Former U.S. intelligence experts blow apart Deep State claim that DNC computers were hacked by Russians
It’s been a while since this topic was in the news but it remains one of the central claims by the Deep State alleging “collusion” between the 2016 Trump campaign and Mother Russia: Namely, Moscow’s hackers breached Democratic National Committee computers, lifted incriminating emails harmful to Hillary Clinton, then delivered them to WikiLeaks to destroy her chances of winning the White House.
However, a new analysis of available open-source data by a former U.S. intelligence official and a cybersecurity expert reveals about as clearly as is possible — without having top secret clearance — that the Russian hacking claim is bogus .
Writing for The Gateway Pundit, William Binney, a former high-ranking NSA official-turned-whistleblower, and Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst and State Department counterterrorism expert, note that the FBI, NSA, and CIA all claimed that the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks on July 26, 2016, “were obtained via a Russia hack.”
However, they note, three years after the fact, no forensic evidence has yet been provided to the public to support that contention. Rather, one Deep State operative after another, along with Democrats in Congress and former Obama administration officials, have only asserted that the Russians did it.
Rather than DNC servers being hacked, however, “existing evidence supports an alternative explanation — the files taken from the DNC between 23 and 25 May and were copied onto a file storage device, such as a thumb drive,” they wrote.
The former intelligence experts said that if Russian operatives had actually penetrated DNC computers the NSA would have evidence of that because “the technical systems” capable of gathering it “have been in place since 2002.”
In the months since the alleged hack, the NSA had ample opportunity to make available the “irrefutable proof” that a Russian hack had occurred, even though the DNC refused to allow the FBI’s cybersecurity experts access to their servers. But the agency has never done so.
In fact, in a January 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment” regarding the alleged hack, the NSA said it had only “moderate confidence” the attack occurred, which Binney and Johnson maintain is intelligence-speak for “we have no hard evidence.”
Lots of speculation but no hard evidence Russia ‘hacked’
Leaks about the NSA’s capabilities by Edward Snowden in 2013 prove that the agency indeed has the ability to know whether the DNC was really hacked, they added. As such, the NSA would have said in the January 2017 assessment it had much higher ‘confidence’ if the hacking really took place.
And yet, special counsel Robert Mueller indicted a dozen Russians for hacking the DNC’s servers — though, of course, there won’t be any way he’ll ever get Moscow to agree to extradite those individuals to the U.S. for trial. (Related: Report: Comey delayed action after whistleblower came forward in 2014 warning of broken warrantless surveillance program.)
Convenient.
In his indictment, Mueller said that the DNC emails were obtained via a “spearphishing” attack. But, as Binney and Johnson write:
Notwithstanding the DOJ press release, an examination of the Wikileaks DNC files do not support the claim that the emails were obtained via spearphising [sic]. Instead, the evidence clearly shows that the emails posted on the Wikileaks site were copied onto an electronic media, such as a CD-ROM or thumbdrive [sic] before they were posted at Wikileaks.
That matches an earlier analysis published at a blog site called Disobedient Media in July 2017 that an individual cyber analysis found the “data was almost certainly not accessed by a remote hacker, much less one in Russia,” as reported by The National Sentinel.
The only cybersecurity firm that has examined the DNC servers, allegedly, is Crowdstrike, and the FBI hasn’t seen their data, either.
Internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom, meanwhile, has claimed that the late Seth Rich, who worked for the DNC, downloaded the emails and gave them to an operative working on behalf of WikiLeaks.
Finally, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has claimed it did not obtain the emails from Russia.
http://hoax.news/2019-02-14-intelligence-expe...acked.html
It’s been a while since this topic was in the news but it remains one of the central claims by the Deep State alleging “collusion” between the 2016 Trump campaign and Mother Russia: Namely, Moscow’s hackers breached Democratic National Committee computers, lifted incriminating emails harmful to Hillary Clinton, then delivered them to WikiLeaks to destroy her chances of winning the White House.
However, a new analysis of available open-source data by a former U.S. intelligence official and a cybersecurity expert reveals about as clearly as is possible — without having top secret clearance — that the Russian hacking claim is bogus .
Writing for The Gateway Pundit, William Binney, a former high-ranking NSA official-turned-whistleblower, and Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst and State Department counterterrorism expert, note that the FBI, NSA, and CIA all claimed that the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks on July 26, 2016, “were obtained via a Russia hack.”
However, they note, three years after the fact, no forensic evidence has yet been provided to the public to support that contention. Rather, one Deep State operative after another, along with Democrats in Congress and former Obama administration officials, have only asserted that the Russians did it.
Rather than DNC servers being hacked, however, “existing evidence supports an alternative explanation — the files taken from the DNC between 23 and 25 May and were copied onto a file storage device, such as a thumb drive,” they wrote.
The former intelligence experts said that if Russian operatives had actually penetrated DNC computers the NSA would have evidence of that because “the technical systems” capable of gathering it “have been in place since 2002.”
In the months since the alleged hack, the NSA had ample opportunity to make available the “irrefutable proof” that a Russian hack had occurred, even though the DNC refused to allow the FBI’s cybersecurity experts access to their servers. But the agency has never done so.
In fact, in a January 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment” regarding the alleged hack, the NSA said it had only “moderate confidence” the attack occurred, which Binney and Johnson maintain is intelligence-speak for “we have no hard evidence.”
Lots of speculation but no hard evidence Russia ‘hacked’
Leaks about the NSA’s capabilities by Edward Snowden in 2013 prove that the agency indeed has the ability to know whether the DNC was really hacked, they added. As such, the NSA would have said in the January 2017 assessment it had much higher ‘confidence’ if the hacking really took place.
And yet, special counsel Robert Mueller indicted a dozen Russians for hacking the DNC’s servers — though, of course, there won’t be any way he’ll ever get Moscow to agree to extradite those individuals to the U.S. for trial. (Related: Report: Comey delayed action after whistleblower came forward in 2014 warning of broken warrantless surveillance program.)
Convenient.
In his indictment, Mueller said that the DNC emails were obtained via a “spearphishing” attack. But, as Binney and Johnson write:
Notwithstanding the DOJ press release, an examination of the Wikileaks DNC files do not support the claim that the emails were obtained via spearphising [sic]. Instead, the evidence clearly shows that the emails posted on the Wikileaks site were copied onto an electronic media, such as a CD-ROM or thumbdrive [sic] before they were posted at Wikileaks.
That matches an earlier analysis published at a blog site called Disobedient Media in July 2017 that an individual cyber analysis found the “data was almost certainly not accessed by a remote hacker, much less one in Russia,” as reported by The National Sentinel.
The only cybersecurity firm that has examined the DNC servers, allegedly, is Crowdstrike, and the FBI hasn’t seen their data, either.
Internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom, meanwhile, has claimed that the late Seth Rich, who worked for the DNC, downloaded the emails and gave them to an operative working on behalf of WikiLeaks.
Finally, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has claimed it did not obtain the emails from Russia.
http://hoax.news/2019-02-14-intelligence-expe...acked.html
