Veteran IntelligenceProfessionals for Sanity Have Forensics proof that the DNC was not hacked

[AIL]

Yes the evidence is available. It's all there but non of the useless news media bothers to do real journalism..
Stupid USA news media all mouth off the same song sheet all 17 intelligent agencies agreed the DNC was hacked by Russia and given to Wikileaks ..
WikiLeaks denied that it received DNC files from Russia.
Wiki leaks said they did NOT hack the DNC servers. A WikiLeaks associate by the name of Greig Murry flew to Washington and meet with a operative that gave him a thumb drive..

This the source of the DNC leaks.. I have been saying this for a long time.


Here is the a quick view of hard facts. " Numbers basically" and we all know that honest numbers do not lie

We Do Forensics

Recent forensic examination of the Wikileaks DNC files shows they were created on 23, 25 and 26 May 2016. (On June 12, Julian Assange announced he had them; WikiLeaks published them on July 22.) We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

FAT is a simple file system named for its method of organization, the File Allocation Table. It is used for storage only and is not related to internet transfers like hacking. Were WikiLeaks to have received the DNC files via a hack, the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and even-ending numbers.

Why is that important? The evidence lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. When a file is stored under the FAT file system the software rounds the time to the nearest even-numbered second. Every single one of the time stamps in the DNC files on WikiLeaks’ site ends in an even number.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site. All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the time stamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.

This finding alone is enough to raise reasonable doubts, for example, about Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers for hacking the DNC emails given to WikiLeaks. A defense attorney could easily use the forensics to argue that someone copied the DNC files to a storage device like a USB thumb drive and got them physically to WikiLeaks — not electronically via a hack.




VIPS: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

The final Mueller report should be graded “incomplete,” says VIPS, whose forensic work proves the speciousness of the story that DNC emails published by WikiLeaks came from Russian hacking.

By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Attorney General

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)


SUBJECT: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

Executive Summary


March 16, 2019 "Information Clearing House" - Media reports are predicting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is about to give you the findings of his probe into any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump. If Mueller gives you his “completed” report anytime soon, it should be graded “incomplete.” Major deficiencies include depending on a DNC-hired cybersecurity company for forensics and failure to consult with those who have done original forensic work, including us and the independent forensic investigators with whom we have examined the data. We stand ready to help.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51280.htm

 

[AIL]

Yes the evidence is available. It's all there but non of the useless news media bothers to do real journalism..
Stupid USA news media all mouth off the same song sheet all 17 intelligent agencies agreed the DNC was hacked by Russia and given to Wikileaks ..
WikiLeaks denied that it received DNC files from Russia.
Wiki leaks said they did NOT hack the DNC servers. A WikiLeaks associate by the name of Greig Murry flew to Washington and meet with a operative that gave him a thumb drive..

This the source of the DNC leaks.. I have been saying this for a long time.


Here is the a quick view of hard facts. " Numbers basically" and we all know that honest numbers do not lie

We Do Forensics

Recent forensic examination of the Wikileaks DNC files shows they were created on 23, 25 and 26 May 2016. (On June 12, Julian Assange announced he had them; WikiLeaks published them on July 22.) We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

FAT is a simple file system named for its method of organization, the File Allocation Table. It is used for storage only and is not related to internet transfers like hacking. Were WikiLeaks to have received the DNC files via a hack, the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and even-ending numbers.

Why is that important? The evidence lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. When a file is stored under the FAT file system the software rounds the time to the nearest even-numbered second. Every single one of the time stamps in the DNC files on WikiLeaks’ site ends in an even number.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site. All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the time stamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.

This finding alone is enough to raise reasonable doubts, for example, about Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers for hacking the DNC emails given to WikiLeaks. A defense attorney could easily use the forensics to argue that someone copied the DNC files to a storage device like a USB thumb drive and got them physically to WikiLeaks — not electronically via a hack.




VIPS: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

The final Mueller report should be graded “incomplete,” says VIPS, whose forensic work proves the speciousness of the story that DNC emails published by WikiLeaks came from Russian hacking.

