 |
| Seth Rich's parents — if wingnuts won't let them rest in peace then I hope they sue like hell. |
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity has claimed these initial emails were downloaded at speeds far too fast for Internet theft, especially international theft. The Nation provides more background, including links to a follow-up segment that challenges some of the VIPS assumptions (you will see little about this at Consortium News, home of the first link), Thomas Drake going public with dissent within VIPS, and the majority's response.
(Breaking update, July 9, 2019: A new Yahoo News bombshell says Russian intelligence, specifically its foreign intelligence agency, the SVR, was behind the Seth Rich conspiracy theories.)
New update, Aug. 14: Further undermining Seth Rich conspiracy theorists? A simple Google Trends search, which shows his name had about zero searching before his July 10, 2016 murder. In other words, after his death, conspiracy theorists latched on to his death as a way of postulating an insider theft. And, whether this was a coordinated idea or not from the start, it became so soon after.
It had a small spike in early August, most likely associated with the Democratic National Convention a week earlier. After that, Google searches for Seth Rich died down to almost zero again until May 2017.
Sadly, a judge has dismissed the lawsuit for lack of specificity, though the ruling is being appealed.
Update and breaking, July 13: Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein has indicted 12 Russian nationals, all alleged GRU employees. Indictment claims one or more of them stole the credentials of a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee employee. From there, they allegedly got in the DCCC computer network, installed malware to keep their access open, etc., transmitted info from that network to a server computer in Phoenix, got into the DNC network via the DCCC network, implanted the same malware, and sent info from DNC computers to a server in Illinois.
Also addressing the download speeds issue, it seems, per Nathaniel Freitas mentioning the use of cloud computing, it is alleged that the 12 Russians got access to other DNC docs that were stored on cloud computers.
I will do one or more separate blog posts, but wanted to get some update out immediately.
First, in that follow-up segment of challenges, Nathaniel Freitas says there are indeed ways such download speeds could have been achieved. He cites various "Trojans" and cloud computing as two of them.
Drake, joined by Scott Ritter and others, goes even further than Freitas in saying the VIPS majority stretched some conclusions. A big one is this:
The transfer rate was independent of the physical location of the data at the time of copy.
Well, that would basically undercut the foundation of the VIPS majority, wouldn't it?
And that's followed by this:
In addition, no qualifiers, disclaimers, or dissenting views are provided in the VIPS memo, nor is any alternative theory presented.
Ten months later, seeing the deep dive on the so-called "Deep State" at Consortium News, the statement above doesn't surprise. Predetermined conclusions? Whoda thunk?
(In addition, Ritter has written on his own at TruthDig. And, at The Intercept, Robert Mackey further refutes the claims Guccifer 2.0 was a Romanian, as well as, re Russian language issues, that it was a leaker inside the US.)
To be fair, the majority issues its rebuttal. (I don't know how big the majority is, or how big VIPS is; five people speak in this rebuttal but six in the dissenting report, though I don't think all are VIPS members.) It has a fair amount of argument from silence, plus claims that cloud computing speeds, or other alternatives by the dissenters and Freitas, greatly sped up in general between spring 2016 and August 2017. Color me unconvinced.
Also, the original VIPS assume for the sake of argument that, if Guccifer 2.0 actually did this, he actually worked overseas. They ignore not only cloud computing but the fact that, if it were Guccifer, maybe he WASN'T overseas.
(Update, Aug. 7: Techdirt notes that it and other sites poked holes in the VIPS majority claims from the start.)
I also wonder how much Ray McGovern and his conspiracy theorist glory ramrodded this. (See below: A fair amount.) As for McGovern throwing away a national medal due to CIA torture, how does he know it didn't do that earlier? He does know about its role in unwarranted assassinations before that. Allende, anybody? And, non-CIA American torture going back to the Philippines.
McGovern and William Binney recently noted that CIA's Marble program could allow spoofing of Guccifer 2.0.
Meanwhile, The Forensicator has recently bemoaned MSM coverage. He then partially rejected the dissenters' report shortly after it came out while also saying VIPS' majority stretched some things. In his alternate scenarios, this person rejects alternate scenarios while saying the download speed ceiling has been raised yet higher. More on that here, but ... you know? This seems like the IT version of an Overton window, his "strong evidence" or whatever ... that, you know, he just happened to look for after all the concerns and objections popped up.
OK, time for some nut-cutting.
First, IF the initial emails were stolen from inside the DNC, would we be fingering Seth Rich if he had not been killed in what is officially described as a robbery gone bad — or, per me, to address a few headscratchers, is maybe a drug deal done bad, or a drug dealers' world omerta killing? (The official, plus my alternatives, to me all make much more sense than a conspiracy theory.)
The answer is, we certainly would not. And, Guccifer 2.0 being spoofed would still not mean that Seth Rich did it.
