Posted on 08/12/2021 4:41:13 PM PDT by Dr. Franklin
Last night, The Washington Times put out an article which said “Mike Lindell’s lead cyber expert says they can’t prove China hacked the 2020 election.”
This was supposed to dump cold water on Mike Lindell’s Cyber Symposium.
They have now issued a major “clarification.”
Here it is:
Kurt Olsen, a lawyer on Mr. Lindell’s team said there were multiple sources of the data that Mr. Lindell claims to have, and did not confirm that Mr. Mongtomery was the source of the data. He also clarified that the $5 million challenge has not been canceled and that Mr. Merritt would not be privy to that information.
Clarification: The article previously described Mr. Merritt as Lindell’s lead cyber expert. Mr. Merritt is a cyber expert on the red team hired by Mr. Lindell to interrogate the data for the symposium, and does not work directly for Mr. Lindell.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepalmierireport.com ...
Secondly, Lindell through his lawyer, did not confirm, and appears to deny that Elizabeth Montgomery, or anyone else sharing her surname, is the source of the massive data file at issue. The lawyer stated the the data comes from multiple sources, not just one guy. So all of the trolls spreading the disinformation that one shady guy invented 37 TB of data and is conning us all got it wrong. Again, Lindell didn't promise to reveal his sources. He simply invited IT experts to examine the files and offered a reward if they could prove it fake. So far, no participant at the event has stated anything was fake.
For those who want to know the rest of the story, write your Congressman and Senators to demand an investigation. Congress has the power to subpoena witnesses and documents, not Mike Lindell. Lindell is a salesman, not a lawyer. Obviously, the purpose of the symposium was to build momentum for audits, which might lead to decertification of the election, not to give away his sources, or to put witnesses or their families in danger for no reason, i.e., without the ability to effect a remedy. We pary that is upcoming, the Good Lord willing.
“Again, Lindell didn’t promise to reveal his sources. He simply invited IT experts to examine the files and offered a reward if they could prove it fake. So far, no participant at the event has stated anything was fake.”
You don’t offer $5mm in a situation like this without knowing the outcome in advance. When I how Lindell worded the challenge I knew he knew the outcome.
It was so encouraging that all 50 states were represented at this conference and that the grass roots movements have so many members and are so committed.
clown.
Still mad about 2016 and President Trump's great victory, I see.
And right on queue the corrupt Biden regime has shut down https://lindelltv.com
Report the rest you crooked reporter.
What a sham you guys are. No honesty.
This is AMERICA for goodness sake !!!
The Washington Times over recent years has been slowly devolving from a conservative paper to an increasingly liberal slant. Looks like they are following the Fox News business plan.
They have reporters who are definitely not Trump fans, and an increasing number of commentary writers who spout the establishment Republican garbage, with a heavy anti-Trump tilt.
The paper used to provide a balance to the communist Washington Post. Now it looks like all their reporters are auditioning for a job at the Post.
No kidding.
What an embarrassing JA exposure.
(*JA = jack a$$in’ = trolling)
Washington Times is bad. Examiner is worse.
A Twittsewer bluecheck like Rob has got to do what he needs to do to avoid getting the Heave-Ho from @jackboot.
Yeah, he was on this thread like a fly on Mitt.
This clarification is somewhat reassuring. The original WT hit piece seemed to suggest that the PCAP data was “not recoverable” meaning the hex data was encrypted in a way that would not allow viewing of the traces. This update indicates the data was “unreliable” which just means that Merritt was able to read and interpret the traces (not encrypted) but that he could not personally draw conclusions about its authenticity or origin.
This is not uncommon with packet sniffing investigations that are not done on the individual’s own profile of the sniffer. They can’t find what they need to see using an unfamiliar tool and would need more time than they were given to form solid opinions.
Without internet access to whois or similar search engines they couldn’t confirm the IP registrations of addresses referenced in the PCAP for example.
Too bad the data snippet was intentionally poisoned by one of the CISSP credentialed attendees so they couldn’t be distributed and give people more time on their own stack. I guess the term “ethical hacker” depends on who signs your paycheck these days.
:: One guy who may not presently agree that China hacked the election, doesn’t undermine the purpose of the meeting.::
~~~~~~~~
Doesn’t matter. These “journalists” are not interested in the truth. They are simply seeking two distract attention from the real story, which is that the election was stolen.
Yep, the snickering-idiot posters on this site — the rabid anti-Lindell haters — were having orgasms over that false story.
“He simply invited IT experts to examine the files and offered a reward if they could prove it fake. So far, no participant at the event has stated anything was fake.”
So far, no participant at the event seems to have been allowed to actually examine the files.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.