Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks  (Read 736 times)

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #10 on: August 12, 2019, 03:31:05 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Regarding Stone, I guess we'll have wait until November to start finding out for sure, won't we.


 It is interesting that in Mueller's indictment there is no indication that the charges against Stone indicate he knew the Wikileaks documents came from the Russians. We have no rumor, link, allusion or any information that such a thing happened. It is not even clear in the indictment that such a thing would be necessary for Stone to be found guilty.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2019, 03:58:09 AM by Matt Grantham »

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2019, 03:54:46 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 It is interesting that in Mueller's indictment there is no indication the charges against Stone include the idea that he knew the Wikileaks documents came from the Russians. We have no rumor, link, allusion or any information that such a thing happened. It is not even clear in the indictment that such a thing would be necessary for Stone to be found guilty.

Has anyone seen the fully un-redacted version of the Mueller Report, yet?

Was Stone in communication, either directly or via a "cut out," with Guccifer 2.0 or DCLeaks?

For Stone "to be found guilty" of what?

Regardless, do you disagree with anything in this November 28, 2018 article? --

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

« Last Edit: August 12, 2019, 06:19:39 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2019, 02:39:47 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Was Stone in communication, either directly or via a "cut out," with Guccifer 2.0 or DCLeaks?

For Stone "to be found guilty" of what?

Regardless, do you disagree with anything in this November 28, 2018 article? --



 Firstly, Stone may be guilty of things, my singular focus is whether he knew the Russians were responsible for the Wikileaks DNC/Podesta emails


 Your article states

Stone’s confidant told the Washington Post that Stone said he learned from Assange that Wikileaks had obtained emails that would torment senior Democrats such as John Podesta. The conversation occurred before any public reports that hackers had obtained emails of the Democratic National Committee, let alone Podesta.

 So I am not  sure if you are suggesting that sometime later he becomes aware the Russians are involved?

 I am not even sure why I need to answer whether I believe Stone was in contact with cut outs working with Guicifer or not I don't, but isn't it up to you to show something that gives creedence to the claims? Yes the fact he lied about being in contact with Russians gives the loosest kind of suspicion, but if that is as good as it gets it aint much

 Same type of answer in regard to what Mueller is charging him with. You tell me what in those charges insinuates he knew the Russians were responsible for the Wiki emails?

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #13 on: August 12, 2019, 08:13:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Firstly, Stone may be guilty of things, my singular focus is whether he knew the Russians were responsible for the Wikileaks DNC/Podesta emails


 Your article states

Stone’s confidant told the Washington Post that Stone said he learned from Assange that Wikileaks had obtained emails that would torment senior Democrats such as John Podesta. The conversation occurred before any public reports that hackers had obtained emails of the Democratic National Committee, let alone Podesta.

 So I am not  sure if you are suggesting that sometime later he becomes aware the Russians are involved?

 I am not even sure why I need to answer whether I believe Stone was in contact with cut outs working with Guicifer or not. I don't, but isn't it up to you to show something that gives credence to the claims? Yes, the fact he lied about being in contact with Russians gives the loosest kind of suspicion, but if that is as good as it gets it ain't much

 Same type of answer in regard to what Mueller is charging him with. You tell me what in those charges insinuates he knew the Russians were responsible for the Wiki emails?

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?


Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #14 on: August 12, 2019, 10:44:06 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2019, 12:43:23 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

-- MWT   ;)
« Last Edit: August 13, 2019, 01:30:19 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2019, 02:12:54 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

-- 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.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #17 on: August 13, 2019, 02:44:27 AM »
 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.

Online Thomas Graves

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1291
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #18 on: August 13, 2019, 04:39:43 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

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?
« Last Edit: August 13, 2019, 04:47:53 AM by Thomas Graves »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 821
Re: Court rules no collusion between Trump, Russia and Wikileaks
« Reply #19 on: August 13, 2019, 04:51:11 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
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.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 

Mobile View