1.
Count 1, items 6 & 7 of the Mueller’s July 13, 2018 Indictment states that the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff…
Count 1, items 6 & 7 of the Mueller’s July 13, 2018 Indictment states that the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff…
(GRU), which would be considered the equivalent to U.S. CIA or the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) used “fictitious online personas” including DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 (Conspirators).
justice.gov/file/1080281/d…
justice.gov/file/1080281/d…
2.
It goes on to say that the Conspirators, around June 2016, used Guccifer 2.0 persona to release “stolen documents” through a website maintained by “Organization 1” (Wikileaks) and continued to do so until November 2016.
It goes on to say that the Conspirators, around June 2016, used Guccifer 2.0 persona to release “stolen documents” through a website maintained by “Organization 1” (Wikileaks) and continued to do so until November 2016.
3.
The IC Report on January 6, 2018 states from July 2015 “Russian intelligence Services” gained access to DNC networks and maintained that…
dni.gov/files/document…
The IC Report on January 6, 2018 states from July 2015 “Russian intelligence Services” gained access to DNC networks and maintained that…
dni.gov/files/document…
...access to at least June 2016. And The General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) “probably began cyber operations” aimed at the US election “by March 2016.”
4.
IC Report signatories were CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director Jim Comey, NSA Chief Admiral Rogers, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
IC Report signatories were CIA Director John Brennan, FBI Director Jim Comey, NSA Chief Admiral Rogers, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.
5.
Does this not sound like TWO different “operations they're trying to report?” A series in 2015 and another in 2016? 2015 done by “Russian Intelligence Services” and 2016 done by “GRU?”
Does this not sound like TWO different “operations they're trying to report?” A series in 2015 and another in 2016? 2015 done by “Russian Intelligence Services” and 2016 done by “GRU?”
6.
Aha! Here we go. Maybe the DNC Lawsuit filed April 20, 2018 against Trump, Wikileaks, and others can help us out with this debacle.
"General Allegation” #220 out of 233 (ahaha, yeah, really):
assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4443…
Aha! Here we go. Maybe the DNC Lawsuit filed April 20, 2018 against Trump, Wikileaks, and others can help us out with this debacle.
"General Allegation” #220 out of 233 (ahaha, yeah, really):
assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4443…
“On or about July 27, 2015, “Russian intelligence agents hacked into DNC’s computers and network. On or about April 18, 2016, Russia, GRU, …
...and GRU Operative #1 (Guccifer 2.0) *separately hacked into the DNC”s computers and network. These constituted two separate and independent trespasses in the United States.”
“At no point has anyone with authority to do so provided Defendants with authorization to access Plaintiff’s networks.” (hmm,weird statement)
7.
Well, sounds pretty straight forward. 2 “separate and independent” “hacks” done in 2 different years; 2015 & 2016.
Well, sounds pretty straight forward. 2 “separate and independent” “hacks” done in 2 different years; 2015 & 2016.
8.
June 27, 2017 James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, told CNN that US intelligence had been aware of the intrusions since the beginning in the summer of 2015.
cnn.com/2017/06/27/pol…
June 27, 2017 James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, told CNN that US intelligence had been aware of the intrusions since the beginning in the summer of 2015.
cnn.com/2017/06/27/pol…
9.
The first quiet warning of the Russian operation came in September 2015, when an agent from the FBI's Washington Field Office notified the Democratic National Committee.
The first quiet warning of the Russian operation came in September 2015, when an agent from the FBI's Washington Field Office notified the Democratic National Committee.
10.
The DNC technician, an outsourced employee, did scan the system networks but found nothing.
The DNC technician, an outsourced employee, did scan the system networks but found nothing.
11.
The FBI tells CNN it made repeated attempts to alert more senior DNC staff.
The FBI tells CNN it made repeated attempts to alert more senior DNC staff.
12.
In November 2015, the FBI called again with even more alarming news: a DNC computer was now transmitting information back to Russia.
In November 2015, the FBI called again with even more alarming news: a DNC computer was now transmitting information back to Russia.
13.
Clapper makes an important distinction, both nation states and non-nation state entities ...including criminals use simple spear phishing emails.
Clapper makes an important distinction, both nation states and non-nation state entities ...including criminals use simple spear phishing emails.
14.
