Posted on 05/12/2020 11:28:47 AM PDT by Kaslin
Another Team Obama cover-up. Total Sham. Smells like Hillary's handy work though.
Only an IDIOT would believe this media lie.
Go read the original transcript; that’s discussed.
Where is Seth Rich’s laptop?
I was really glad to see Rush devote so much of today’s program to this issue. After all, the hoax that “the Russians hacked the DNC emails” is the entire actual basis of the greater fraud that “the Russians decisively influenced the 2016 election.” The admission by Crowd Strike’s president that they couldn’t prove the Russians did anything to the DNC server is overwhelming, indeed, the most important revelation from the declassified transcripts. This is something most of us here knew about, but the general public didn’t. Hopefully (HA,HA) it will lead to a really serious FBI investigation of how the DNC emails got exfiltrated to Wikileaks and the role of the late Seth Rich.
BTW, I really like the term “exfiltrated’ in this context because it covers so much more than mere “hacking” or “theft” and accurately describes what would have happened if a DNC person, such as Seth Rich, extracted the files via thumb drive. Indeed, since Crowd Strike’s president used that rather unusual, and uniquely descriptive, term, it suggests to me that he might know exactly what happened and who did it.
You're right, for one additional reason:
The amount of data that the Russians allegedly "stole" was such a high amount that there was no way it could've been downloaded via the Internet unless there were multiple high-bandwidth (in the multiple Gb each) connections to the email server to enable multiple data streams - in the time window that CrowdStrike said the data was "stolen."
That of course left only one possibility: copied and stolen via USB Drive.
Now consider the point in time at which the data was stolen and the fastest USB Data Transfer rate was at the time. It would've taken several hours to download all the data alleged to have been stolen by the Democrat hacks, to a USB drive.
So someone sat there and watched the data get copied to the USB-2 drives and no one saw them doing it?
OH. MY. SIDES.
Someone knows who stole that data. They're either dead (Seth Rich) or too damn' afraid to speak up and skipped the country for fear of getting killed by Hitlery.
Debunked. Trump propaganda. Conspiracy theory. Unhinged. Racist. The Experts all agree. 57 Intelligence agencies agree. NYT and WAPO already explained it. Momma! Waaaa!
No, been over this many times. The speed between two data centers in the US is adequate. The speed to over to England or elsewhere is generally not. An internet exfiltration could have easily happened from the DNC server in a US datacenter to another server in a US datacenter.
It was a little under 2GB. If you propose multiple (i.e. two) Gbit ethernet links, it would take about 5 seconds. The timestamps from the files say it took 87 seconds.
You do know how much 2GB is?
It's absurd to think that 2GB of data got copied in 87 seconds over an Internet connection to Russia. Especially in 2016 and especially considering it was highly unlikely the DNC office in question had a 1Gb connection.
It also takes more than 87 seconds to copy 2GB to a USB2 drive, which was the technology at the time.
BTW: we had this discussion back in 2017 here on FR. What timestamps are you referring to that indicate it took 87 seconds to copy a file? That information isn't stored on a Windows machine. There is no "timestamp" on a file that indicates how long it took to copy from point A to point B.
+.
It didn't get copied to Russia. Russians probably don't have a single hacking attack server in Russia, they are all here or other parts of the world.
The 87 seconds is from the primary BS site: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ and quoted widely.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/usb-3.0-thumb-drive-review,3477.html "31 USB 3.0 Thumb Drives, Tested And Reviewed By Manuel Masiero, Achim Roos July 22, 2013"
I'm not sure why people keep posting this crap over and over. I guess they just don't want to admit Rush is wrong (about plenty of topics)
Certainly it’s possibly that their servers were hacked, but the metadata on the files that wikileaks received shows they were saved too quickly for them to have been transmitted over an internet connection.
For example, if you have a timestamp on file #1 that shows the copying was completed on 9:00:01 AM, and a timestamp on file #2 that shows the copying was completed on 9:00:05 AM, then you know that file #2 took 4 seconds to transfer, and if you divide the file size by 4 seconds, you will know how many megabytes per second the data was transferred at. If the rate is above a certain level, then you know it wasn’t transferred over the internet, it must have been a physical copy made through a direct connection.
What timestamps are you referring to that indicate it took 87 seconds to copy a file? That information isn't stored on a Windows machine. There is no "timestamp" on a file that indicates how long it took to copy from point A to point B.
You can roughly determine it from the delta of the last access timestamp for each file. As each file is sequentially copied the timestamps will ripple forward, and you can approximately calculate the overall transfer rate from the size of each file divided from the difference of the timestamp between the current file and the next.
It is a routine forensic technique. Last access timestamps are disabled by default on Windows desktops but are typically enabled on Windows servers.
Every single file has a timestamp. On Windows, Unix and Mac. The 87 second theory article explains it. They are wrong about transfer speeds, but the timestamp part is correct. They look at the earliest and latest timestamps and subtract to get 87 seconds.
Not relevant. Creation time.
Rush is out of his league on this one but at least he knows which field the game is being played.
Most of the GOP has no idea which Planet the game is being played.
Most of the GOP is secretly playing for the other team.
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.