Posts Tagged ‘Guccifer 2.0’

willliam-binney

“Mueller Report based on fabricated evidence”

In other words, it looked like the CIA did this, and that it was a matter of the CIA making it look like the Russians were doing the hack. So, when you look at that and also look at the DNC emails that were published by Wikileaks that have this phat file format in them, all 35,813 of these emails have rounded off times to the nearest even second.

That’s a phat file format property; that argues that those files were, in fact, downloaded to a thumb drive or CD-rom and physically transported before Wikileaks posted them. Which again argues that it wasn’t a hack.

how-russia-hacked-the-2016-presidential-election-promo-1531528620228-articleLarge

NY Times today goes on an incredible journey, providing zero evidence, but lots of claims. Some of it may be true. The Guccifer 2 entity may have been a Russian intelligence operation, connected to the indictments of 12 people by Mueller this week. See what you think, and try and hack your way through all the anti-Russian, anti-Putin propaganda they just had to throw in there as standard (mind control) practice.

Tracing Guccifer 2.0’s Many Tentacles in the 2016 Election

PS.

They even go to lengths to dismiss the “murdered DNC staffer” by not even giving him a name, which was Seth Rich. Assange mentioned Rich as a possible source for the documents, but this has been attacked as a “conspiracy theory” and unthinkable ever since. Rich was murdered in a “robbery” according to the official story… where absolutely nothing was actually stolen.

 

 

WikiLeaks-Assange-Russia-NOT-Source.jpg

“Copied, Not Hacked”

Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying and doctoring were performed on the East coast of the U.S. Thus far, mainstream media have ignored the findings of these independent studies [see here and here].

Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

From the information available, we conclude that the same inside-DNC, copy/leak process was used at two different times, by two different entities, for two distinctly different purposes:

-(1) an inside leak to WikiLeaks before Julian Assange announced on June 12, 2016, that he had DNC documents and planned to publish them (which he did on July 22) – the presumed objective being to expose strong DNC bias toward the Clinton candidacy; and

-(2) a separate leak on July 5, 2016, to pre-emptively taint anything WikiLeaks might later publish by “showing” it came from a “Russian hack.”

 

The Time Sequence

June 12, 2016: Assange announces WikiLeaks is about to publish “emails related to Hillary Clinton.”

June 15, 2016: DNC contractor Crowdstrike, (with a dubious professional record and multiple conflicts of interest) announces that malware has been found on the DNC server and claims there is evidence it was injected by Russians.

June 15, 2016: On the same day, “Guccifer 2.0” affirms the DNC statement; claims responsibility for the “hack;” claims to be a WikiLeaks source; and posts a document that the forensics show was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”

We do not think that the June 12 & 15 timing was pure coincidence. Rather, it suggests the start of a pre-emptive move to associate Russia with anything WikiLeaks might have been about to publish and to “show” that it came from a Russian hack.

Jill-Stein-Meme-13-jg copy.png

Guccifer 2.0 Releases More DNC Docs, Exposing More Corruption

 

1437.jpg

 

A toast for Guccifer, who faces a lengthy prison term for exposing these criminal syndicates called “Democrats” and “Republicans.”

Nancy Pelosi’s files, with lots of bribe money tabulated…

DCCC DOCS FROM PELOSI’S PC

 

Here’s Nancy Pelosi’s response to Black Lives Matter. After acknowledging their concerns:

“Don’t offer support for concrete policy positions”

That’s the Democratic Party today in a nutshell. You are wasting your breath. They say so themselves.

In a laughable take on ISIS, they claim it’s all Bush and Zarqawi (who was supposedly killed in 2006, a full decade ago!). It’s the same blame Bush for everything mantra you hear all over the Democrat-friendly web. The Zarqawi charade is icing on the cake. Killed five years before a stone was thrown in Syria, but it’s all him. Trust her.