Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Could the FBI Indict 12 Russians for Hacking the DNC When the FBI Never Saw the Server?
TheMarketswWork.com ^ | July 16, 2018 | Stayfree

Posted on 07/16/2018 5:31:00 PM PDT by Stayfree

My question is based in part from information contained in an article published on May 18, 2018 by TheMarketsWork.com "The FBI’s Outside Contractors, DNC Servers & Crowdstrike" by Jeff Carlson.

Since the FBI never examined the DNC server first-hand, and instead of doing so, relied heavily on information provided by Crowdstrike who was hired by the DNC, any such information should NOT be relied upon for any conclusions.

Very fishy indeed!



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: 2018election; 2020election; corruption; dnc; election2018; election2020; fbi; jamescomey; lisapage; obstruction; peterstrzok; robertmueller
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last
To: Lurkinanloomin

Did Carnac the Magnificent on Johnny Carson see the writing on the question cards before he gave his psychic replies?

No.

FBI don’t gotta see no stinkin’ server, either.


21 posted on 07/16/2018 6:05:19 PM PDT by frank ballenger (End non-citizen voting ,vote fraud & leftist media news censorship or we're finished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

Ask Seth rich what happened


22 posted on 07/16/2018 6:06:59 PM PDT by Truthoverpower (The guvmint you get is the Trump winning express !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Today I spoke with several colleagues who were with Main Justice at times in the past, and posed this very the question. Their response was that one could be prosecuted for hacking the DNC unless the government inspected the computers AND let the defense share in the independent findings as part of the discovery process. It would be like allowing a victim in a criminal case to do its own DNA test, and allowing the only DNA evidence come from the party affiliated expert, with no independent analysis from the government or the defense.


23 posted on 07/16/2018 6:07:29 PM PDT by theoilpainter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

How does the DOJ respond when Russia wants to see the proof? We are waaaay past the point where even the American people just believe what they tell us. There better be some hard evidence. Without hands on the server and multiple forensic examiners testimony, this is just more deep state crap.


24 posted on 07/16/2018 6:14:29 PM PDT by Bearshouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

I don’t do criminal law and I understand the 12 will never stand trial but the admissibility of a 3rd party assessment seems doubtful to me


25 posted on 07/16/2018 6:15:56 PM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theoilpainter

Exactly it would be inadmissible


26 posted on 07/16/2018 6:17:43 PM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

On Tucker Carlson tonight I heard the DNC has destroyed all of their servers.

Was it not our FBI that allowed Hillary’s staff to keep their computers and phones without being inspected by the FBI?

Did not Hillary bleach her server even after a Congressional order to preserve data?

These are the reasons the American Public is having major problems believing Washington DC political hacks.

Trump is standing with the American Public and is using his power to force corrupt people to face sunlight.

The devil screams when exposed to sunlight.


27 posted on 07/16/2018 6:19:49 PM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree
same question i ask the day the indictments were announced
28 posted on 07/16/2018 6:24:49 PM PDT by Chode ( WeÂ’re America, Bitch!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

Good question...


29 posted on 07/16/2018 6:28:39 PM PDT by Mr. K (No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

So were the DNC servers. The “hack” was likely Seth Rich downloading information from inside the network. I saw an article last year that analyzed the metadata of the files downloaded and the speed of the downloads was not possible over the internet.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-10/new-research-shows-guccifer-20-files-were-copied-locally-dnc-not-hacked-russians


30 posted on 07/16/2018 6:31:07 PM PDT by jospehm20
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: shelterguy

Typical Democrats. Hanging first, trial later.


31 posted on 07/16/2018 6:35:17 PM PDT by kanawa (Trump Loves a Great Deal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree
And why did Mueller’s FBI allow Obama/Hillary to sell 20% of US’ uranium to Russia Russia Russia?
32 posted on 07/16/2018 6:40:57 PM PDT by Chgogal (Sessions recused himself for shaking an Ambassador's hand. Shameful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree

There is the old saying a good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, meaning a grand jury can be persuaded to indict anyone. In the case of the Russians, there will be no extradition, there will be no trials. Mueller will not have to present his case in front of judge or jury where ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ would apply. The indictments are worthless and only for show.


33 posted on 07/16/2018 6:43:16 PM PDT by Stevenc131
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree
How Could the FBI Indict 12 Russians for Hacking the DNC When the FBI Never Saw the Server?

They are Deep State criminals who consider themselves above the law and that's my final answer, Regis!

34 posted on 07/16/2018 6:52:48 PM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stayfree
Very fishy indeed

Yes, especially since the FBI indicted no one. The special counsel investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election issued an indictment of 12 Russian...

35 posted on 07/16/2018 6:52:59 PM PDT by MosesKnows (Love Many, Trust Few, and Always Paddle Your Own Canoe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stevenc131

I read somewhere that the FBI is reopening the Lincoln assasination investigation based on new evidence.
Well, with the current batch of idiots in charge, it could happen....


36 posted on 07/16/2018 6:54:41 PM PDT by 9422WMR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gahanna Bob

Yes, vault 7 from wikileaks has the details. I believe it falls under the UMBRIDGE subtrafuse program.
All they are doing is creating the appearance of evidence to impeach Trump. They don’t need any real evidence to get that dirty deed done.


37 posted on 07/16/2018 7:05:53 PM PDT by Karl Spooner ( ·)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CaptainK

Great question ... you would think an average genius journalist would ask such a question.

A better question is why did the DNC not permit the FBI to inspect their servers? The real answer is it would have uncovered other criminal activity ... maybe a lot more criminal activity.


38 posted on 07/16/2018 7:13:51 PM PDT by Susquehanna Patriot (Do Leftist/Liberals Really Believe That Dissent = Highest Form of Patriotism?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MosesKnows

Look on youtube for the Sunday Morning Futures interview by Maria Bartiroma of Fox with Devin Nunes. His statements are VERY relevant to this thread and question - the house GOP intel report that was mocked by the media and democrats had even MORE information in it than the indictment. The basis for this indictment has been known for over 18 months! There is also another bombshell that Nunes pointed out about the recent indictment - it did not mention that the hacking efforts were also deployed against the GOP server and targets. In other words - both political parties were targeted, but the recent indictment and press conference fails to mention this.

That alone tells you everything you need to know.


39 posted on 07/16/2018 7:26:06 PM PDT by volunbeer (Find the truth and accept it - anything else is delusional)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
I saw an article last year that analyzed the metadata of the files downloaded and the speed of the downloads was not possible over the internet.

It turns out to be more complicated than that. While such speed may not be available to a Romanian hacker using an international internet connection, it might be available to a hacker using or connected to a computer located near Washington D.C. with a high-speed cable or fiber connection, provided that the DNC also used such a high speed connection. D.C. leads the nation in high speed internet.

However, it is important to note that the speeds found by Forensicator, 23MB/sec for mixed size files and 38MB/sec for large files, are exactly what you would expect for transferring files from a modern computer to a USB2 thumb drive.

There is more to this story than data transfer speed. For more info, read the articles here: https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/

40 posted on 07/16/2018 7:33:12 PM PDT by TChad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson