EatTheRich
President
Every criminal case on the list involved an indictment of Trump.
The Russians did not hack the DNC
- Thread starter Sickofleft
- Start date
what crime would they have investigated?
You have referred to the Crossfire or Mueller investigations in terms relating them to an attempted coup.
1. It wasn't one server. I think Crowdstrike said there were 9 systems being used for DNC Email. Dismantling their email network would have been expensive and unnecessary. Crowdstrike gave the FBI backups of all those systems.
The DNC would have had to replace all those systems while they were in the FBI lab being investigated.
2. Crowdstrike found a file of extracted email. The right wing conspiracy theory is that a DNC employee pulled those email out and did a PKZIP to compress the file in preparation of copying it off of the system. You have no evidence of any employee having done that. Your theory says that that employee used a thumb drive to copy the file...and yet there was nothing in the logs that indicated a thumb drive was inserted...
There are a number of ways the file could have been copied off to another PC in the DNC network that had also been hacked. Did Crowdstrike put their monitor on all DNC PCs? No. I can think of a number of ways to have gotten that file off of the DNC Email system that did not involve an internal source.
There is ample evidence that the Russians did hack the DNC. There is no evidence that an employee of the DNC wanted to help Trump and hurt Clinton.
3. We are still trying to extradite Assange. He is in prison in Britain.
4. I have posted numerous sources, including the bipartisan report from the senate.
5. What is the evidence that it was not the Russians? The software found on the DNC servers indicates the Russians hacked the system. The same software was found on elections systems around the country. Explain that in light of your version where the hacker was a DNC employee.
Sickofleft
Mayor
John Solomon reported things that were verbotten!! by the powers at be so they destroyed the mans career.He got fired for using his own lawyers as sources and keeping that hidden. His stories have been shown to be more rumor and innuendo than based in fact. He was fired by Fox news as well as The Hill
The Hill finds John Solomon 'failed' to identify key details of sources
The publication reviewed the former columnist's work after it came under scrutiny during the impeachment inquiry.www.politico.com
Fox News Parts Ways With John Solomon, Architect of Trump’s Ukraine Conspiracies
The pro-Trump writer became a paid contributor as he was a fixture on Fox’s right-wing opinion programming, despite the network’s research arm warning of his “disinformation.”
Fox News Parts Ways With John Solomon, Architect of Trump’s Ukraine Conspiracies
The pro-Trump writer became a paid contributor as he was a fixture on Fox’s right-wing opinion programming, despite the network’s research arm warning of his “disinformation.”www.thedailybeast.com
he lied...
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
They weren't investigations of the DNC hack.
1. So it was smarter to keep using the compromised system? Where was their redundancy?
2. And nothing in the logs about it being "exfiltrated" either. Which do you think would have been easier to cover the tracks of - removal by someone with access to the server or by someone hacking the network from 5000 miles away?
3. Has anyone from the FBI traveled to "Britain" to interrogate him?
4. Quoting the same "un-named 'intelligence experts'" who insisted that Hunter Biden's laptop was "Russian disinformation?" What is their EVIDENCE???
5. Again with conflating the hack and the email release - they aren't one and the same, no matter how many times you suggest that they are. I have no doubt the Russians were camped out on the DNC network, for years actually (LOL). I would simply ask you, what was their motive? The idea that they preferred Trump to Hillary enough to risk being exposed as directly tampering with the election is absurd. The fact remains that you have no evidence it was the Russians who took those emails and released them to Wikileaks. But you persist in this disinformation effort because admitting that fact leaves you only with about a hundred grand in Facebook advertising that was anti-Hillary, at least until Trump won and then switched to anti-Trump. Pretty hard to make the case that they interfered to get Trump elected and then as soon as they succeeded, they turned around and tried to take him down.
EatTheRich
President
What is the least bit implausible about that? They preferred Trump because they wanted a weaker U.S., not because they liked him better. That their decision paid dividends for Russia can be seen today.
Your version of events is laughable...showing you'd rather lie than face facts.
Crossfire started after Downer told them of his conversation with Papadop about dirt the russians had on Hillary...and after wiki released the email. The Mueller investigation...which ypu say didn't investigate the hack, indicted Russian agents for the hack.
Yes
.keeping those systems after Crowdstrike had resecured them and installed software and procedures to prevent another was not a problem. Your implication that there was some permanent damage is silly
EatTheRich
President
Matthew 23:23 - Woes to Scribes and Pharisees
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You pay tithes of mint, dill, and cumin. But you have disregarded the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.
biblehub.com
Sickofleft
Mayor
More bullshit.
Sickofleft
Mayor
What is laughable is someone who still defends this bullshit and does so by not reading anyting about it past 2019.
You were lied too, repeatedly and you are pathetically still defending it.
You've provided nothing to support your version of events that I have not debunked with facts. You were lied to...Trump lost. Yet you pathetically argue he won.
