Trump: I Have Intel that Casts Doubt on Russian Hacks

I trust Julian and his WikiLeaks sources. A lot more very damaging data will be dumped in the days leading up to the 20th. Obama is guilty of treason as well as Hillary. A lot of stuff is happening behind the scenes. Trump's life is in danger. Obama and his cronies are desperate. They know they are in big trouble if Trump and his administration are able to get control and clean the swamp.

 

There is a whole lot of doubt that it was actually Russia that did this dastardly crime of exposing the truth about Hillary and the DNC. And there is little doubt about Obama and his Liberal Loving Locusts' motive for attempting to put on a show that they have "official" evidence. Hopefully when it comes to Obama’s cronies within the FBI organization they will be held accountable for helping him fabricate this propaganda and become part of the swamp to be drained when Trump takes office.

 

I haven't seen the evidence and you haven't either.

I do know from a friend that was an FBI computer forensics analyst, that they can actually know quite a bit about hackers. Hackers leave trails behind because there are all sorts of ways that they leave evidence. Most activity - legitimate or not - is logged and connections can be traced through an examination of the logs. Russia and China have some of the best hackers in the world, but you can tell a lot by the operating systems they use, the methods favored, and the IP addresses and how they are spoofed. Moreover, state-sponsored hacking has a definite flavor and sophistication. They can afford the best equipment and engage large numbers of personnel to enable connections.

Beyond what my friend has explained on a high level, I am confident that we have our own hackers involved in Russian assets and can tell if they have obtained certain information.

If the FBI and CIA really say that Russia did it, I am convinced that they can be trusted and they can make the case with evidence that a person who understands technology would be able to understand. What they are not going to do is release information on the methods and assets they use to track individuals.

Unfortunately Mr. Trump does not appear to be technologically saavy and may not listen to any information that does not serve his political purposes.

 

I understand the first page of the 13 page report was a thorough disclaimer, hmm, ...some like to conveniently ignore common sense it seems when factoring in the "unseen evidence".

 

I trust an alleged racist, a Putin ally, and a guy that bragged that WikiLeaks might be responsible for US deaths.

Man, this hatred of Hillary really runs deep.

 

As a software engineer and having been involved in computer/data fraud detection and protection, the FBI, CIA, XYZ whatever, no matter who they are apart from a verbal face to face confession can never say that they know 100% who has perpetrated a hack or illegal data mining unless the perps are amateurs.

My prediction is that the best that any organization can say is "we are relatively certain that this breech originated in Russia or the Ukraine or China (take your pick) but cannot say for absolute certainty that is indeed the origin.

Now that is through the pure IT path.

The bribery, and the evil engineered to do the hack deed, now that is a lot easier to nail down.

The old saying in spy work "FOLLOW THE MONEY".

HankD

 

If you have ever been in a place of protecting classified data and defense of the security of the nation you would understand why.

It is a despicable crime to breech the trust given to you.

She has admitted to deeds which would have gotten me sent to Leavenworth.

HankD

 

And what has Julian Assange done? Would he not be in prison? Yet here is Rippon saying he trusts him.

Basically, Rippon (and Trump, and Hannity, and Palin) are saying they believe Assange rather than the US intelligence agencies.

 

I think a good question to ask before one believes Assange is what he would hope to get by deflecting suspicion away from the Russians.

First hint: Snowden
Second hint: asylum

 

People can loathe Hillary all day long, 24/7/365, but that doesn't mean that you need to like and/or defend the person alleged to have leaked her emails.

 

That stands to reason after seeing Comey's public performance after probably being bribed and/or intimidated into distorting the facts.

Agreed, Assange should have received some kind of retribution but I believe he has turned State's evidence or whatever it is called at the Federal level - immunity? Not sure what deal he made.

HankD

 

Why not/It's a free country remember?

HankD

 

So defending an alleged rapist that is holed up in the Ecuadoran embassy in London, and a guy that brags about possibly being responsible for people's deaths is OK because he may have leaked Hillary's emails?

Sent from my Moto Droid Turbo.

 

True, but, one doesn't need to like someone who hacked into a pedifile ring and exposed them either yet might be glad that he did and got them busted and then go about defending those actions of shedding some truth on the situation.

 

Not sure what you are talking about, but when people take Assange's side, or Putin's side, vs. the US intelligence service that is wrong and un-American.

 

I never personally said it was OK neither do I defend anyone's evil but it is justice being served from one evil person to another and that is OK.

As for taking sides, one can always be on the side of the truth.

When real evidence is shown and the truth comes forth I will accept it.

HankD

 

So you and Benjamin agree with Jimmy Carter.





Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

I cant speak for Benjamin, but IMO yes President Carter is correct in his quote.

HankD

 

Not as deep as yours for trump apparently.