Why it's highly likely the DNC Wikileaks dump was not done by Russians / was an internal leak View another article
 

We've been hearing for a YEAR how the Russians hacked the DNC, working with the Trump campaign to throw the election. This is very likely complete BS, and here's why:
1 The "evidence". Problem with the evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC: THERE ISN'T ANY. The server was reported to be hacked by the Russians NOT by the FBI, but by a PRIVATE security company (CrowdStrike) HIRED by the Democrats! That company is the ONLY org that has ever seen the "evidence". Well, didn't the FBI examine the server to confirm what the security company said? UH, no. The DNC would NOT ALLOW THE FBI to inspect the server.
Here's a link you can read:
thehill.com/policy/national-security/313555-comey-fbi-did-request-access-to-hacked-dnc-servers
Why would they not allow that? Seems like this would be a GREAT WAY to ensure Hillary winning, but having the FBI prove that the Russians/Trump hacked the DNC, yet they REFUSED access to the FBI? Right there people should be EXTREMELY SUSPECT that there is any evidence whatsoever. I mean, the DNC CLEARLY would lie to damage Trump, and they CLEARLY could get the company that they are PAYING to say that as well. Why doesn't the FBI subpoena the private company and ask them some questions.


2 It doesn't make sense logistically. Here we see the report that shows TWO Russian intel agencies hacked the DNC:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-government-hackers-penetrated-dnc-stole-opposition-research-on-trump/2016/06/14/cf006cb4-316e-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html

The 2 Russian agencies:
Fancy Bear "is believed to work for the GRU, or Russia’s military intelligence service"
Cozy Bear, "but thinks it might be the Federal Security Service, or FSB, the country’s powerful security agency, which was once headed by Putin."

And we have this:
"One group, which CrowdStrike had dubbed Cozy Bear, had gained access last summer and was monitoring the DNC’s email and chat communications, Alperovitch said.

The other, which the firm had named Fancy Bear, broke into the network in late April and targeted the opposition research files."

So here's the thing:
1 Putin is the absolute leader of Russia, and has total control of their security services
2 Cozy Bear (the GRU) hacked the DNC server "last summer", meaning the summer of 2015.
3 Fancy Bear (the FSB) hacked the DNC in April (of 2016), setting off the alarms.

So...why the F would Putin have the FSB hack the DNC WHEN HE ALREADY HAD ACCESS THROUGH THE GRU? WHY WOULD HE RISK GETTING CAUGHT WITH A SECOND HACK ATTEMPT WHEN HE ALREADY HAD ACCESS? Does that make ANY sense to you? It does not. Again, WHY WOULD HE RISK GETTING CAUGHT WITH A SECOND HACK ATTEMPT WHEN HE ALREADY HAD ACCESS? Putin ALREADY had 100% access, why hack something you already had access to?

And do you think the FSB would act INDEPENDENTLY, hacking a political party in America WITHOUT getting approval by Putin? That's just stupid, again Putin was the FORMER HEAD OF THE KGB and has TOTAL CONTROL of the intel community in Russia. The FSB would NOT hack the DNC independently, and Putin would NOT want to risk getting caught (which they did) by hacking a server he ALREADY HAD ACCESS TO.


3 Hackers using outdated tools. Here's a link:
https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2016/12/russia-malware-ip-hack/
From the article, the hackers used a tool called "PAS", but according to the article: "But PAS has evolved even further since 3.1.7. It is now version 4.1.1 which you can get from the same website:"
This the equivalent of the NSA, Russia has TOP-TIER hacking skills. Why the F would they use OUTDATED tools to hack the DNC, when getting caught would be HUGELY EMBARRASSING and potentially be an ACT OF WAR against America? Does that make sense? NO IT DOES NOT.


4 The content / timing. The content of the DNC hack / release to Wikileaks was all timed right before the Democratic National Convention. But...why release the information THEN? If you're Putin, you know from superdelegates Hillary will be nominated, why not release the material in OCTOBER...as opposed to JULY. The release to Wikileaks was July 22, 2016. The 2016 Democratic National Convention started on July 25, 2016, THREE DAYS LATER! Why would the Russians release then? The Russians already had the emails, it's not like Hillary was going to release it herself! So why would they release the emails to Wikileaks in July, when it does no damage? What seems WAY MORE LIKELY is that it was a DISGRUNTLED Sanders supporter unhappy with the DNC. There were A LOT of those people, you think 0 people that worked for the DNC that had access to those emails were disgruntled about Hillary's nomination? Haha. There were not 0.

The content itself is purely damaging to HILLARY and the DNC as well, showing collusion between her and the DNC. However, most of the emails showing collusion were NOT particularly damaging to Hillary in the GENERAL ELECTION, more "inside baseball" stuff that would piss of Sanders supporters. This also leads to the conclusion that it was a DISGRUNTLED Sanders supporter, that was hoping the release would change the minds of superdelegates and give Sanders the nomination.


5 The reaction. So...Russia hacked one of our polical parties (the DNC), released the info to Wikileaks, and the sitting President (of ths same political party)...DOES ABSOLUTELY NOTHING? Does that make ANY SENSE AT ALL? Yeah, he kicked out some diplomats AFTER the election, but just think: if Obama REALLY AND TRULY had ANY evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, why not come out and SAY IT? EVERY PRESIDENT WOULD! Especially a President in an election year where YOUR party gets hacked! This is a no-brainer! It's a stupid and NON-SENSICAL excuse to say "he didn't want to get involved", Obama specifically TOLD PEOPLE TO VOTE FOR HILLARY! It makes 0 sense for Obama to have ACTUAL EVIDENCE and not release that IN FULL to the American people. 0 sense.


