-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It was an overseas cyber security company that picked up on, analysed and confirmed the intrusion and traced its source.
This evidence was passed on to US Int agencies and that resulted in the briefing doc they provided Trump.Hired by whom?
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It was an overseas cyber security company that picked up on, analysed and confirmed the intrusion and traced its source.
This evidence was passed on to US Int agencies and that resulted in the briefing doc they provided Trump.Hired by whom?
US Govt.
They pay a few select cyber companies with expertise in certain areas. As far as I know the company concerned is still on a US Govt contract.
Govt work is quite lucrative for these companies and they don't raise flags unless they are very sure of their assessments. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It was an overseas cyber security company that picked up on, analysed and confirmed the intrusion and traced its source.
This evidence was passed on to US Int agencies and that resulted in the briefing doc they provided Trump.Hired by whom?
US Govt.
They pay a few select cyber companies with expertise in certain areas. As far as I know the company concerned is still on a US Govt contract.
Govt work is quite lucrative for these companies and they don't raise flags unless they are very sure of their assessmentsYeah.. nah.
They were hired by the DNC and then once the report was complete they offered it to the US govt (for a fee) and they bought it. But no, they were not hired by the US Govt.
The DNC was incredibly shady in how they dealt with it. If the US govt had been in charge of the investigation and hired the company.. they wouldn't have allowed all the evidence to be altered/hidden/destroyed.Basically the FBI bought the findings as they couldn't get access to come up with their own.
Which begs the question.. if this hack was so significant... why not allow it to be investigated by the correct govt authorities?
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It was an overseas cyber security company that picked up on, analysed and confirmed the intrusion and traced its source.
This evidence was passed on to US Int agencies and that resulted in the briefing doc they provided Trump.Hired by whom?
US Govt.
They pay a few select cyber companies with expertise in certain areas. As far as I know the company concerned is still on a US Govt contract.
Govt work is quite lucrative for these companies and they don't raise flags unless they are very sure of their assessmentsYeah.. nah.
They were hired by the DNC and then once the report was complete they offered it to the US govt (for a fee) and they bought it. But no, they were not hired by the US Govt.
The DNC was incredibly shady in how they dealt with it. If the US govt had been in charge of the investigation and hired the company.. they wouldn't have allowed all the evidence to be altered/hidden/destroyed.Basically the FBI bought the findings as they couldn't get access to come up with their own.
Which begs the question.. if this hack was so significant... why not allow it to be investigated by the correct govt authorities?
No. You are wrong. They weren't hired by the DNC.
I can't go into detail on how I know this (and aren't hiding behind that, I simply can't say).
The company is on a 'retainer' from the US Govt and have been for many years. I don't know any detail of the working arrangement but it certainly wasn't a one-off assignment. It was something found in the course of normal work and investigated further. They aren't partisan in any way.
No 'evidence' has been destroyed. If you think there ever was evidence that pointed directly to VPutin@gmail.com then you are sadly mistaken. These are cyber Int assessments that come with a level of certainty on their conclusions due to a great number of findings added together. My understanding is that the level of certainty on this was very high and that is why the Int was passed on. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
It was an overseas cyber security company that picked up on, analysed and confirmed the intrusion and traced its source.
This evidence was passed on to US Int agencies and that resulted in the briefing doc they provided Trump.Hired by whom?
US Govt.
They pay a few select cyber companies with expertise in certain areas. As far as I know the company concerned is still on a US Govt contract.
Govt work is quite lucrative for these companies and they don't raise flags unless they are very sure of their assessmentsYeah.. nah.
They were hired by the DNC and then once the report was complete they offered it to the US govt (for a fee) and they bought it. But no, they were not hired by the US Govt.
The DNC was incredibly shady in how they dealt with it. If the US govt had been in charge of the investigation and hired the company.. they wouldn't have allowed all the evidence to be altered/hidden/destroyed.Basically the FBI bought the findings as they couldn't get access to come up with their own.
Which begs the question.. if this hack was so significant... why not allow it to be investigated by the correct govt authorities?
No. You are wrong. They weren't hired by the DNC.
I can't go into detail on how I know this (and aren't hiding behind that, I simply can't say).
The company is on a 'retainer' from the US Govt and have been for many years. I don't know any detail of the working arrangement but it certainly wasn't a one-off assignment. It was something found in the course of normal work and investigated further. They aren't partisan in any way.
