacking is big money to be made, so why not.

I really think it was an insider that knew of the emails and was a die hard Bernie supporter that saw how he got screwed over.

a reply to: rickymouse

can you provide a source link for what you are claiming? if proven to be all you say then that would make my efforts irrelevant, but claims to hacking in general is not a claim to the DNC event. so if you would provide a verifiable source to these claims I would appreciate itas even though I dont watch tv much I never heard of putin on a Fox interview.

I think a source or link is necessary since your claims are derailing the evidence, that it should be done so with citation and linked source. all you provided so far is hearsay. if you can prove that he admits it I will have some crow and gladly concede to such confession if indeed that is what it really is

originally posted by: AutisticEvo
a reply to: rickymouse

can you provide a source link for what you are claiming? if proven to be all you say then that would make my efforts irrelevant, but claims to hacking in general is not a claim to the DNC event. so if you would provide a verifiable source to these claims I would appreciate itas even though I dont watch tv much I never heard of putin on a Fox interview.

I think a source or link is necessary since your claims are derailing the evidence, that it should be done so with citation and linked source. all you provided so far is hearsay. if you can prove that he admits it I will have some crow and gladly concede to such confession if indeed that is what it really is

Here is a transcript of it. www.dailymail.co.uk...< br />
Some news interpretations say that Putin denies hacking the DNC, but if you read this, he never denies it, he does seem to say that any information of corruption released by whomever hacked it was later admitted to be true. Putin is no dummy.

a reply to: rickymouse


Well it seems to begin with how Putin discussed joint counter terrorism with the US and cooperation in Syria when asked by Wallace about how he views relations currently between Russia and the U.S. Putin went on to elaborate about the START treaty : in 2021 and also about Improving relations in Iran and North Korea.


WALLACE then says " Mr. President, one of the issues that is standing in the way of more progress, as you know, are the allegations of Russian interference in the U.S. election. " to Putin, who after wallace went to elaborate stated CLEARLY "Well, let me start answering your question with something a little bit different. Let's look at it this way. People are talking about the purported interference of Russia with the election process in the United States. I mentioned this in 2016, and I want to say it now again - and I really wish for your American listeners to listen to what I say. First of all, Russia, as a state, has never interfered with the internal affairs of the United States, let alone its elections. "

Thats a Direct Denial. he Elaborated on what really happened.
Putin "The information that I am aware of, there's nothing false about it. Every single grain of it is true. And the Democratic leadership admitted it."
and also said
"First of all, Special Counsel Mueller has accused a certain private company in Russia - that is not even a very big enterprise, its core area of competence is a restaurant business.
And now,
this company hired American lawyers and defending its integrity and reputation in an American court. So far, American court has not discovered any trace of interference whatsoever"

then he goes forward with the conversation completely steamrolling wallace since the start.
Putin"We - with the United States - we have a treaty for assistance in criminal cases, an existing treaty that exists from 1999. It's still in force, and it works sufficiently. Today I referred an example of its sufficient work. "

and "Why wouldn't Special Counsel Mueller send us an official request within the framework of this agreement?
Our investigators will be acting in accordance with this treaty. They will question each individual that the American partners are suspecting of something.
Why not a single request was filed? Nobody sent us a single formal Letter, a formal Request?"


Later wallace asks why Mueller would Indict 3 days before the summit and he said it was America's "Internal Political Games"

www.dailymail.co.uk...< br />
There is the direct denial he made, and rebuking the accusations of Mueller, thus not only Confirming my OP stands TRUE still and now, but also you helped make my OP Stronger with this new information.

by this transcript, as far as international relationships go, Mueller failed to go through international protocol based upon a previously written agreement between Russia and the USA to send a formal letter requesting cooperation in Investigation of its Citizens or Government.

Mueller violated the normal expectations of International Relations and has risked serious damage to International Relations by accusing a Nation while refusing to provide the nations law enforcement and leadership of any EVIDENCE to Russian Authorities or Communication whatsoever, which is basically writing them off as complicit or incompetent in its stance alone, which shows a disregard towards international relations in order to serve an Agenda that Lisa Page has already pointed out its only purpose is to Disrupt the Presidency.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: AutisticEvo

Yeah.... no

quality and insightful as always..

im still amazing mods allow you're posts to stand..

surely we are a little less credible with each sillyolme addition

If you dare bring up the fact that we haven't seen any hard proof that Russia hacked the DNC servers on social media sites like Reddit, you will be down voted and called a Russia bot. In my opinion the owners of reddit have joined google and facebook to push an agenda. They allow bots to downvote anyone that dares to question things.

abovetopsecret is one of the few sites i see people stopping to question what were being told by the media and our government.

How can anyone claim the Russians were the ones in the DNC server stealing documents then handing them to Wikileaks to publish?

Can you name one single shred of evidence? Anything linking the two that isnt a DNC/FBI statement?

Wikileaks on one hand denies it was the Russians,
Wikileaks also did something very unusual, that is to imply that Seth Rich was involved and offer a reward

We have xNSA specialists coming out saying it wasn't a hack/data purge it was a local copy

“Transfer rates of 23 MB/s (Mega Bytes per second) are not just highly unlikely, but effectively impossible to accomplish when communicating over the Internet at any significant distance,” he wrote. “Further, local copy speeds are measured, demonstrating that 23 MB/s is a typical transfer rate when using a USB–2 flash device (thumb drive).”

We've got the DNC denying access to the FBI's multiple requests to investigate the servers

The bureau made “multiple requests at different levels,” according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a “highly respected private company” would get access and share what it found with investigators.

after the DNC Tried to pretend that the FBI never even asked them...

All the ''Russia did it'' crowd has... is a Wordpress Blog post of someone saying '' I am guccifer 2.0 I did the hack '' and leaving obvious Russian hallmarks in the coding
Guccifer2.0 -

Do you think I’ve been in the DNC’s networks for almost a year and saved only 2 documents? Do you really believe it?

AFTER we learn that the CIA has long had tools to hack someone and leave a footprint framing another country

And what else do you have?

A CrowdStrike blogpost where they say '' We believe it was Russian Intelligence COZYbear and FANCYBear

CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016

So congratulations...
You have a blog post by an anonymous wordpress person and a blog post by CrowdStrike saying ''we believe the anonymous person did the hack''

You are the biggest fools in history!

“Transfer rates of 23 MB/s (Mega Bytes per second) are not just highly unlikely, but effectively impossible to accomplish when communicating over the Internet at any significant distance,” he wrote. “Further, local copy speeds are measured, demonstrating that 23 MB/s is a typical transfer rate when using a USB–2 flash device (thumb drive).”

This is something I've seen kicked around in discussions of this lately that I've yet to see anyone refute. That would seem to conclusively prove it wasn't a remote hack. Does anyone have anything to counter this?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Something along those lines. I go along with the disgruntled employee/advisor of Clinton doing the deed. Certainly seems more likely than the Russkies did it.