Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks

[Matt Grantham]

Whether or not Roger Stone was in contact with people communicating with Guccifer 2.0 about the distribution of the hacked emails will hopefully be resolved in Stone's upcoming trial.

--  MWT   

Question:  Do you agree with Mueller's finding that the Russians were, in so many words, engaged in systematic and pervasive long-term efforts to not only see Clinton defeated, but your boy Trump elected?

 Since there is no indication that that Muller made in effort to check or corroborate Crowd Strikes finding, nor did he apparently even consider the Veteran Intelligence Professionals and William Binney's findings, I have little confidence in the Guicifer 2.0 finding. The Facebook story has no connection to Russian intelligence from what I have seen is a few tens of thousands of dollars worth of effort. It is a world wide web by the way. I have never voted fro Republican in my life and certainly did not vote for Trump. So I do not consider him my boy

[Thomas Graves]

Since there is no indication that that Muller made in effort to check or corroborate Crowd Strikes finding, nor did he apparently even consider the Veteran Intelligence Professionals and William Binney's findings, I have little confidence in the Guicifer 2.0 finding.

Maybe you can enlighten yourself a little by reading this article:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dnc-hacked-itself-conspiracy-theory-collapses-key-backer-claim-exposed-as-uk-troll.shtml

-- MWT   

[Matt Grantham]

Maybe you can enlighten yourself a little by reading this article:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180802/07182740351/as-dnc-hacked-itself-conspiracy-theory-collapses-key-backer-claim-exposed-as-uk-troll.shtml

-- MWT   

 I am trying to look for the meat of this articles rebuttal of the VIPS. This seems to be about it


 The Nation was forced to review the report, adding a meandering preamble to address criticism. In the year since, reports have forged a new infosec community consensus that yes, Guccifer 2.0 was GRU, and had been amusingly caught because Russian intelligence forgot to activate its VPN before logging into the bogus persona's WordPress site on one occasion (one of several opsec errors made by Russian intel).



 I don't see much meat there quite frankly If you want to point to something else in the article I will listen. Not sure who the infosec community is. We do know that the supposed consensus on the Russian hack was not a consensus opinion of all 17 intelligence agencies as Clapper made quite clear. At a minimum lets have an open forum of VIPS, and Kapersky and others who doubt the alphabet agencies and their hired helpers.

[Matt Grantham]

 In my opinion to refute VIPS in a straightforward manner one would need to do one of two things. Show that download speeds have no relation to the question of the distance of the hack. Or that VIPS measurement of the download speeds were incorrect or unreliable. I am not seeing that in your article.

[Thomas Graves]

We do know that the supposed consensus on the Russian hack was not a consensus opinion of all 17 intelligence agencies as Clapper made quite clear.

At a minimum lets have an open forum of VIPS, and Kapersky and others who doubt the alphabet agencies and their hired helpers.

Which of the 17 intelligence agencies dissented from the majority's conclusion?

Isn't Kapersky Lab owned by a Russian and headquartered in Moscow?

[Matt Grantham]

Which of the 17 intelligence agencies dissented from the majority's conclusion?

 It is not a matter of them dissenting but rather that they never assented.



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/a-rather-large-new-york-times-correction

[Thomas Graves]

In my opinion to refute VIPS in a straightforward manner one would need to do one of two things. Show that download speeds have no relation to the question of the distance of the hack. Or that VIPS measurement of the download speeds were incorrect or unreliable. I am not seeing that in your article.

Two honest personal questions:

1) A you a "computer person"?

2) Have you done any research on the technical aspect of the issue?