IC Report states first wave of attacks came in July, 2015. FBI started notifying the DNC of the attacks in September, 2015 and continued to do so up to November, 2015. DNC’s “outsourced” IT dude scanned their systems and didn’t find anything. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
IC Report states first wave of attacks came in July, 2015. FBI started notifying the DNC of the attacks in September, 2015 and continued to do so up to November, 2015. DNC’s “outsourced” IT dude scanned their systems and didn’t find anything. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
15.
Miraculously the DNC’s “computer tech” finally discovers the breach in April, 2016, thereby prompting the DNC to hire a private, 3rd party company, Crowdstrike ...
Miraculously the DNC’s “computer tech” finally discovers the breach in April, 2016, thereby prompting the DNC to hire a private, 3rd party company, Crowdstrike ...
...whose President of CrowdStrike Services & CSO is Shawn Henry, a Mueller FBI Executive appointee to the cyber branch in 2010.
16.
DNC executives maintained that they were not made aware by the FBI of any “hacking” attempts between September, 2015 and November 2015.
DNC executives maintained that they were not made aware by the FBI of any “hacking” attempts between September, 2015 and November 2015.
17.
Where’s the information from 2015!?! I sure as hell can’t find any. It’s like 2015 disappeared and only 2016 exists.
Where’s the information from 2015!?! I sure as hell can’t find any. It’s like 2015 disappeared and only 2016 exists.
18.
Where’s the server? We wants the servers, Lebowski.
Where’s the server? We wants the servers, Lebowski.
19.
Okay, I think we all can now realize there are TWO, count ‘em, TWO different phases of "attacks", on 2 separate occasions deemed “independent” in the DNC lawsuit, between 2015 and 2016. Hmm, well that’s interesting. The MSM sure doesn’t make these distinctions, do they …
Okay, I think we all can now realize there are TWO, count ‘em, TWO different phases of "attacks", on 2 separate occasions deemed “independent” in the DNC lawsuit, between 2015 and 2016. Hmm, well that’s interesting. The MSM sure doesn’t make these distinctions, do they …
20.
Keep in mind, there are, as I see it, 4 sets of servers. 1) Hillary’s private servers. 2) DNC’s servers. 3) DCCC’s servers. 4) Democratic Caucasus Servers from the the farce investigation we know as the Awan case.
Keep in mind, there are, as I see it, 4 sets of servers. 1) Hillary’s private servers. 2) DNC’s servers. 3) DCCC’s servers. 4) Democratic Caucasus Servers from the the farce investigation we know as the Awan case.
21.
Guccifer 2.0 is listed as a persona of Russia’s GRU in the indictment, attributed to Unit 74455 in Moscow, whom “assisted in the release, promotion and publication of anti-Clinton content on social media accounts operated by the GRU, utilizing DCLeaks .com and Wikileaks)
Guccifer 2.0 is listed as a persona of Russia’s GRU in the indictment, attributed to Unit 74455 in Moscow, whom “assisted in the release, promotion and publication of anti-Clinton content on social media accounts operated by the GRU, utilizing DCLeaks .com and Wikileaks)
22.
July 8, 2018 - Well, here’s William “Bill” Binney, Former Technical Director of the NSA, Army veteran where he served in the Army Security Agency specializing in “Signals Intelligence”, 40 year veteran data analyst with the bulk of his career analyzing large amounts of data…
July 8, 2018 - Well, here’s William “Bill” Binney, Former Technical Director of the NSA, Army veteran where he served in the Army Security Agency specializing in “Signals Intelligence”, 40 year veteran data analyst with the bulk of his career analyzing large amounts of data…
...against the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact for the NSA.
23.
Binney states that by request from Mike Pompeo, he performed this analysis.
Binney states that by request from Mike Pompeo, he performed this analysis.
24.
The video link above, Binney outlines his analysis of the Guccifer 2.0 releases and explains his findings, but we'll go through them right quick.
The video link above, Binney outlines his analysis of the Guccifer 2.0 releases and explains his findings, but we'll go through them right quick.
25.
Binney explains, in high level detail, how he calculated the rate of transfer during upload of the stolen documents by looking at the time stamps of the files and measuring the bytes or bits between each file transfer.
Binney explains, in high level detail, how he calculated the rate of transfer during upload of the stolen documents by looking at the time stamps of the files and measuring the bytes or bits between each file transfer.
