re: How can the government claim evidence when they have never examined DNC server?

quote:

---

Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election specifically to help trump over hillary

---

What about the attempts to hack the RNC?

There needs to be clarification of the various alleged actions taken because “hacking” is, or else has become, a very ambiguous term and it appears many use that term to be deliberately vague and hence technically not exactly lying.

Podesta/DNC emails stolen and released.
Facebook pages.
Attempts on state election servers.
What else??

quote:

---

Be real, could you imagine the responses had the FBI been the only people that had examined the server? Or do we trust Intel now?

---

I'd trust them more than a third party source who is affiliated with the Clintons.

quote:

---

Actually they do know the Russians did this.

---

The DNC server was a completely different subject from what we dealt with in the state election networks. At the time, we believed what we were being told about that one from Crowdstrike. Crowdstrike is reputable and does in fact know their shite. Not sure how you could get the people that would have been involved in the IR to all stay quiet if that report had been faked. So I think what they saw is what they say in the report. I have an aversion to conspiracy theories when the obvious works just fine. The DNC was full of idiots who were easily spear-phished.

quote:

---

Too late for that. The chain of custody has been violated so the evidence is no longer credible in a court of law. One of the most common arguments by any defense is that police did not manage the chain of custody properly and that the evidence is therefore tainted.

---

Chain of evidence, lol! The FBI/DOJ/IC has probably been busy destroying evidence long before Hilldawg was exonerated....., you can believe dat!

Why would the Russians even bother hacking into the email server when they know Trump will simply invite them to the Oval Office anyway?

quote:

---

"FBI didn't see the server" conspiracy

---

Know I know you are full of shite.

quote:

---

Not sure how you could get the people that would have been involved in the IR to all stay quiet if that report had been faked.

---

Right.
Just to be clear in the case of the DNC, Crowdstrike was brought in after repeated FBI warnings to the DNC concerning Russian hacks.

Crowdstrike confirmed Russian hacks the Dutch had been warning the US IC about for nearly a year. For the Dutch, it must have been a NSS moment.

However, Crowdstrike did not (to the best of my knowledge) rule out hacking by other entities, nor did they eliminate possibility of information theft via an internal source.

Yeah that was my interpretation of it as well.

That's the problem with this whole thing. Its so many different moving pieces that are actually pretty complicated and require a baseline understanding of subjects most folks don't have, that it's very easy to try to sum it up as some kind of single actor conspiracy manipulating it all.

I've never thought that. But the part that I was involved in sure looked like it and the things we thought were going to happen as a result of the idiocy we were being fed actually did happen. Those stories came out exactly like we expected claiming twenty something states were attacked by the russians. And while all fifty states were probably seeing instances of the IP addresses HS was sending out as indicators, that was by no means an actual indicator of anything by the russian government. Far from it. But it was enough where we would have to say, yes, we saw those. Of course all they did was browse a website. But that wasn't the question.

The DNC hack and Podesta were their own faults. If you're going to put shite like that in writing, you might want to actually get serious about protecting those servers. I was actually totally fine with wikileaks leaking those. If you don't want your shite exposed for the universe to read then protect it or don't say it. Because God knows the media wasn't going to do their job.

quote:

---

It was laughable to people in the business because it was simply specific IPs. Something a ten year old can spoof or anyone with a VPN. The problem with this whole thing is that the networks are being hit by these 'Russian' attacks every day. So you can't say they aren't doing it. Whoever the hell 'They' are are doing it daily. On everything on the internet. Got a thermostat connected to your home network? There's a 'russian' trying to drop a bot on it.

---

I've had this conversation with actual industry people as well. The claim I was given is that the entire Internet is swept every two weeks by "Russian and Chinese" bots. I'm not exactly sure what that means, but it was given in the context of open network ports and peripheral devices like security cameras only having basic "admin" type passwords on them.