This of course means Faux, Ed Butowsky and wingnut lawyer Ty Clevenger are all full of it, and deserve the suits and countersuits they're facing. (Maybe Seth Rich's parents or brother need to find an angle on suing the Forensicator, too. Since the blog started mid-2017 for a specific purpose, let's find out who's doing this!) And, Brains, I wish you'd stop publishing this bullshit. Every time you do, especially in a Texas Progressives roundup, I'm going to call out Clevenger, and I'm probably going to start calling you out too. (Oh, and contra one Twitter buttinski, of course's it's of value to know who Forensicator is, given VIPS split report and other things. This isn't like blind-screening male vs female first violin candidates, or other issues in the arts. Unlike you, I try to avoid buying anonymous pigs in pokes on science or technology issues, and since he pops up nowhere before the DNC emails download question, I can't find other stuff on him.)
(Update, Aug. 6: Forensicator, if Computer Weekly is right, is a front man for a British self-described black hat hacker and pro-Trumpist Tim Leonard / Adam Carter. And, Duncan Campbell says that Bill Binney, at least, within VIPS, flipped his stance on the "impossible to download internationally claims" after taking a second look at the files, with Campbell. But Binney claims that Campbell misinterprets him. But, Binney himself misinterprets the VIPS statement. Per the "minority report" linked above, it's clear that not all of VIPS accepted that this had to be a hack, not a download. Maybe that's because the VIPS majority report, specifically McGovern, relied on Carter.
And, as for Disobedient Media lamenting a "smear" of Leonard/Carter? Good for the goose, good for the gander — Bill Binney apparently believes in microwave mind control weapons. And, the person whose show he is on thinks this is a plot to remove gun rights.
Carter, meanwhile, has told me on Twitter that he'll prove Campbell wrong. "You'll see." Well, if Campbell is correct, making threats to the media ain't how you do it. Nor is blocking someone like me after I pointed out Binney's misrepresentations in a response.)
(In addition, Ritter has written on his own at TruthDig. And, at The Intercept, Robert Mackey further refutes the claims Guccifer 2.0 was a Romanian, as well as, re Russian language issues, that it was a leaker inside the US.)
To be fair, the majority issues its rebuttal. (I don't know how big the majority is, or how big VIPS is; five people speak in this rebuttal but six in the dissenting report, though I don't think all are VIPS members.) It has a fair amount of argument from silence, plus claims that cloud computing speeds, or other alternatives by the dissenters and Freitas, greatly sped up in general between spring 2016 and August 2017. Color me unconvinced.
Also, the original VIPS assume for the sake of argument that, if Guccifer 2.0 actually did this, he actually worked overseas. They ignore not only cloud computing but the fact that, if it were Guccifer, maybe he WASN'T overseas.
(Update, Aug. 7: Techdirt notes that it and other sites poked holes in the VIPS majority claims from the start.)
I also wonder how much Ray McGovern and his conspiracy theorist glory ramrodded this. (See below: A fair amount.) As for McGovern throwing away a national medal due to CIA torture, how does he know it didn't do that earlier? He does know about its role in unwarranted assassinations before that. Allende, anybody? And, non-CIA American torture going back to the Philippines.
McGovern and William Binney recently noted that CIA's Marble program could allow spoofing of Guccifer 2.0.
Meanwhile, The Forensicator has recently bemoaned MSM coverage. He then partially rejected the dissenters' report shortly after it came out while also saying VIPS' majority stretched some things. In his alternate scenarios, this person rejects alternate scenarios while saying the download speed ceiling has been raised yet higher. More on that here, but ... you know? This seems like the IT version of an Overton window, his "strong evidence" or whatever ... that, you know, he just happened to look for after all the concerns and objections popped up.
OK, time for some nut-cutting.
First, IF the initial emails were stolen from inside the DNC, would we be fingering Seth Rich if he had not been killed in what is officially described as a robbery gone bad — or, per me, to address a few headscratchers, is maybe a drug deal done bad, or a drug dealers' world omerta killing? (The official, plus my alternatives, to me all make much more sense than a conspiracy theory.)
The answer is, we certainly would not. And, Guccifer 2.0 being spoofed would still not mean that Seth Rich did it.
This of course means Faux, Ed Butowsky and wingnut lawyer Ty Clevenger are all full of it, and deserve the suits and countersuits they're facing. (Maybe Seth Rich's parents or brother need to find an angle on suing the Forensicator, too. Since the blog started mid-2017 for a specific purpose, let's find out who's doing this!) And, Brains, I wish you'd stop publishing this bullshit. Every time you do, especially in a Texas Progressives roundup, I'm going to call out Clevenger, and I'm probably going to start calling you out too. (Oh, and contra one Twitter buttinski, of course's it's of value to know who Forensicator is, given VIPS split report and other things. This isn't like blind-screening male vs female first violin candidates, or other issues in the arts. Unlike you, I try to avoid buying anonymous pigs in pokes on science or technology issues, and since he pops up nowhere before the DNC emails download question, I can't find other stuff on him.)