By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Attorney General

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)


SUBJECT: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

Executive Summary


March 16, 2019 "Information Clearing House" - Media reports are predicting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is about to give you the findings of his probe into any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump. If Mueller gives you his “completed” report anytime soon, it should be graded “incomplete.” Major deficiencies include depending on a DNC-hired cybersecurity company for forensics and failure to consult with those who have done original forensic work, including us and the independent forensic investigators with whom we have examined the data. We stand ready to help.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51280.htm

The evil Russian hacked the DNC for sure your intelligence said it must be true ..

Is that why your comment is funny?

But you forget that your intelligence agencies all of them have lied to you many times. That is really funny .

 

[Raoul_Luke]

First, a clarification. I have no doubt "the Russians" hacked into the DNC network (as we have done to their political organization networks). And they very likely did download the email files. The $64,000 question is, are they the ones who gave them to Assange? That is what needs to be proved, in my view.

If Mueller's report "concludes" that the Rooskies gave the emails to Assange, I'm gonna need to see the proof. If he's just drawing the conclusion from the fact that they had DNC email files and Assange ended up with DNC email files, ergo the Russians must have been the ones who gave them to him, that's not good enough. There is the forensic evidence that clearly suggests the email files that were publicized were downloaded to a local (portable) drive and Assange is on the record saying he got them from a "DNC insider." Absent forensic evidence that shows the files being transferred from the Russians to Assange or one of his associates, it's just very convenient and self-serving conjecture.

 

[AIL]

First, a clarification. I have no doubt "the Russians" hacked into the DNC network (as we have done to their political organization networks). And they very likely did download the email files. The $64,000 question is, are they the ones who gave them to Assange? That is what needs to be proved, in my view.

If Mueller's report "concludes" that the Rooskies gave the emails to Assange, I'm gonna need to see the proof. If he's just drawing the conclusion from the fact that they had DNC email files and Assange ended up with DNC email files, ergo the Russians must have been the ones who gave them to him, that's not good enough. There is the forensic evidence that clearly suggests the email files that were publicized were downloaded to a local (portable) drive and Assange is on the record saying he got them from a "DNC insider." Absent forensic evidence that shows the files being transferred from the Russians to Assange or one of his associates, it's just very convenient and self-serving conjecture.

You did not read the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

They proved beyond doubt that the transfer rates that was used was not possible through a web hack it was TOO FAST to match that speed it can only be done by an internal direct connection to the network like a thumb drive.

FAT is a simple file system named for its method of organization, the File Allocation Table. It is used for storage only and is not related to internet transfers like hacking. Were WikiLeaks to have received the DNC files via a hack, the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and even-ending numbers.

Why is that important? The evidence lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. When a file is stored under the FAT file system the software rounds the time to the nearest even-numbered second. Every single one of the time stamps in the DNC files on WikiLeaks’ site ends in an even number.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site. All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the time stamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.


All 17 intelligence agencies have been lying to you and the American public and your stinking news media is not able to do a simple investigation on the obvious.

Its obvious that there was no HACK by Russia or WikiLeaks in was an internal dissatisfied DNC employee that was fed of the lies by the Clinton and the insiders that were rigging the vote count in favor of Clinton to defeat Bernie Sander..

 

[Raoul_Luke]

You did not read the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

They proved beyond doubt that the transfer rates that was used was not possible through a web hack it was TOO FAST to match that speed it can only be done by an internal direct connection to the network like a thumb drive.

FAT is a simple file system named for its method of organization, the File Allocation Table. It is used for storage only and is not related to internet transfers like hacking. Were WikiLeaks to have received the DNC files via a hack, the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and even-ending numbers.

Why is that important? The evidence lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. When a file is stored under the FAT file system the software rounds the time to the nearest even-numbered second. Every single one of the time stamps in the DNC files on WikiLeaks’ site ends in an even number.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site. All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the time stamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.


All 17 intelligence agencies have been lying to you and the American public and your stinking news media is not able to do a simple investigation on the obvious.