Read the link on why he was fired by fox.
Sickofleft
Mayor
Get your talkling points from your betters confused? I was referring to the Russian Collusion Scandal, which we know for a fact was all based on a story your outragesously corrupt party made up....and... you start talking about a stolen election.
What facts by the way?
The only thing you have ever done is just repeat whatever it is your TV told you, disparged anyone/anything that disagrees with the narrative and to top it off you start yelling about the MY PIllow guy.... who until now I have never even mentioned.
This is sadly "presenting facts" for you.
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
First off, lets start with the fact that Papadopoulos was in no position to waltz up to Australia's High Commissioner for the UK and have a drink with him. The only way that meeting happened is by Downer arranging it. So what, exactly, was his reason for doing so?
Secondly, Downer claims Papadopoulos told him that the Russians supposedly had information they planned to use to to hurt Hillary. Why would he do that? Downer had just told him he was a fan of Hillary. He was working for Trump at the time and only a moron or closet Hillary supporter would bring up such "gossip" in such a setting. What possible purpose could have compelled Papadopoulos to do so? To that point, Papadopoulos is on record as denying he did so (and that is more plausible than the notion that he did).
Thirdly, even if he did, that information was fed to him through Stefan Halper, with whom (surprise) Downer was associated:
The emails hadn't even been "exfiltrated" when they met, so we know for a fact that that's not what they discussed. However, by then the Clinton campaign's efforts to tar Trump as a "Putin puppet" were already under way.
So the theory that Halper (a known US deep state operative) was used to feed Papadopoulos a (fake) narrative that "the Russians" were going to release damaging information which was then passed on to Downer (who solicited their meeting and claims Papadopoulos told him information Papadopoulos denies telling him) has legs, and blasts a huge hole in the notion that the Russians were trying to help Trump at all, let alone doing so by stealing DNC emails and handing them off to Wikileaks.
And again, even if they did, the idea that they did so as part of a conspiracy to "steal the election" as opposed to simply fomenting political strife in the US, is preposterous. The only way to make THAT plot work is for lefties (like you) to keep using it as a brickbat to beat conservatives. So if anyone here is furthering Putin's geopolitical agenda, it is none other than you.
So you think a picture of Halper and Downer speaking at some event indicates they were pals?
You seem a little confused....it was Misfud who talked to Papadopolous. That was on April 26th. Trump announced Papdop was working on the campaign in March. On May 10th Papdop met with Downer. Another Australian diplomat, Erika Thompson was there as well. He told Downer that the Russians could help the campaign with an anonymous release of info on Clinton. Downer told his superiors in Australia about the conversation the next day. Downer did not say anything to the US/FBI until July when the DNC hack became known.
Here is a tweet from Papadop...
Downer was a fool. I played him the entire meeting that I knew was designed to spy on my energy related work and then to ask a bizarre last minute question about Clinton-Russia. The transcripts will prove it all, folks. They exist. The Australians already flipped on him.
Did you know Papadop admitted telling Nikos Kotzias that the Russians had Clinton emails? Kotzias was the Greek prime minister.
The FBI opened the investigation on August 10th.
So just where did you get your info on what Downer told him about being a fan of Clinton's? You just pull this shit out of your ass and claim it is fact.
Last edited:
Raoul_Luke
I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
How could he have possibly known about "the Russians" having "Clinton emails" in April when the DNC email hack occurred in May? You skated past the most important question - why would Downer arrange to meet with a brand new low level Trump campaign official? There simply isn't a good reason, unless it was specifically to solicit the information about "Clinton dirt" that Papadopoulos was fed by (yes) Mifsud, at the behest of Stefan Halper:
And why would Mifsud deny it?
Professor Joseph Mifsud has never been heard talking about his conversations with George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, before the 2016 election.
In the clip Professor Midsud says “absolutely this is not true” when asked if he told Papadopoulos that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. The alleged remark was the trigger for the FBI’s investigation into Russian election meddling and possible links to the Trump campaign, later taken up by special counsel Robert Mueller.
Halper and Mifsud both met with Papadopoulos, and the link between them is Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, the guy Christopher Steele had worked for. I bet you didn't know that. Again it begs the question, why were these guys soliciting meetings with Papadopoulos while Steele was busy working for Hillary to produce the (discredited) "dossier?" You have any good answers? Because so far all we have heard from you on this key aspect of the story is "crickets."
"He told me he's very pro-Clinton, and he hates Obama," alleged Mr Papadopoulos.
"I don't have an opinion of Barack Obama as a personality although he's obviously very clever and very articulate," Mr Downer said.
"I think Hillary Clinton's a very smart and engaging woman.
"I could have said that. I mean I can't remember saying it, but I could have said it."
