Russa, Russia, Russia.....

[Deleted]

LOL.

NSA Experts Say DNC ‘Hack’ Was Actually a Leak and Inside Job

The Nation‘s Patrick Lawrence wrote a lengthy review of the findings made by various computer experts formerly with the NSA. Published this week, the left-wing magazine’s report notes two bases for their conclusion: (1) hard science shows that a remote hack of the DNC servers resulting in the breach that actually occurred would have been technologically impossible; (2) forensic review of the initial Guccifer 2.0 documents proves that they are poorly-disguised cut-and-paste jobs–forgeries–intended to finger Russia.

Lawrence, by way of the experts’ findings, concludes that the so-called “hack” was actually an inside job by someone with internal access to the DNC’s computer network. In other words, the DNC has (or had) a leak.

Bloomberg - Why Some U.S. Ex-Spies Don't Buy the Russia Story

Original story:

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.

[Deleted]

Bloomberg doesnt talk about the topic you write about.

The other two sources are propaganda pages.

[BuckSparkles]

LOL.

NSA Experts Say DNC ‘Hack’ Was Actually a Leak and Inside Job


Bloomberg - Why Some U.S. Ex-Spies Don't Buy the Russia Story

Original story:

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.

Now now, they have barely any hope to cling onto, let them cling to the Russia hysteria a few more months.

[PACOX]

This is like when former Area 51 workers say that the US is controlled by reptilians.

[Lenonis]

Yup, it's all made up.

Which is why a GOP lead house, a GOP led senate, and a GOP special counsel are investigation a GOP president's campaign.

And also why said special counsel was able to show enough evidence to convince a judge to issue a no-knock warrant for a raid on the campaign chair.

Sorry guys, the days of claiming it's all a nothingburger is over. You need to update your talking points to how Trump is innocent of it all. You're about a month behind in your talking points.

[Molis]

I am going to put forth a conspiracy theory to debunk another conspiracy theory.

Top notch work.

[Vizardlorde]

Isnt it funny they believe ex intelligence agents over multiple intellingece agencies?

[Grapemask]

Isnt it funny they believe ex intelligence agents over multiple intellingece agencies?

That's classic, but pretty much the right's MO. They're the same ones that ignore tens of thousands of climate change studies as "bad science," but then when a single study is published that's contrary to those tens of thousands, they scream and holler "We were right!" Truly baffling.

[Hobb]

That entire report is based off of one former programmer's opinion saying that the transfer rate was too high. And that's even based off of no direct access to any of the evidence Mueller does have access too.

Basically this report is nothing more than an opinion piece.

[Lenonis]

nothing more than an opinion piece.

That's basically the entire right wing platform these days. Almost everything they believe flies directly in the face of evidence to the contrary and it just ends up being "well it's how I feel."

If one more conservative states that "I'm entitled to my opinion" as a justification for something with no evidence I'm going to pull my hair out.

[Shalcker]

That entire report is based off of one former programmer's opinion saying that the transfer rate was too high. And that's even based off of no direct access to any of the evidence Mueller does have access too.

Which evidence do you suppose could contradict their observations?

And why would hacker claim that he is from Romania then copy-pasted some stolen documents into Russian Word - all AFTER Wikileaks announced they are going to leak same data? :/

[Jeezy911]

That's basically the entire right wing platform these days. Almost everything they believe flies directly in the face of evidence to the contrary and it just ends up being "well it's how I feel."

If one more conservative states that "I'm entitled to my opinion" as a justification for something with no evidence I'm going to pull my hair out.

"Well it's how I feel" could be the slogan for the Democratic part: I mean if it already wasn't "Better ingredients, better Pizza, better jobs" or something.

[Mafic]

LOL.

NSA Experts Say DNC ‘Hack’ Was Actually a Leak and Inside Job


Bloomberg - Why Some U.S. Ex-Spies Don't Buy the Russia Story

Original story:

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.

Interesting but we will have to wait and see what the special investigation yields.

[Edge-]

"Well it's how I feel" could be the slogan for the Democratic part:

[Jeezy911]

No way you are getting me to bite defending one of the biggest Washington Insiders around. Not a fan of Gingrich.

[Edge-]

No way you are getting me to bite defending one of the biggest Washington Insiders around. Not a fan of Gingrich.

Also, one of the biggest and most ardent Trump supporters, and someone Trump relied on heavily to carry his message during the campaign.

But he's largely speaking on behalf of both Trump and the GOP in this instance. Sorry if that's a tough pill to swallow, broskito.

[BrerBear]

This article is dumb. It is particularly dumb because it throws up a bunch of straw men and then claiming that if the intelligence agencies don’t rebut them, then that is proof that their claims are correct.

Example:

In a letter to Barack Obama dated January 17, three days before he left office, the group explained that the NSA’s known programs are fully capable of capturing all electronic transfers of data. “We strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of Russian hacking were given to WikiLeaks,” the letter said. “If NSA cannot produce such evidence—and quickly—this would probably mean it does not have any.”

Just because the NSA has the ability to capture data traffic does not mean that they can record all Internet traffic all the time. That's ridiculous. Nor does it mean the evidence intelligence officials have of Russia -> WikiLeaks is a data transfer capture. There are many other evidence possibilities: conversations, login records, and yes... metadata. The author’s claim that the NSA much produce capture data, “and quickly”, or it doesn’t have evidence, is the worst kind of strawman.

And the central claim of this article, that the transfer speed was too fast to be real, and the time stamp is wrong, is inane. It’s as if the author has no concept of remote server logins and staging. Which it’s clear he doesn’t, because the author is in way over his head.

The article was dumb, and I feel dumber for having read it.
You should feel dumb for citing it.

[Lenonis]

"Well it's how I feel" could be the slogan for the Democratic part: I mean if it already wasn't "Better ingredients, better Pizza, better jobs" or something.

"NO U" has never really been a decent counterargument just FYI.

[Belize]

Lawnewz?

Sounds like a reputable source to me. I mean, their name endz with a z. How could they not be.

[Edge-]

Lawnewz?

Sounds like a reputable source to me. I mean, their name endz with a z. How could they not be.

It's like when you spell things with "XTREME" instead of "extreme". It's how you reach the hip, cool kids.