I'm gonna tell you who I think did hack the Democrat server. RUSH: Stand by in a second. This unclassified ODNI report was based. The Intelligence Community Assessment, published on Janualso confirms that Russia was behind the DNC hack, stating on page 2 of the report: In July 2015, Russian intelligence gained access to Democratic National Committee (DNC) networks and maintained that access until at least June 2016.
I read the source’s publicly available explanation. President Trump was quick to fire back at the DNC in a tweet: So funny, the Democrats have sued the Republicans for Winning.Short answer: nobody knows, but the media is treating it as a fact based primarily on a single technical source employed by the Democratic National Committee. My lawyers and I want to examine the DNC servers to settle this bogus claim of Russian hacking once and for all. People have just forgotten.Stone said: The DNC lawsuit opens the door of discovery.
The Pakistanis hacked the Democrat National Committee servers and I will explain.This can be good news in that we will now counter for the DNC Server that they. It was the Pakistanis, folks. People hired by Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz. RUSH: As to who hacked the Democrat National Committee server, it was Democrat National Committee employees.
You will not find, if you Google the Awan brothers from Pakistan, you won't find many stories. RUSH: On the hack of the Democrat National Committee server. In earlier VIPS memoranda we addressed the lack of any evidence connecting the Guccifer 2.0 alleged hacks and WikiLeaks, and we asked President Obama specifically to disclose any evidence that WikiLeaks received DNC data from the Russians see here and. We focus specifically on the Jalleged Guccifer 2.0 hack of the DNC server.
Political Hacks New Obama Order Allows. And they may not have been the ones to hack.Once in, both groups installed malware on the DNC's servers and PCs to continually steal and send information back to 'command-and-control' servers. Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz hired them and put them on the payroll. But there were three brothers from Pakistan, and they were hot to trot computer specialists.
Dnc Server Hack Pakistan Software Updates Current
Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz hires them, these kids from Pakistan made off with all kinds of computer data from all over the DNC, and anywhere from 44 to 80 Democrat congresspeople had their data stolen, and in some cases, even the hardware, the computers themselves were stolen.They were paid millions of dollars to have access to these computers because they were the IT specialists, they were the people charged with keeping the Democrats' equipment up and running, keeping all of the software updates current and making sure that maintenance was done on the network and on the hardware.There were a lot of red flags about these people. They were fired when it was discovered what they had done. They are back in Pakistan.
Again, their names are Groucho, Zeppo, and Harpo. Now, I'm gonna give myself a caveat. It was very embarrassing to the DNC when it happened, and so the Drive-Bys have ignored the story. One of them I think left Washington under cover of darkness, once they had been discovered and they're in Pakistan where they will not be extradited back.The story has been completely and totally covered up. The story was reported some time ago, the original theft and the fact that these guys left Washington. But they were given carte blanche is the point.
But the important thing is that this investigation, if you really, really want to get back to the starting point was when Democrats said that the Russians hacked their servers. And there is information that they were involved in theft, Democrat National Committee data. I was confusing them with the Marx Brothers.They were kids.
But one of the most telling pieces of information, CrowdStrike was the third-party outfit that the Democrats hired to forensically examine their server. Now, in the course of staying up to speed on this, I read I can't tell you how much about it, so much that I can't remember where I read some things. And everybody just accepted it.There has yet to be - do not doubt me - there has yet to be any evidence furnished that the Russians did the hacking. We've been told from the get-go the Russians did the hacking, and they did it to help Trump win. Just the data had been hacked and stolen. Nobody made off with the server, nobody made off with the hardware of the network.
But regardless, the maximum transfer speeds can be easily calculated. And if you're hacking, you're going in via the internet, so your speeds, your transfer speeds are gonna be totally dependent on your router equipment and what kind of connection the Democrat National Committee server has.Was it fiber? Was it gigabit Ethernet? Was it DLS? We don't know. If you're gonna go in and hack data, what are you gonna do? You're gonna find a way in to the host computer, and then you're gonna find a way to transfer that data back to your server.
You can transfer a couple terabytes in not very long. You can copy massive amounts of data very fast over USB to either a DVD or a thumb drive. The speeds that were reported, the speeds that CrowdStrike reported from data transfer is identical to the speed if you're writing something to a DVD or a thumb drive over USB. The speed at which the data that was stolen from the server was transferred are speeds that are impossible over the internet.There are not super-secret, literally wicked fast networks that super spies have that nobody else has that have speeds that approach what these are reported to be. If you spend time Googling this and delving into this, you will stumble across this fact.
They at first tried to tell us it was the Podesta emails. So what does this mean? It means it had to be an inside job, it had to be somebody with access to the hardware, to the server, to computers, it had to be somebody who could plug in a thumb drive or an optical drive with DVD or what have you, a CD, and write the data that way, because if it's over the internet, the amount of data we're talking about here - and we still don't know specifically what was even hacked. And it simply is not possible over the internet. The transfer speed data is there.
They've shown no evidence. They've just told us the Russians did it and that CrowdStrike proved it and that's it. They haven't even told us that. But that was not part of the Democrat National Committee hack.We still don't know the data that was hacked from the DNC. And he gave outside players access to his computer, and that's how they were able to get all of his emails that ended up at WikiLeaks and then in the public domain.
Somewhere in the DOJ is a document explaining what justifies this investigation, what eventually justified special counsel, what justified the FISA warrant application. But we don't know by who and we don't know what they got, and that's what Nunes wants. The real thing began when they claimed their server was hacked. We now know it's not the Steele dossier because the investigation began long before that FISA application.We know it's not Papadopoulos blabbing to the Australian ambassador because we now know the investigation started months before Papadopoulos got drunk in the bar and started talking about his knowledge of the Clinton emails being in the possession of the Russians, which he didn't know until the FBI spies told him.So this investigation, the official investigation began long before anything they publicly said. He's demanding to see a one- or two-page document, however long it is, that actually explains why this investigation began.
When the DOJ invites him and Gowdy up last week to see some of this documentation, they didn't show them anything.But shortly after Gowdy and Nunes had their little meeting with DOJ, Rosenstein, then the New York Times and Washington Post stories ran. Earlier we made the point that Nunes was actually targeted. Which brings me to one final thing. They did that on their own. He did not seek to out anybody. He did not ask for the name of the spy.
He's Comey's best friend at Columbia. Do you remember the name Benjamin Wittes? Yes, you do. You're saying, "How do you know that? There hasn't been anything about -"Oh, yes. They wanted to blame that leak on Nunes to discredit him and take him out of the investigation.
He was part of the plan to blame it on Nunes and essentially Trump. There's no question that he was setting this up. And he had some tweets last weekend and over the weekend.In his tweets he blamed Nunes for leaking this stuff to the New York Times and the Washington Post. But Ben Wittes runs a legal website, Lawfare, Law View, Law U, whatever it is.
Now, what would the Russians do with this information?RUSH: Okay, wait. Say, try this theory on for size.CALLER: The dynamites in the bleached bit emails that Hillary ditched from her private server -CALLER: - the Obama and Clinton outfit was concerned that that server had gotten hacked and that the Russians had highly dangerous information on the both of them.
0 kommentar(er)