Papadopoulos and Downer tell us about the drink date that started the Mueller investigation
It was a single drink in a London wine bar that tipped investigators to a possible connection between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia. For the first time, both men give their accounts of the evening.
www.abc.net.au
The DNC hack did not start in 2016...the leak of email by Wiki started in June 2016.How could he have possibly known about "the Russians" having "Clinton emails" in April when the DNC email hack occurred in May? You skated past the most important question - why would Downer arrange to meet with a brand new low level Trump campaign official? There simply isn't a good reason, unless it was specifically to solicit the information about "Clinton dirt" that Papadopoulos was fed by (yes) Mifsud, at the behest of Stefan Halper:
And why would Mifsud deny it?
Professor Joseph Mifsud has never been heard talking about his conversations with George Papadopoulos, a Trump campaign adviser, before the 2016 election.
In the clip Professor Midsud says “absolutely this is not true” when asked if he told Papadopoulos that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. The alleged remark was the trigger for the FBI’s investigation into Russian election meddling and possible links to the Trump campaign, later taken up by special counsel Robert Mueller.
Halper and Mifsud both met with Papadopoulos, and the link between them is Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, the guy Christopher Steele had worked for. I bet you didn't know that. Again it begs the question, why were these guys soliciting meetings with Papadopoulos while Steele was busy working for Hillary to produce the (discredited) "dossier?" You have any good answers? Because so far all we have heard from you on this key aspect of the story is "crickets."
"He told me he's very pro-Clinton, and he hates Obama," alleged Mr Papadopoulos.
"I don't have an opinion of Barack Obama as a personality although he's obviously very clever and very articulate," Mr Downer said.
"I think Hillary Clinton's a very smart and engaging woman.
"I could have said that. I mean I can't remember saying it, but I could have said it."
Papadopoulos and Downer tell us about the drink date that started the Mueller investigation
It was a single drink in a London wine bar that tipped investigators to a possible connection between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia. For the first time, both men give their accounts of the evening.
While you are questioning why Papadop would tell Downer that the Russians had dirt...has it hit you that Downer telling Papadop he admired Clinton wouldn't fit with the conspiracy to get Papadop to say anything about getting Russian help for the campaign?
Misfud met with Papadop even before he was announced as a member of the Trump campaign. He met again after the announcement.
The Steele dossier was written from June 2016 to December....Misfud met Papadop in March 2016...so much for your allegation that they met while Steele was working on the dossier. The second meeting was in April. In December 2019 the Trump DOJ said there was no evidence that Misfud was working for the FBI.
You have spent a lot of energy claiming CrowdStrike is not credible and supplied no info to the FBI. In fact they were one of several Cyber Security experts to review the data. You prefer to believe Assange and Putin.
Cybersecurity analysis[edit]
A self-styled hacker going by the moniker "Guccifer 2.0" claimed to be the source of the leaks;[42][43] WikiLeaks did not reveal its source.[22] Cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Mandiant, SecureWorks, and ThreatConnect, and the editor for Ars Technica, stated the leak was part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC committed by two Russian intelligence groups.[44][45][46][47][48][49] U.S. intelligence agencies also stated (with "high confidence"[50]) that the Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents from the DNC, according to reports in The New York Times and The Washington Post.[50][51][52][53][54]
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange initially stuck to WikiLeaks policy of neither confirming or denying sources but in January 2017 said that their "source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party",[55][56] and the Russian government said it had no involvement.[57]
Comey testified that the FBI requested, but did not receive, physical access to the DNC servers.[58][59] According to Comey, the FBI did obtain copies of the servers and all the information on them, as well as access to forensics from CrowdStrike, a third-party cybersecurity company that reviewed the DNC servers.[59] Comey said that access through Crowdstrike was an "appropriate substitute" and called the firm a "highly respected private company."
2016 Democratic National Committee email leak - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Really? All made up by the DNC. So the WIKI release of DNC emails never happened?
UK knew in 2016 of Trump's 'suspicious links' to Russia, book claims
The UK’s intelligence agencies were aware that Donald Trump may have been compromised by the Kremlin but Theresa May’s government – including then-foreign secretary Boris Johnson – chose not to pursue the matter for fear of offending the US president, a new book claims.
According to Crime in Progress, to be published next week in the US and UK, MI6 was “already aware” in 2016 of “suspicious links” between Russia and the Trump campaign. The book is written by Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch, who co-founded the Washington research firm Fusion GPS.
The book claims: “[Dearlove] then surprised Steele by indicating that he was already aware that the British government had suspicions about links between Russia and members of the Trump campaign.
UK knew in 2016 of Trump's 'suspicious links' to Russia, book claims
No 10 did not ‘push matter’ to avoid offending US president, say commissioners of Steele dossier
www.theguardian.com
What I have posted is that the suspicions were enough for the investigation. Crossfire started while Obama was president...but Mueller started with Trump's DOJ.
Latest posts
-
Biden claims uncle was eaten by Cannibals…
- Latest: Jack4freedom
