Kim Dotcom: "Let Me Assure You, The DNC Hack Wasn’t Even A Hack"

I doubt any follow up for VIPS didn't get one either. They have presented the only evidence in regards to whether it was an outside hack or inside leak. They evidenced it was an inside leak.

Some think it may well have been Seth Rich. The reason they think this is because early on Amb. Murray went out and made a statement that he knew the leaker and it was not Russia. He immediately was blacked out in MSM, in europe and here. Funny huh? The MSM did not even question him, to try to show him us as a fool. He just vanished from news coverage.

Then you have assange personally speaking to the murder of seth rich saying people who whistle blow do it at great personal risk. He then offered a large reward for info leading to the capture of his murderers. It would not be good for his business if he warned his future whistleblowers of what might happen to them. Yet he basically did just that. Which makes some people think Rich was the leaker.

Murray may be lying. VIPS may be lying. Assange may be lying. Kim Dot may be lying. Or of course our own gov't could be lying. Has our gov't ever lied to us before? How about Murray, VIPs, Assange, or Kim Dot Com? This might help you to become a bit more objective, if one only considers this question? Of course trump hating partisans cannot be objective for it might destroy their faith and beliefs. And they really do not want to do that! Human nature rules their domain, not logic, rationality, reason, and observation of their actual reality. Their actual reality is that their gov't habitually has lied to them, and yet they develop amnesia. When it suits their partisanship. Human nature.

 

And let's not forget the Seth Rich claim doesn't even make sense, because he had no access to the information in question.

 

That's the story the DNC sold the sheeples.

 

If he has evidence, do you really think congress wants to hear it? It would hurt them in their current McCarthyism. Hell, they never even gave VIPS any credence when they supplied the evidence the hack was not a hack but an insider leak. I guess they don't want to talk to William Binney who would publically reveal what these jack wagons are in congress. And show them what evidence actually looks like.

 

Remember, Podesta's password was............ password

 

Some of Congress may not, but the Trump administration and his DOJ arm should care. The media, the left, and the Obama holdovers in government want that narrative to go quietly away.

 

Someone on the inside did, according to the evidence VIPS tried to present to MSM and the DOJ.

Why was Brazille so paranoid that she closed her blinds? You think she thought Rich may have been involved and killed? Why be paranoid? Is she scared of the machine behind the clintons, or what?

 

Just a reminder: Kim has failed to provide any evidence, except the one time he tried passing off documents as evidence and he later had to admit they were fake. Putting faith in him at this point is just that: blind faith.

 

Then call him to task on his claims. Offer him the chance to prove this but has this been done? No.

 

He has all the chance he wants, but he has already screwed up once. The last time he offered "evidence" of this, it turned out he was lying. He's the one saying he has evidence. It is his responsibility to produce it if he wants intellectual honest people to believe him. But has this been done? No.

 

You are engaging in standard conspiracy theory speculation. Please stop.

The VIPS assessment is heavily disputed, even within VIPS. For a full discussion of the memo and the variouis views on it, try this:
https://www.thenation.com/article/a-leak-or-a-hack-a-forum-on-the-vips-memo/

Pay especially close attention to the independent review of both VIPS camps' claims.

And even if the hack WERE internal, it almost certainly wasn't Seth Rich, for the reasons stated: he did not have any access to the files in question, so couldn't have copied them even if he wanted to. People pushing the Seth Rich angle are doing so with no evidence at all.

 

I read it. Perhaps you should pay attention to the reply of VIPS? They dispute the opposition. And who is more trustworthy? I would go with VIPS.

How do you know he had no access to files copied? I need to see the evidence for that. People are considering the seth rich angle because of Amb Murray told us, before blacked out, and what assange said about his murder along with the reward assange posted. And as Binney has told us, if the NSA had evidence of the hack, they sure have not said anything about it. And Binney said they would have it, and he should know. Then there is the kind of hack that is said to have been used on the DNC. An out of date software, hardly what russian intel would have used. But we take this on the word of the private contractor employed by the dnc, for the fbi was never given access to the DNC system...how odd. Wonder why, since this is supposed to involve a russian hack? Of course you do not find that odd, but the fbi does not generally take the word of private contractors but want to get that evidence themselves. Not this time.

 

#1, BOTH groups are VIPS. It's an internal dispute.

#2, as the independent third-party review points out, both groups overstate their conclusions. I found the third-party reviewer the most careful and persuasive of all. He pointed out the scenarios that match the data that VIPS ignored. They include multiple remote hack methodologies.

Until you can rule those out, the main VIPS claim -- that the data-transfer rate indicates it HAD to be an inside job -- simply can't be supported.

The DNC leak consisted largely of leaked emails. Seth was in charge of a project to produce an app that would increase voter turnout. His job gave him no access to the DNC email server. And the vast majority of the emails that were leaked were emails he was not part of. There is simply no evidence that he had the sort of access needed to perpetrate the leak, nor is it reasonable to think he did.

Never mind that Murray never actually pointed to Rich, and that both Murray and Assange had a selfish interest in muddying the waters to obscure the identity of their source. Neither of them is a credible source on this matter.

Well, they certainly haven't said anything publicly. But then, the NSA rarely does. A secretive agency being secretive isn't evidence of anything.

Source, please. The hack methodology is EXACTLY what Russian intel has used repeatedly. Further, it was the same methodology used on Hillary Clinton's campaign, which is how John Podesta's e-mails ended up getting stolen.

You make a lot of breezy assertions here that simply aren't true.

The FBI relies on private contractors all the time. If they trust them and their expertise, they don't generally re-invent the wheel by redoing the work themselves.

Further, the Crowdstrike conclusion was independently confirmed by two of its competitors.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...6005beac8b3_story.html?utm_term=.60f3debe9f37

Further, the DNC provided copies of the server to the FBI.

So what you're left with is standard conspiracy theory crap: you have no actual evidence to support your claim, so you pretend it's supported by asking questions about perceived inconsistencies in the "official" story -- most of which are not actually inconsistencies.

 

You can learn three and be as good as Hillary, "Side of Beef Tossed in Van," "Downward Facing Drunk," and "Speaking Fee Salutations."

 

It is no more conspiracy crap than what is being peddled and eaten up by the establishment democrats. BTW, both Binney and McGovern are the older kind of democrats. Not right wing nuts. The nuts are those who believe the official story, concocted with zero evidence.

What you call a conspiracy theory makes a helluva lot more sense than the story you are peddling.

The disagreement within VIPS, and I saw the list, are not experts in hacking and the NSA as Binney is. VIPS is sticking by their report as they should. The founders of VIPS believe what they said, and until we see actual evidence backing the official story, my views will coincide with theirs. My money says the official story is rubbish. A conspiracy theory. I do think russia did hack hillarys private server. That was much more important than the DNC. And we were told there was no way to tell if russia hacked her server. Yeah, right. NSA has the goods if they exist as they so with the alleged russian hack of the dnc. Yet no evidence to date from them. Means they have none. IMO. Which means the dnc hack is a farce. You should be able to see and understand this, if you have kept up with the capabilities of the nsa.

 

It definitely should be investigated. Battling investigations take time away from swamp's efforts to spend more of our money.

 

Nor you just stop right there mister... You leave poor Hillary out of this!!...

 

Russian hacking story goes back further, what's your point?

 

Cr baby thats wants attention, is pissed at the US and wants to damage it as much as possible?

He can run for president for the GOP the next election no doubt, makes a decent chance to win.