Its obvious that there was no HACK by Russia or WikiLeaks in was an internal dissatisfied DNC employee that was fed of the lies by the Clinton and the insiders that were rigging the vote count in favor of Clinton to defeat Bernie Sander..

Sure I did. But they also have evidence that the Russians had gained access to the DNC servers. They conflated (either intentionally or ineptly) that hack with the email drop on Wikileaks in order to indict those Russian hackers for the effort to "meddle in the election." In fact they were simply snooping because, well, that's their job(s).

 

[AIL]

Sure I did. But they also have evidence that the Russians had gained access to the DNC servers. They conflated (either intentionally or ineptly) that hack with the email drop on Wikileaks in order to indict those Russian hackers for the effort to "meddle in the election." In fact they were simply snooping because, well, that's their job(s).

That so called 17 intelligence evidence is fake .

• FBI Says the Democratic Party Wouldn't Let Agents See the Hacked Email Servers
• https://www.wired.com/2017/01/fbi-says-democratic-party-wouldnt-let-agents-see-hacked-email-servers/

Only Crowdstrike inspected the servers saw Russia within a few hours they were told to look for Russia
hack and this is what they found like all good consultants


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

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

 

[Dawg]

Thread Title says Not Hacked

now FBI not allowed to see Hacked Server...........dammmmmmmmmmmm

 

[AIL]

Thread Title says Not Hacked

now FBI not allowed to see Hacked Server...........dammmmmmmmmmmm

You have been lied to again and again and you have-not figured this out again.

 

[Drumcollie]

So if the Russians did not do it...Then the dnc did...Obviously!

 

[middleview]

Yes the evidence is available. It's all there but non of the useless news media bothers to do real journalism..
Stupid USA news media all mouth off the same song sheet all 17 intelligent agencies agreed the DNC was hacked by Russia and given to Wikileaks ..
WikiLeaks denied that it received DNC files from Russia.
Wiki leaks said they did NOT hack the DNC servers. A WikiLeaks associate by the name of Greig Murry flew to Washington and meet with a operative that gave him a thumb drive..

This the source of the DNC leaks.. I have been saying this for a long time.


Here is the a quick view of hard facts. " Numbers basically" and we all know that honest numbers do not lie

We Do Forensics

Recent forensic examination of the Wikileaks DNC files shows they were created on 23, 25 and 26 May 2016. (On June 12, Julian Assange announced he had them; WikiLeaks published them on July 22.) We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

FAT is a simple file system named for its method of organization, the File Allocation Table. It is used for storage only and is not related to internet transfers like hacking. Were WikiLeaks to have received the DNC files via a hack, the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and even-ending numbers.

Why is that important? The evidence lies in the “last modified” time stamps on the Wikileaks files. When a file is stored under the FAT file system the software rounds the time to the nearest even-numbered second. Every single one of the time stamps in the DNC files on WikiLeaks’ site ends in an even number.

We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site. All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the time stamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is 1 chance in 2 to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.

This finding alone is enough to raise reasonable doubts, for example, about Mueller’s indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officers for hacking the DNC emails given to WikiLeaks. A defense attorney could easily use the forensics to argue that someone copied the DNC files to a storage device like a USB thumb drive and got them physically to WikiLeaks — not electronically via a hack.




VIPS: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

The final Mueller report should be graded “incomplete,” says VIPS, whose forensic work proves the speciousness of the story that DNC emails published by WikiLeaks came from Russian hacking.

By Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

MEMORANDUM FOR: The Attorney General

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)


SUBJECT: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

Executive Summary


March 16, 2019 "Information Clearing House" - Media reports are predicting that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is about to give you the findings of his probe into any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump. If Mueller gives you his “completed” report anytime soon, it should be graded “incomplete.” Major deficiencies include depending on a DNC-hired cybersecurity company for forensics and failure to consult with those who have done original forensic work, including us and the independent forensic investigators with whom we have examined the data. We stand ready to help.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/51280.htm

what you've posted is not foresic proof. It is someones opinion. The USB stuff is funny. Could someone extract email to local files on the DNC server, copy the files from there to a PC at the Russian embassy and then to a USB? Of course.

