Your vox article explicitly states there’s no evidence or even any indication the anyone giving money to the Clinton foundation received anything for it. The only thing anyone has found was that a donor was refused a visa they probably should have gotten. Giving to the Clinton foundation lowered the chances of Clinton doing thing on your behalf.

The DNC turned over copies of the servers to the FBI, presumably backups dating from after the hacks. Do you seriously believe that because they didn’t pass along an actual physical box that they’re hiding something? It’s weird to assume that handing over an actual box is even possible. I wonder how the feds deal with virtualization..

Mueller was reportedly considering bring hacking indictments in early March. Has he decided not to? Is he waiting for some reason? No one actually knows, cause Mueller’s team doesn’t leak. There are lots of possible legitimate reasons for a delay that do not involve a lack of evidence, most significantly ongoing investigation.

I get that you’re utterly convinced of your correctness but your evidence is not supporting your conclusions.

the fbi was working with crowdstrike…. they didn’t have access to the machines but they had access to copies and the logs… which are admissible in court…. which the fbi also stated was sufficient… which other intelligence agencies also stated was sufficient…. which the larger InfoSec community says it was sufficient…. yet you and a bunch of amateurs say it matters? wtf do you have to add to say that it’s not?

the analysis that is public is also evidence.. ip addresses.. registered domains… bitly accounts.. you’re handwaving that also based on what?

you are lying… and I can cut through this bullshit all day with you… quit it…

Hey, look, I cited a bunch of articles I found off the internet that provide confirmation bias for the thing I already believe! Game set match, motherfuckers! I could do the same thing, you know.

I presented evidence, if you think it’s confirmation bias then rebut it with counterevidence. If you can’t then please remit from the ridiculous ad hominem sarcasm. Obnoxiousness doesn’t conceal the lack of content in one’s position but reveals it. So far you have my presenting evidence and others dismissing it or glossing it over on an empirical stat-based site. LOL.

I could do the same thing, you know. I could paste in links to a million “look at all the Russia collusion evidence” here, but I’m not that tedious.

Or thorough….

Bottom line, you don’t know what evidence Mueller has, and neither do I, so stop pretending like you’ve got this all figured out.

Untrue. If you actually looked at the confirmation bias articles you brushed over you’d see we do know Mueller doesn’t have any of the metadata on the “Russian hack” because the DNC DID NOT GIVE IT TO THE FBI. That is a fact. Not speculation. And it is the reason why no one is even speculating that his investigation will produce smoking gun proof that the Russians committed an act of cyberwarfare against the US during the 2016 election.

this ex nsa analyst says that its impossible that wikileaks received these files from the dnc hack because of the timestamp and transfer rate of internet connections… while ignoring the whole ability of simply copying a file…

In order to consider your copying “theory,” you’d have to adduce evidence that supports it. All you offer- surprise!- is wild speculation that the filers were “copied.” What evidence supports this theory?

Crowdstrike never handed over evidence. Only an analysis. The server is the evidence and no one has handed that to the FBI yet. As of right now, there is more hard evidence – far more, actually
– for the debunking argument than there is hard evidence for the argument the Russians hacked the server. Again, why not just have the DNC hand over their servers to the FBI to settle this matter once and for all? After all, you are claiming that Russia hacked the DNC during an election to tamper the election. That’s an act of war. Don’t you want to get the unassailable truth out there about an act of war? What possible excuse could the DNC have to hide their servers when handing them over is critical to seeing if the US has been subjected to an act of war by Russia?

You don’t have an answer do you? I’ll wait.

you realize the voa… which was also heavily disputed internally…. leans their argument on timestamps proving it wasnt possible to copy files to wikileaks due to the transfer rate…. which is hilariously bad analysis… just read it…

They lean their argument on a number of data points, not just timestamps. If you want to focus on them as part of a cherrypick go ahead. But there were many issues with the metadata which supposedly added up to something completely different than what CrowdStrike, the only security group to have ever looked at the hacked server, surmised before they had to retract and then change parts of their analysis when called out on it by IISS for erroneously using their data as proof of the intrusion.

For one thing, let’s look that the supposedly hacked material’s transfer rate. Metadata showed that on the evening of July 5, 2016 that 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server. The operation took 87 seconds, a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second. This is the documented factual record. The problem? No hacker using an Internet service provider available in mid-2016 was capable of downloading data at this speed.

A test download of a comparable data volume (and using a server speed not available in 2016) 40 miles from his computer via a server 20 miles away and came up with a speed of 11.8 megabytes per second—half what the DNC operation would need were it a hack. Other investigators have built on this finding. Folden and Edward Loomis say a survey published August 3, 2016, by http://www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively.

And this was supposedly all done from Romania by Guccifer.

I could do the same thing, you know. I could paste in links to a million “look at all the Russia collusion evidence” here, but I’m not that tedious.

Bottom line, you don’t know what evidence Mueller has, and neither do I, so stop pretending like you’ve got this all figured out. Let’s see where the evidence takes us. If it turns out that there was no collusion or conspiracy, well then fucking hooray for America and MAGA forever I guess.

this ex nsa analyst says that its impossible that wikileaks received these files from the dnc hack because of the timestamp and transfer rate of internet connections… while ignoring the whole ability of simply copying a file…

thats your appeal to authority? please elaborate more on this… whats your take here?

i havent presented any evidence because im not trying to convince anyone of anything on a knicks board about politics…. you havent presented evidence yourself but youre linking to articles that intentionally misrepresent what youre saying… that is what i mean by bad faith discussions… and for whatever reason you think someone on here is gonna buy these argument?

im not going into the details of crowdstrike… what youre saying is a straightup lie and im calling you out on your bullshit… you can check me on any of the following but you have no idea why there is a certificate… an ip address… a registered domain…. and known methods and techniques… all traced back to past confirmed russian hackings.. you dont know what the significance of that is do you?

its documented and analyzed in numerous places from other reputable security firms.. foreign govt intelligence agencies… and by ours… wtf do u kno thats special that we have not considered? enlighten me please….

you also realize the retraction from the nyt was that ‘not all 17 agencies agreed’.. could you tell me how many did agree and whether or not you wanna take back what you said?

Oh my god, you’ve wasted so much time here today spewing political garbage on a Knicks site on behalf of a guy that you know is a corrupt piece of shit? What’s wrong with you?

Here, in one tweet, is exactly the problem epitomized for all to see. Somehow, my attack of partisan disinformation is seen as a defense of one side vs. the other. Why? Because in our tribalistic political culture one must either for or against any attack on Trump no matter how dishonest or ulterior its motive may be. Wow.

there is a tiny sect of people like you who still doubt it…. but from my observations.. it’s because they aren’t technical or they have an axe to grind….

Also untrue. Ex-NSA analysts have been the ones raising doubts about the information for awhile. Again, if you read the article I linked you’d see their argument. Here is another article.