26.
Important Note by me: The timestamp IS NOT an indication of where the file originated. Any system can set any timezone, or if using your host system with a Virtual Machine, you can have 2 timezone settings or more. Put a pin in that.
Important Note by me: The timestamp IS NOT an indication of where the file originated. Any system can set any timezone, or if using your host system with a Virtual Machine, you can have 2 timezone settings or more. Put a pin in that.
27.
Binney states that the highest rate of transfer they achieved was 49.1 megabytes per second utilizing a 1 gigabyte [.zip] file. Binney goes on to say that “we knew that couldn’t go across the network.” That means over the internet those transfer rates are not achievable.
Binney states that the highest rate of transfer they achieved was 49.1 megabytes per second utilizing a 1 gigabyte [.zip] file. Binney goes on to say that “we knew that couldn’t go across the network.” That means over the internet those transfer rates are not achievable.
28.
Binney tested the 1G file transfer speeds with the Netherlands, Albania, Blegrade, and the UK. Binney states the fastest rate of transfer he achieved was 12 megabtes per second, and that came from a data center in New Jersey to a data center in the UK…
Binney tested the 1G file transfer speeds with the Netherlands, Albania, Blegrade, and the UK. Binney states the fastest rate of transfer he achieved was 12 megabtes per second, and that came from a data center in New Jersey to a data center in the UK…
...Less than a 1/4th of the rate necessary to transfer that data from the hack.
29.
THIS WAS AN IMPOSSIBLE TRANSFER, OVER THE NETWORK, AT THAT RATE!
THIS WAS AN IMPOSSIBLE TRANSFER, OVER THE NETWORK, AT THAT RATE!
30.
Binney - “However, it is a perfect download rate for a thumb drive.”
Binney - “However, it is a perfect download rate for a thumb drive.”
31.
This was, without a doubt, a LOCAL file transfer, which means the DNC “hack” was downloaded to an external device (thumb drive) on site, or by someone within the required distance of the server to achieve a 49.1 megabyte per second transfer rate. NOT A “LONG DISTANCE” hack.
This was, without a doubt, a LOCAL file transfer, which means the DNC “hack” was downloaded to an external device (thumb drive) on site, or by someone within the required distance of the server to achieve a 49.1 megabyte per second transfer rate. NOT A “LONG DISTANCE” hack.
32.
Binney proves Guccifer 2 manipulated data before leaks. “The whole thing by Guccifer 2 is a fabrication.” “It’s false.” “It’s still not an overseas hack.” “Selected people” from the NSA-CIA-FBI were chosen, not the ones actually doing the analysis, to give a “selected result”
Binney proves Guccifer 2 manipulated data before leaks. “The whole thing by Guccifer 2 is a fabrication.” “It’s false.” “It’s still not an overseas hack.” “Selected people” from the NSA-CIA-FBI were chosen, not the ones actually doing the analysis, to give a “selected result”
33.
The NSA monitors, per Binney, the “transoceanic” cables (internet lines exiting/entering the U.S.) “like hound dogs.” Binney says that the NSA can pinpoint down to the building, within a foreign country, any transfers crossing the transoceanic cables.
The NSA monitors, per Binney, the “transoceanic” cables (internet lines exiting/entering the U.S.) “like hound dogs.” Binney says that the NSA can pinpoint down to the building, within a foreign country, any transfers crossing the transoceanic cables.
34.
Put a fork in the Guccifer 2.0 HOAX, it’s done.
Put a fork in the Guccifer 2.0 HOAX, it’s done.
35.
Logic culminated in the following paragraph. Everything above led to this one, simple paragraph.
Logic culminated in the following paragraph. Everything above led to this one, simple paragraph.
36.
Logic would tell you that plenty of Russian government officials were in the U.S. at these times, have their own embassy, and if they “hacked” these servers why the hell would they transfer the data across the network when they could carry by hand, on a thumb drive, …
Logic would tell you that plenty of Russian government officials were in the U.S. at these times, have their own embassy, and if they “hacked” these servers why the hell would they transfer the data across the network when they could carry by hand, on a thumb drive, …
...sheeeit, up their ass even, head to an airport and take it back to Russia? FFS, they could mail it! They know about the NSA traceroute capabilities and transoceanic cables.
/end
/end
Addendum: And then we also have this from General Flynn. 
