New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack

[Zander]

The fake Russia narrative is starting to fall apart......even the "progressives" at "The Nation" know it's all a huge lie......

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.

• There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.

• Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source—claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative.

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack

 

[Lewdog]

Like I said in another thread... Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight some ex-NSA agents are going to rick going to jail for SEVERAL years for sharing Classified information to some hack writer that violates their intelligence clearance. Not-gonna-happen.

 

[JGalt]

Two words: Seth Rich.

He wasn't as loyal as the DNC though he was.

 

[tinydancer]

Bottom line is that no government agency ever had the ability to examine the servers. The DNC's employees CrowdStrike are not going to tell the truth.

 

[Zander]

We are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. These officials profess “high confidence” in their “assessment” as to what happened in the spring and summer of last year—this standing as their authoritative judgment. Few have noticed since these evasive terms first appeared that an assessment is an opinion, nothing more, and to express high confidence is an upside-down way of admitting the absence of certain knowledge. This is how officials avoid putting their names on the assertions we are so strongly urged to accept—as the record shows many of them have done.​

 

[Lewdog]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

 

[JGalt]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

 

[Lewdog]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

 

[Snouter]

We all know Seth Rich provided the DNC emails to Wikileaks. But even so, did Wikileaks showing illegal collusion between Crooked Hillary and the MSM and the democrat party's attack on our democracy in rigging the election for Crooked Hillary sway any votes? If so, what law does leaking emails in an election break? The Swamp is doing this daily to a sitting President and nobody's house is raided at 3:48AM.

 

[JGalt]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

Big difference: Trump is merely being set up. Hillary is a genuine criminal.

I believe that genuine criminals should be punished.

 

[Lewdog]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

Big difference: Trump is merely being set up. Hillary is a genuine criminal.

I believe that genuine criminals should be punished.

There is NO difference. A leak is a leak. Your answer just proves you have no ethics or morals.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

So democrats are aghast and against all the leaks from inside Whitehouse.......funny I dont see any of that

 

[Snouter]

Lewdog, the question is not about leaks, it is about corruption. Crooked Hillary and the DNC are proven to be corrupt. Leaking our Presidents phonecalls is an attack on our democracy.

 

[Lewdog]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

So democrats are aghast and against all the leaks from inside Whitehouse.......funny I dont see any of that

You can say what you want about them, but as far as me, I've said very clearly I'm against ALL leaks.

 

[JGalt]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

Big difference: Trump is merely being set up. Hillary is a genuine criminal.

I believe that genuine criminals should be punished.

There is NO difference. A leak is a leak. Your answer just proves you have no ethics or morals.

You're confusing factual "leaked" information which showed the crimes Hillary committed, with sensationalized stories about Trump. Try as they may, the leakers and media haven't really shown anything Trump did that was illegal or immoral.

 

[Lewdog]

Lewdog, the question is not about leaks, it is about corruption. Crooked Hillary and the DNC are proven to be corrupt. Leaking our Presidents phonecalls is an attack on our democracy.

Wrong. You are just trying to justify leaks. A leak is a leak. If you are on a forum trying to justify a leak, then you also have no ethics or morals.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

So democrats are aghast and against all the leaks from inside Whitehouse.......funny I dont see any of that

You can say what you want about them, but as far as me, I've said very clearly I'm against ALL leaks.

And leaks from DNC VS NSA CIA FBI WHitehouse are not compareable

 

[Lewdog]

Oh look Conservatives are proud of leakers once again!

If Putin himself had offered me some information that would put that bitch Hillary behind bars, I'd take him up on it.

And I'm not what you'd call "fond" of Communists.

That has nothing to do with leakers. You are either against or for leakers. You can't be FOR leakers when it benefits you, and AGAINST leakers when it makes Trump look like an idiot.

Big difference: Trump is merely being set up. Hillary is a genuine criminal.

I believe that genuine criminals should be punished.

There is NO difference. A leak is a leak. Your answer just proves you have no ethics or morals.

You're confusing factual "leaked" information which showed the crimes Hillary committed, with sensationalized stories about Trump. Try as they may, the leakers and media haven't really shown anything Trump did that was illegal or immoral.

Hey numbnuts, Trump admitted the information being leaked from the White House is true. Hell he admitted it today in his media session. He said it flattered him about the leaks of the people in the White House fighting over his "love" which had to do with Bannon fighting with McMaster...

 

[Zander]

I have to give "The Nation" a lot of credit for publishing this in-depth article. It takes bravery and principles to toss off the partisan blinders and objectively look at the facts. Bottom line. the "DNC HACK" was not a hack. It was an inside job. This is now INDISPUTABLE.

​

 

[Lewdog]

I'm bookmarking this thread for the next leak that comes out about Trump and his cabinet... so that I can post it over and over showing you morally lacking hypocrites.