No 'evidence' has been destroyed. If you think there ever was evidence that pointed directly to VPutin@gmail.com then you are sadly mistaken. These are cyber Int assessments that come with a level of certainty on their conclusions due to a great number of findings added together. My understanding is that the level of certainty on this was very high and that is why the Int was passed on.Being on retainer means absolutely nothing, my company was on retainer to the UK govt, didn't mean squat. MI5 and MI6 (and to a lesser extent local police) were still the absolute top dog when it came to this stuff.
And sorry, you just saying, you know something and claiming that is evidence I am not correct, is not evidence in any way.If the extent of your argument is simply that you are right because you say you are.. stop posting, it is pointless.
-
The unrest in the States is really starting to escalate now. Bloody sad to see.
And it's not because of a handful of Neo-Nazis. It's because dishonest as fuck media outlets and dumb fuck celebs are conflating the term "alt-right" to include just about everyone on the right, tarring people's names and making it appear like there is this massive group of white supremists taking over America. Which just couldn't be further from the truth.
Jordan Peterson as an example has to repeatedly call out dishonest journalists that keep referring to him as "far right" or "alt-right". Utterly ridiculous.
And now they've cottoned on to the fact a protest against Google is planned over their treatment of James Damore. So the media automatically claims it is an "alt-right, white supremist" protest. Which is not true. So what will happen is these people will peacefully protest, Antifa and BLM will turn up armed with clubs and attack, and the dishonest media will report "more violence at alt-right protest".
I am really starting to question the motives of a large chuck on the left. They appear to actively want the USA to fail. Tear it all down in a bloody, murderous revolution.
I'm not sure of an easy way out of this mess now. The Marxists have really infected left wing politics and the movement doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon - spurred on by MSM outlets like CNN, celebrities, corporations like Google, and of course the Universities where it all began.
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
If the extent of your argument is simply that you are right because you say you are.. stop posting, it is pointless.
But your posts on the subject are simply your take on things. Do you have evidence that 'the FBI bought the findings as they couldn't get access to come up with their own.'
I'm not evening arguing a point. I'm trying to point out something about the subject that I know from a source (admittedly without being able to disclose that source)
If you want to ignore that, then fine, go ahead, continue making an erroneous argument. I'm more than happy for all my posts on the subject to be deleted (along with your quotes of them)
-
From Crowdstrike:
CrowdStrike Services Inc., our Incident Response group, was called by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the formal governing body for the US Democratic Party, to respond to a suspected breach. We deployed our IR team and technology and immediately identified two sophisticated adversaries on the network – COZY BEAR and FANCY BEAR.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
If the extent of your argument is simply that you are right because you say you are.. stop posting, it is pointless.
But your posts on the subject are simply your take on things. Do you have evidence that 'the FBI bought the findings as they couldn't get access to come up with their own.'
I'm not evening arguing a point. I'm trying to point out something about the subject that I know from a source (admittedly without being able to disclose that source)
If you want to ignore that, then fine, go ahead, continue making an erroneous argument. I'm more than happy for all my posts on the subject to be deleted (along with your quotes of them)
Comey said under oath
“multiple requests at different levels” to gain access to the devices for their investigations, but in the end they needed to rely on a private company hired by the DNC to “share with us what they saw.”
-
I only know what I know and can confirm it wasn't crowd strike and the company wasn't employed by the DNC.
This has nothing to do with devices so the quote is most likely not about the evidence I know about which was more traffic and link related.As I can't say much more that is all I will add. Believe what you like.
-
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
The unrest in the States is really starting to escalate now. Bloody sad to see.
And it's not because of a handful of Neo-Nazis. It's because dishonest as fuck media outlets and dumb fuck celebs are conflating the term "alt-right" to include just about everyone on the right, tarring people's names and making it appear like there is this massive group of white suptemists taking over America. Which just couldn't be further from the truth.
Jordan Peterson as an example has to repeatedly call out dishonest journalists that keep referring to him as "far right" or "alt-right". Utterly ridiculous.
And now they've cottoned on to the fact a protest against Google is planned over their treatment of James Damore. So the media automatically claims it is an "alt-right, white supremist" protest. Which is not true. So what will happen is these people will peacefully protest, Antifa and BLM will turn up armed with clubs and attack, and the dishonest media will report "more violence at alt-right protest".