 

[Boca]

Seth Rich would know....unfortunately he's not available.

 

[middleview]

Seth Rich would know....unfortunately he's not available.

You mean "might know" right? He wasn't in the IT support group.

 

[AIL]

So if the Russians did not do it...Then the dnc did...Obviously!

No Hack by Russia and no Hack by WikiLeaks has ben going on for a long time and no one has interviewed the person that traveled to Washington stayed at a local hotel meet in a park with a disgruntled DNC insider who was provided the thumb drive.

One Year Ago — Former British Diplomat Craig Murray Barred From Entering The US
Posted on September 10, 2017 by L
“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.”

Ambassador Craig Murray

“This attempt to prevent a truth-teller from speaking in support of nonviolence is absolutely shameful. This is not a policy created to represent any view of the U.S. public, and we are not going to stand for it.”

https://gosint.wordpress.com/2017/09/10/one-year-ago-former-british-diplomat-craig-murray-barred-from-entering-the-us/

December 13, 2016 – Craig Murray: DNC, Podesta emails leaked, not hacked – Episode 4328

Radio interview with the person that has knowledge that it was a LEAK drive..

Not one FuRken MSM journalist made a phone call to the this man Two different inside leaks one form Clinton one from Podesta

 

[Dawg]

You have been lied to again and again and you have-not figured this out again.

As you prove with your thread.........wasn't hacked and then hacked

 

[middleview]

No Hack by Russia and no Hack by WikiLeaks has ben going on for a long time and no one has interviewed the person that traveled to Washington stayed at a local hotel meet in a park with a disgruntled DNC insider who was provided the thumb drive.

One Year Ago — Former British Diplomat Craig Murray Barred From Entering The US
Posted on September 10, 2017 by L
“I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.”

Ambassador Craig Murray

“This attempt to prevent a truth-teller from speaking in support of nonviolence is absolutely shameful. This is not a policy created to represent any view of the U.S. public, and we are not going to stand for it.”

https://gosint.wordpress.com/2017/09/10/one-year-ago-former-british-diplomat-craig-murray-barred-from-entering-the-us/

December 13, 2016 – Craig Murray: DNC, Podesta emails leaked, not hacked – Episode 4328

Radio interview with the person that has knowledge that it was a LEAK drive..

Not one FuRken MSM journalist made a phone call to the this man Two different inside leaks one form Clinton one from Podesta

Podesta's email was hacked by someone posing as support who got him to reveal his password. Not too smart, but phishing bytes a lot of people. It was not an inside source.

Craig Murray met a courier, not the person claiming to have stolen the email.

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

 

[AIL]

Podesta's email was hacked by someone posing as support who got him to reveal his password. Not too smart, but phishing bytes a lot of people. It was not an inside source.

Craig Murray met a courier, not the person claiming to have stolen the email.

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

So was it a hack or a lea? Were the Russian involved? NO

 

[AIL]

what you've posted is not foresic proof. It is someones opinion. The USB stuff is funny. Could someone extract email to local files on the DNC server, copy the files from there to a PC at the Russian embassy and then to a USB? Of course.

No not at the speed of the transfer it not possible to have that speed over the internet

We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

 

[middleview]

No not at the speed of the transfer it not possible to have that speed over the internet

We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

There are a number of ways the files could have been handled.
1. Extract from email to a local file.
2. Zip the local files into one archive file. (fat property of each file would show the speed with which the data was extracted)
3. Copy the .zip file across the internet to a system outside of the DNC.
4. Unzip the email files. Unzipped files would still have the FAT property from the source.
5. copy the email files to a USB thumb drive (FAT system property would now show local copy time to USB drive).

 

[middleview]

No not at the speed of the transfer it not possible to have that speed over the internet

We recently discovered that the files reveal a FAT (File Allocation Table) system property. This shows that the data had been transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.

I did a ZIP on a file in another system on my home network. That compresses the file into a much smaller .zip file. Then I copied the zip file from that system to my pc. I unzipped the file and here is the FAT file properties. I just did this a few minutes ago.
Notice that it kept the time from the source system.