The Mueller Investigation

[Zarathustra]

The data transfer rate proves that it wasn't remotely hacked.

Only to idiots who don't understand technology.

How can this be interpreted as anything other than trolling? If you are not one of those "idiots," why don't you share your knowledge? If you wanted to rebut his point, why not offer something other than an insult? If this is merely a technical question, it should be easy to demonstrate. Your point rebuts nothing. It achieves nothing other than personal attack--something you once complained about so frequently.

[wayfriend]

The data transfer rate proves that it wasn't remotely hacked.

Only to idiots who don't understand technology.

How can this be interpreted as anything other than trolling? If you are not one of those "idiots," why don't you share your knowledge? If you wanted to rebut his point, why not offer something other than an insult? If this is merely a technical question, it should be easy to demonstrate. Your point rebuts nothing. It achieves nothing other than personal attack--something you once complained about so frequently.

First explain why you have these very different standards for me than for everyone else.

[Zarathustra]

Only to idiots who don't understand technology.

How can this be interpreted as anything other than trolling? If you are not one of those "idiots," why don't you share your knowledge? If you wanted to rebut his point, why not offer something other than an insult? If this is merely a technical question, it should be easy to demonstrate. Your point rebuts nothing. It achieves nothing other than personal attack--something you once complained about so frequently.

First explain why you have these very different standards for me than for everyone else.

Short answer: I don't like you. Slightly longer answer: you are the one who calls everyone else a troll; I don't like hypocrites. Even longer answer: no one else here has dropped into a conversation merely to have a one sentence response with sole purpose of calling someone an idiot and leaving the substance of their point untouched.

Your turn.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Don't waste your energy, Zarathustra--the attempt at an insult failed because in order to be insulted one must care what the would-be insulter is saying.

Actual forensic computer analysts crunched the numbers and concluded that the servers were not remotely hacked--end of story. Of course, in the broader sense this entire thread is at its "end of story"--no one on talking head shows is talking about Mueller and it isn't coming up at impeachment inquiries. Everyone who has a vested interest in it has dropped it because it did not contain anything of relevance with which they could nail Trump.

Seriously--we are the only people still talking about it. Mueller failed and it is over--end of story.

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

link

Wayfriend isn't savvy enough to get out of his echo chamber.

[Skyweir]

Ok lets play devils advocate and say you are correct the DNC Servers were not hacked _

Right?

Not hacked ... then where did the Russians who did not hack the DNC Servers obtain the data which they gave to Wikileaks??????

WikiLeaks's First Contact with Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks

Shortly after the GRU's first release of stolen documents through dcleaks.com in June 2016, GRU officers also used the DCLeaks persona to contact WikiLeaks about possible coordination in the future release of stolen emails. On June 14, 2016, @dcleaks_ sent a direct message to @WikiLeaks, noting, "You announced your organization was preparing to publish more Hillary's emails. We are ready to support you. We have some sensitive information too, in particular, her financial documents. Let's do it together. What do you think about publishing our info at the same moment? Thank you."159 _____________________________________________________________________________________

Around the same time, WikiLeaks initiated communications with the GRU persona Guccifer 2.0 shortly after it was used to release documents stolen from the DNC. On June 22, 2016, seven days after Guccifer 2.0's first releases of stolen DNC documents, WikiLeaks used Twitter's direct message function to contact the Guccifer 2.0 Twitter account and suggest that Guccifer 2.0"[s]end any new material [stolen from the DNC] here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing."160

On July 6, 2016, WikiLeaks again contacted Guccifer 2.0 through Twitter's private messaging function, writing, "if you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefable [sic] because the DNC is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after." The Guccifer 2.0 persona responded, "ok ... i see." WikiLeaks also explained, "we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary ... so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting."161

c. The GRU's Transfer of Stolen Materials to WikiLeaks

Both the GRU and WikiLeaks sought to hide their communications, which has limited the Office's ability to collect all of the communications between them. Thus, although it is clear that the stolen DNC and Podesta documents were transferred from the GRU to WikiLeaks, ___________________________________________________________________

158 3/14/16 Twitter DM, @WikiLeaks to ______________ Less than two weeks earlier, the same account had been used to send a private message opposing the idea of Clinton "in whitehouse with her bloodlutt and amitions [sic] of empire with hawkish liberal-interventionist appointees." 11/19/15 Twitter Group Chat, Group ID 594242937858486276, @WikiLeaks et al.

The Office was able to identify when the GRU (operating through its personas Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks) transferred some of the stolen documents to WikiLeaks through online archives set up by the GRU. Assange had access to the internet from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, England. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________162

On July 14, 2016, GRU officers used a Guccifer 2.0 email account to send WikiLeaks an email bearing the subject "big archive" and the message "a new attempt."163 The email contained an encrypted attachment with the name "wk dnc link1.txt.gpg."164 Using the Guccifer 2.0 Twitter account, GRU officers sent WikiLeaks an encrypted file and instructions on how to open it.165 On July 18, 2016, WikiLeaks confirmed in a direct message to the Guccifer 2.0 account that it had "the 1Gb or so archive" and would make a release of the stolen documents "this week."166 On July 22, 2016, WikiLeaks released over 20,000 emails and other documents stolen from the DNC computer networks.167 The Democratic National Convention began three days later.

Similar communications occurred between WikiLeaks and the GRU-operated persona DCLeaks. On September 15, 2016, @dcleaks wrote to @WikiLeaks, "hi there! I'm from DC Leaks. How could we discuss some submission-related issues? Am trying to reach out to you via your secured chat but getting no response. I've got something that might interest you. You won't be disappointed, I promise."168 The WikiLeaks account responded, "Hi there," without further elaboration. The @dcleaks_ account did not respond immediately.

The same day, the Twitter account @guccifer_2 sent @dcleaks_ a direct message, which is the first known contact between the personas.169 During subsequent communications, the ___________________________
163 This was not the GRU's first attempt at transferring data to WikiLeaks. On June 29, 2016, the GRU used a Guccifer 2.0 email account to send a large encrypted file to a WikiLeaks email account. 6/29/16 Email, guccifer2@mail.com __________________ (The email appears to have been undelivered.)
164 See SM-2589105-DCLEAKS, serial 28 (analysis).
165 6/27/16 Twitter DM, @Guccifer_2 to @WikiLeaks.
166 7/18/16 Twitter DM, @Guccifer_2 & @WikiLeaks.
167 "DNC Email Archive," WikiLeaks (Jul. 22, 2016), available at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails.
1689/15/16 Twitter DM, @dcleaks_ to @WikiLeaks.
169 9/15/16 Twitter DM, @guccifer_2 to @dcleaks_.

Guccifer 2.0 persona informed DCLeaks that WikiLeaks was trying to contact DCLeaks and arrange for a way to speak through encrypted emails."170

An analysis of the metadata collected from the WikiLeaks site revealed that the stolen Podesta emails show a creation date of September 19, 2016.171 Based on information about Assange's computer and its possible operating system, this date may be when the GRU staged the stolen Podesta emails for transfer to WikiLeaks (as the GRU had previously done in July 2016 for the DNC emails).172 The WikiLeaks site also released PDFs and other documents taken from Podesta that were attachments to emails in his account; these documents had a creation date of October 2, 2016, which appears to be the date the attachments were separately staged by WikiLeaks on its site.173

Beginning on September 20, 2016, WikiLeaks and DCLeaks resumed communications in a brief exchange. On September 22, 2016, a DCLeaks email account dcleaksproject@gmail.com sent an email to a WikiLeaks account with the subject "Submission" and the message "Hi from DCLeaks." The email contained a PGP-encrypted message with the filename "wiki_mail.txt.gpg."174

Do we simply summarily dismiss evidence of GRU engagement on DNC hacking with Wikileaks then??

Would that make you more comfortable with information and intelligence that challenges your cognitive world view?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Ok lets play devils advocate and say you are correct the DNC Servers were not hacked _

Right?

Not hacked ... then where did the Russians who did not hack the DNC Servers obtain the data which they gave to Wikileaks??????

We may actually be talking about two separate events, now that I think about it. Let me double-check the Forensicator references and get back to you. It's getting late here.

[Skyweir]

All good ... look forward to your clarification

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The SCOTUS declined to hear the case which would have given Democrats access to the entire, unredacted Mueller Report. Too bad Democrats--the Report had one more failure to give to you.

[sgt.null]

The SCOTUS declined to hear the case which would have given Democrats access to the entire, unredacted Mueller Report. Too bad Democrats--the Report had one more failure to give to you.

The gift that keeps on giving.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The FISC just released a DoJ assessment stating that the FISA warrants against Carter Page, after removing the FBI misinformation, did *not* meet the necessary legal threshold and should never have been issued in the first place. Remember--these particular warrants relied heavily on the Steele dossier--now wholly discredited--and so even more of that old "Russian collusion" conspiracy theory foundation has eroded. The other importamt thing this helps show is that Trump's political opponents managed to weaponize the FBI, setting an extremely dangerous precedent which threatens this nation far more than anything Trump could do on his own. Don't forget--not only did the FBI ignore the CIA about Page but Kevin Clinesmith, FBI attorney, altered the messages specifically to get the warrants against tbe Trump Campaign. The DoJ also wants to speak with FBI special supervisory agent Joe Pientka about other lapses in procedure, but the FBI website no longer lists him and the FBI has not responded to journalist questions about his status.