I am really starting to question the motives of a large chuck on the left. They appear to actively want the USA to fail. Tear it all down in a bloody, murderous revolution.
I'm not sure of an easy way out of this mess now. The Marxists have really infected left wing politics and the movement doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon - spurred on by MSM outlets like CNN, celebrities, corporations like Google, and of course the Universities where it all began.
I agree with all of that but you could also swap it all around and talk about the large number of left leaning folk that are sick of being called 'libtards', 'leftards' and 'snowflakes' as soon as they voice an opinion.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I only know what I know and can confirm it wasn't crowd strike and the company wasn't employed by the DNC.
This has nothing to do with devices so the quote is most likely not about the evidence I know about which was more traffic and link related.As I can't say much more that is all I will add. Believe what you like.
Oh FFS. You know what you know.But have no evidence or information. Cool story....
Evidence is over rated aye....
-
You chose a private company to investigate this stuff if you have things to hide.
Scenarios are different thus.
Scenario 1.
Private company gets called in to investigate breach, they ask for access to a server, client says, NO, that server/data/archive isn't relevant/ available.. investigator goes... ok. And makes a note of the limitation in final report.
Scenario 2 Govt agency gets called in to investigate breach, they ask for access to a server, client says, NO, that server/data/archive isnt relevant/ available.. investigator goes... we will decide that , not you. Now give us access, or we will obtain access via a warrant because we are investigating a crime.So no, calling in a company and calling in the govt gets in no way equal results.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@No-Quarter said in US Politics:
The unrest in the States is really starting to escalate now. Bloody sad to see.
And it's not because of a handful of Neo-Nazis. It's because dishonest as fuck media outlets and dumb fuck celebs are conflating the term "alt-right" to include just about everyone on the right, tarring people's names and making it appear like there is this massive group of white suptemists taking over America. Which just couldn't be further from the truth.
Jordan Peterson as an example has to repeatedly call out dishonest journalists that keep referring to him as "far right" or "alt-right". Utterly ridiculous.
And now they've cottoned on to the fact a protest against Google is planned over their treatment of James Damore. So the media automatically claims it is an "alt-right, white supremist" protest. Which is not true. So what will happen is these people will peacefully protest, Antifa and BLM will turn up armed with clubs and attack, and the dishonest media will report "more violence at alt-right protest".
I am really starting to question the motives of a large chuck on the left. They appear to actively want the USA to fail. Tear it all down in a bloody, murderous revolution.
I'm not sure of an easy way out of this mess now. The Marxists have really infected left wing politics and the movement doesn't appear to be going anywhere soon - spurred on by MSM outlets like CNN, celebrities, corporations like Google, and of course the Universities where it all began.
I agree with all of that but you could also swap it all around and talk about the large number of left leaning folk that are sick of being called 'libtards', 'leftards' and 'snowflakes' as soon as they voice an opinion.
Those are just insults. Labels such as racist, Nazi and white supremacist are far far worse and are straight out slander. In fact, it's absolutely ridiculous to even equate them.
-
@Crucial Man there is no where near an equivalency there.
The Google protest is against google firing someone for telling some incredibly verifiable facts in an internal memo. The press is now equating that to being Nazi supporters. What do you think the logical outcome from the masses of Black Lives Matter, Antifa, Social Justice Warriors who are now out for blood following the Charlottesville disaster?This escalation is absolutely sickening. Even from my own circles people are blindly following this completely false media narrative. What you're white and think there are biological difference between men and women? Well then you must be a Nazi and being a Nazi we are well within our rights to hit you.
How far away is that from, "we are in our rights to kill you, since your idealogy killed one of us"? This is going to be very bad and it will have far reaching consequences throughout the western world.
-
-
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/346151-alt-right-plans-free-speech-march-against-google
and you can guarantee there will be more as those are pretty click baity headlines that will be hard to resist
-
@Rembrandt said in US Politics:
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/346151-alt-right-plans-free-speech-march-against-google
and you can guarantee there will be more as those are pretty click baity headlines that will be hard to resist
Thanks mate. Thats not what I read from those articles but if its what you saw, I'm sure plenty of others feel the same way.
US Politics