Thread by @ElizabethleaVos

Brand new analysis on the work of the Forensicator.

Examines the DNC's self-own on their claims of hacking, which were contradicted by an 'anonymous DNC official' quoted by the Associated Press in Nov '17.

disobedientmedia.com/2018/05/the-da…

This article discusses the DNC's refutation of their own narrative on Russian hacking.

Turns out the document we were all told had "Russian fingerprints" on it did not come from the DNC emails, but from the Podesta email collection.

Crowdstrike's Shawn Henry - previously of the FBI - told WaPo that it was the theft of the Trump Oppo doc which set of the alarms that the DNC had been breached. This is huge, because that doc was attached to one of John Podesta's emails.

archive.is/IptJH#selectio…

This latest article from @DisobedientNews covers the #Forensicator's second analysis, which can be read in full here:

Please do read it, an immense effort went into the findings they present.

theforensicator.wordpress.com/media-mishaps-…

In Nov '17, the AP referred to this same claim - when made by Guccifer 2.0 - as a "sign of dishonesty," construing it as a false claim which went against the "real" version of the #Russianhacking saga.

After dismissing the earliest version of the story, what are we left with?

Here's what the @AP wrote, exactly:

"... There were signs of dishonesty from the start. The first document Guccifer 2.0 published on June 15 came not from the DNC as advertised but from Podesta’s inbox, according to a former DNC official who spoke on condition of anonymity..."

Again: Why is the AP's report and their anonymous #DNC Official countering what the President of the DNC's cyber security firm described to the Washington Post as the actual theft - the act of the "#Russianhack" itself?

#Russianhacking #Forensicator

This narrative change throws out the entire #Russianfingerprints argument, because it dismisses the Trump Opposition Report which contained the Cyrillic error messages and which was the focus of the entire Russian hacking storyline.

In the end, that's all this saga was: Fiction

**Off. Damn typos.

These were Shawn Henry's exact words to WaPo:

"…[Fancy Bear] broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files. It was this breach that set off the alarm. The hackers stole two files, [Shawn] Henry said.”

Compare this with the AP's anon DNC source

From the article: "One does not have to stray far from the actors in the #Russianhacking saga to discover that the @DNC and establishment #Democrats were, instead of victims of #meddling, the perpetrators of such abuse of the American Democratic process."

steemit.com/informationwar…

From the article: "AP makes the hacking allegations entirely nebulous: a fantasy narrative that can be neither proven nor disproven but easily edited and rearranged when convenient.”
zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-2…

Shawn Henry is eminently qualified to comment on any breach of the DNC network, since his Company, #Crowdstrike, was hired to ensure DNC's cyber-security.

All that said, why was his version of events contradicted outright by the 'anonymous DNC Official' quoted by the @AP?