This is the real cover-up. This is the real abuse of power. AG Barr needs to go after every person involved.

[Zarathustra]

The FISC just released a DoJ assessment stating that the FISA warrants against Carter Page, after removing the FBI misinformation, did *not* meet the necessary legal threshold and should never have been issued in the first place. Remember--these particular warrants relied heavily on the Steele dossier--now wholly discredited--and so even more of that old "Russian collusion" conspiracy theory foundation has eroded. The other importamt thing this helps show is that Trump's political opponents managed to weaponize the FBI, setting an extremely dangerous precedent which threatens this nation far more than anything Trump could do on his own. Don't forget--not only did the FBI ignore the CIA about Page but Kevin Clinesmith, FBI attorney, altered the messages specifically to get the warrants against tbe Trump Campaign. The DoJ also wants to speak with FBI special supervisory agent Joe Pientka about other lapses in procedure, but the FBI website no longer lists him and the FBI has not responded to journalist questions about his status.

This is the real cover-up. This is the real abuse of power. AG Barr needs to go after every person involved.

Oh, you mean that thing we've been saying for years has now been shown to be true?? I'm sure the mainstream media will be all over this story.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The facts that we have known about it and have been saying it are insufficient; this is demonstrable proof that what we have been saying is true.

Fortunately for the Democrats, all the noise of impeachment is going to bury this story. Surely they would not be so sneaky as to time the impeachment trial to mostly coincide with these Dept. of Justice reports, would they?

[Obi-Wan Nihilo]

Pretty good summation here. It's a shame that this isn't getting more coverage.

[sgt.null]

The supposed unbiased press has
Set itself up as the resistance. No
Longer satisfied with reporting. They
A want the next Watergate. They want
To take down a Republican president.
Is this what they teach in journalism?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

In the wake of those FISA revelations, Michael Flynn--who had previously pled guilty, based on the advice of his legal team at the time--has obtained new counsel, withdrawn his guilty plea, and a Federal judge has indefinitely postponed any sentencing for Flynn. In other words, one of the biggest fish caught by Mueller is about to go free.

I suspect some Democrats are wishing that Mueller had never happened because it has given them nothing but headaches.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

The true reason why Roger Stone got sentenced to nine years for "lying to investigators" and why the Democrat-affiliated prosecutors are so adamant that he serve time is simple:

if Roger Stone spends even one day behind bars they will be able to say "see? we told you that Russian collusion was real and we were able to prosecute and prove it".

They think it is a method by which they can dismantle the entire Trump Administration. Trump should pardon Roger Stone just to prevent any re-prosecution...but he may have to wait until after the election.

edit/add: William Barr is appointing prosecutors to reivew some of the cases surrounding previous Russia/Ukraine-related cases such as the ones for Flynn. Recall: Flynn was found guilty only of "lying to FBI investigators"--which is a crime only because there was an investigation--and his money for legal defense was running out, so he pled the charge. He has since retracted that plea and his case is under review again.

I think that ultimately everyone caught by the Mueller net will be exonerated, which means the ultimate outcome of the entire Mueller Investigation will be "money spent, time wasted, no convictions"....as we knew it would be all along.

Trump might be waiting until re-election to pardon everyone though.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

Roger Stone's sentencing is actually on hold pending a new trial. Both the judge and at least one juror made anti-Trump comments during and after the trial, so the entire process is now tainted with politics--that could be enough to get the case thrown out altogether, obviating the need for a pardon or commutation.

Democrats are so desperate to nail anyone connected to Trump that they cannot shut up long enough to actually put one of them in jail.

[Hashi Lebwohl]

U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton, a Bush appointee, wants access to the unredacted version of the Mueller Report becuase of his "grave concerns about the objectivity" about how Barr redacted and released the report.

Translation: he wants to leak the unredacted report and curry favor with Democrats, because he is a never-Trumper and he is hoping for an appointment to a higher bench from a Biden Administration.

Too bad for you, Judge Walton--you won't get to have the unredacted report because a higher court will see through your obvious political bias and rule against you.

[Skyweir]

BS.

Hes a conservative judge ... he has issue with Barrs obvious bias and misinformation campaign. Fair call I say.