And, as for Disobedient Media lamenting a "smear" of Leonard/Carter? Good for the goose, good for the gander — Bill Binney apparently believes in microwave mind control weapons. And, the person whose show he is on thinks this is a plot to remove gun rights.
Carter, meanwhile, has told me on Twitter that he'll prove Campbell wrong. "You'll see." Well, if Campbell is correct, making threats to the media ain't how you do it. Nor is blocking someone like me after I pointed out Binney's misrepresentations in a response.)
(Update, April 8, 2021: Until reading Glenn Greenwald's "No Place to Hide," I didn't know Campbell's background. Well, Duncan Campbell, as the man who first exposed the GCHQ by name and the "Five Eyes," knows his shit. As a man earlier targeted for prosecution under Britain's Official Secrets Act, he has no love lost for the national security state or its smears. So, his pronouncements re the Seth Rich case, and his skill in getting the information, should be taken with the utmost seriousness. So, Carter claiming he would prove Campbell wrong is not just LOLs, it's bombast of a ridiculous level.)
There. That's enough spleen for now, though that Clevenger piece has grown to almost Actual Flatticus takedown dimensions and needs a split, spinoffs or something.
And, per that picture, our old friend Actual Flatticus enters the scene, courtesy ShirtLost DumbShit Haller!
Back to Seth Rich.
To recap:1. We have no proof, just possibilities, that someone besides Guccifer 2.0 (and/or team) took the early 2016 DNC emails.2. Whoever did take this batch, we have no proof of where in the world that they may have, or not have, done it from.3. If other person(s) did take these emails, and they were on the east coast of the US, we have no proof they worked for the DNC.4. If other person(s) who did take these emails worked for the DNC, we have no proof that Seth Rich was the person, or one of the group.5. We know that among the most ardent claimants of "Seth Rich did it" are definite conspiracy theorists Ray McGovern and Ty Clevenger.
I can think of three alternatives to Seth Rich and/or any DNC employee being involved. All three make arguably almost as much sense if not much more.
First: To turn McGovern's nuttery on its head — NSA staffers from the Deep State who WANT Trump elected steal this stuff then use the Marble program to frame Guccifer 2.0.
Second: Roger Stone hired some minions to do this.
Third: A la Watergate, the Trump campaign or the RNC did this.
I consider any of those to have at least 10-20 percent the plausibility of "Seth Rich did it."
==
As for the big picture? Had I seen those Nation pieces when they came out, I wouldn't have gone as far down the "Seth Rich stole the emails" rabbit hole as I originally did. I might also have started some of my recent searching through Consortium News' past, especially on conspiracy theories, earlier than I did.
Re the claims of Ty Clevenger et al? Per this good Seth Rich events timeline, the law enforcement who first said the FBI was involved withdrew that claim. Rod Wheeler then also withdrew it. Also per that link, I'm not sure why Kim Dotcom isn't being sued as well.
I'm sorry, to myself and to readers.
There. That's enough spleen for now, though that Clevenger piece has grown to almost Actual Flatticus takedown dimensions and needs a split, spinoffs or something.
And, per that picture, our old friend Actual Flatticus enters the scene, courtesy ShirtLost DumbShit Haller!
Back to Seth Rich.
To recap:1. We have no proof, just possibilities, that someone besides Guccifer 2.0 (and/or team) took the early 2016 DNC emails.2. Whoever did take this batch, we have no proof of where in the world that they may have, or not have, done it from.3. If other person(s) did take these emails, and they were on the east coast of the US, we have no proof they worked for the DNC.4. If other person(s) who did take these emails worked for the DNC, we have no proof that Seth Rich was the person, or one of the group.5. We know that among the most ardent claimants of "Seth Rich did it" are definite conspiracy theorists Ray McGovern and Ty Clevenger.
I can think of three alternatives to Seth Rich and/or any DNC employee being involved. All three make arguably almost as much sense if not much more.
First: To turn McGovern's nuttery on its head — NSA staffers from the Deep State who WANT Trump elected steal this stuff then use the Marble program to frame Guccifer 2.0.
Second: Roger Stone hired some minions to do this.
Third: A la Watergate, the Trump campaign or the RNC did this.
I consider any of those to have at least 10-20 percent the plausibility of "Seth Rich did it."
==
As for the big picture? Had I seen those Nation pieces when they came out, I wouldn't have gone as far down the "Seth Rich stole the emails" rabbit hole as I originally did. I might also have started some of my recent searching through Consortium News' past, especially on conspiracy theories, earlier than I did.
Re the claims of Ty Clevenger et al? Per this good Seth Rich events timeline, the law enforcement who first said the FBI was involved withdrew that claim. Rod Wheeler then also withdrew it. Also per that link, I'm not sure why Kim Dotcom isn't being sued as well.
I'm sorry, to myself and to readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are appreciated, as is at least a modicum of politeness.
Comments are moderated, so yours may not appear immediately.
Due to various forms of spamming, comments with professional websites, not your personal website or blog, may be rejected.