6 Wikileaks themselves. Assange has repeatedly denied the Russians were his source. Russians or someone digruntled at Wikileaks could disprove that and make Assange look like an idiot. Why lie so blatantly? Not only that, a former UK official that worked for Wikileaks says IT WAS A DNC STAFFER:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/10/cia-concludes-russia-interfered-to-help-trump-win-election-report?CMP=share_btn_tw
Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims "bullshit", adding: "They are absolutely making it up."

"I know who leaked them," Murray said. "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."


What likely happened:
1 An insider with the DNC released the info to Wikileaks. Was it Seth Rich? I have no idea, but it was someone at the DNC. Wikileaks already said it was an insider, it makes 0 sense for the Russians to do it.
2 Amateur hackers (NOT THE RUSSIANS) DID hack the DNC, just for fun. Just like multiple entities hacked Hillary's email server. Hackers try to hack EVERYONE, anyone that has a website up for more than 30 minutes will tell you that. Companies have hack attempts EVERY DAY, as do gov't. agencies. Pro hackers like the Russians aren't going to use outdated tools for hacking.
3 DNC saw Manafort et al. working with the "Russians" and decided to blame Russians for the DNC hack as opposed to one of their own staffers. They refused to allow the FBI to confirm it, and now in the press it's just "assumed" the Russians did it.

As you can see, the Russians didn't hack the DNC server, and of course the Democrats are absolutely desperate to keep this lie going. But it's just all complete bs.
Topic How this article applies
Subscribe to get news+blog posts to your email.
Check us out on FB/Twitter:
macys.om 12/09-12/13
Login to post a comment
Enter your comment below.
The speech Romney should give
Romney, Man of Steel: attacks from the right on Romney completely off-base
F****** Idiot Politicians: Chief Obama economist says tax hikes on rich would boost economy
BLS is full of BS; what every American needs to know
8 Facts about the Obama/GOP tax compromise
Is Obama planning on resigning?
Liberals DEMANDING US soldiers with foot fetishes to serve OPENLY
Tax cuts: no matter what happens, GOP has a winning hand
Obama tax compromise smashes Democrats in 2
Stay Classy, Dems. . .Or Maybe Not
The shot across the bow of the GOP
Would Democrats be happy as slaves under a Democratic President?
A DREAM Act to some...a nightmare for all of us.
Democrats' attacks on the rich bite them back...hard
The lonely road of Barack Obama
Idiot Liberals are unhappy reality exposed by WikiLeaks hurts liberal foreign policy
Why the fallout from Wikileaks is overblown
Why Wikileaks release is (mostly) a good thing for the world.
You'd have to be an idiot like Jimmy Carter to believe North Korea
Thank you...to America
Why the TSA scans/patdowns are 100% ineffective
Best plan for the GOP? Raise taxes on the wealthy.
Socialist Lawrence O'Donnell reveals the Democratic playbook on MSNBC
China sells its drones using videos of them destroying US aircraft carriers
TSA: Prepare for full cavity searches during Thanksgiving weekend
96%. Why unhappy Democrats can't primary Obama
Liberals posting GAO article about health care reform deficit savings are just full of it.
Yes, we have a spending problem.
Tax cuts for the rich just not a big deal
State Dept spending went up 41% this year
Sarah Palin will be our next President
Obama the Muslim
THIS is what climate change is all about...
Explaining the 2010 Election
Would Sarah Palin make a great President?
We are Greece in a few years
Pelosi fired herself
Bernanke+Obama are tanking the US dollar
Angle and O'Donnell losses best thing for GOP
Bush v. Obama deficits
Recession has been over for 17 months now
Obama's international friends?
HuffPost: Obama failed
Obama doesn't care about leftists or middle class
Valerie Jarrett is Obama's chief adivser
Obama aloof, inexperienced
Obama golfing again
Facts about the Boston Tea Party
I know, you don't really like Republicans
Chris Dodd wrote the financial reform bill in the Senate. Who donates to his campaign?
Too Big To Fail? Bailout is WRITTEN into Dodd Financial Reform
Financial reform ineffective
Financial Reform didn't stop derivatives
Health reform to WORSEN doctor shortage
Doctors limiting new Medicare patients because payments are too low
Obamacare either MASSIVE cuts to Medicare or MASSIVE deficits
Japan's looming debt
Deficits were fixed after WWII because the war was over
Debt growing at 10% of GDP per year? Not sustainable
Debt above 90% is a drag on growth
CBO shows highest debt % since WWII
Historical Percentage of Revenue by Source
Waste of stimulus
State debt: states are borrowing more
How exactly did this stimulus bill grow the economy?
Record number in govt anti-poverty programs
Dems love the misery of the Great Depression
Dems prosper as economy tanks
Democrat promises killed our economies
Mother jones admitting pensions are a problem
States need to go broke
Federal workers earning DOUBLE their private sector counterparts
Obama bails out state unions
SS/Medicare liabilities $4.3 trillion
Time is running out for the West
Krugman says we don't have a debt problem
SS/Medicare admit THEMSELVES we have a problem, while liberals continue to deny we have one
Medicare admitting Health care reform deficit savings is a SHAM
Obama's 10-year interest payments: $5.6 TRILLION
Obama's 10-yr deficit: $9.7 trillion
Why the SS Trust Fund is meaningless
Social Security ran a deficit this year
Largest cut for Bush tax cuts
Obama's tax cuts vs. Bush tax cuts for the rich
Facts about the Bush tax cuts