According to Brazile:
On June 14 Debbie invited the Democratic Party officers to a conference call to alert us that a story about hacking the DNC that would would be published in the Washington Post the following day. That call was the first time we’d heard that there was a problem. Debbie’s tone was so casual that I had not absorbed the details, nor even thought that it was much for us to be concerned about. Her manner indicated that this hacking thing was something she had covered. But had she?
Brazile reveals former top Obama official Susan Rice noted in relation to the ‘hack,’ that “It took a long time for the FBI to get any response from the party.”
In June, Wasserman Schultz claimed that neither the FBI nor any other government agency contacted her about the hacking of the DNC’s computer networks. The former DNC’s claim was rebuffed by former DHS head Jeh Johnson, who testified to the House Intelligence Committee that the FBI reached out to help the DNC, but opted to reply on a private cyber security company for assistance.
It begs the question…
Was Wasserman Schultz unusually calm about the situation because the ‘hack,’ was not actually a hack?
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported over the summer, an IT specialist, who goes by the name The Forensicator, published a detailed report that appears to disprove the theory that the DNC was hacked by Russia.
The documents were copied on July 5th, five days before Seth Rich was murdered.
The Forensicator summarized the complex report into 10 bullet points.
The report as laid out by The Forensicator:
Based on the analysis that is detailed below, the following key findings are presented:
On 7/5/2016 at approximately 6:45 PM Eastern time, someone copied the data that eventually appears on the “NGP VAN” 7zip file (the subject of this analysis). This 7zip file was published by a persona named Guccifer 2, two months later on September 13, 2016.
Due to the estimated speed of transfer (23 MB/s) calculated in this study, it is unlikely that this initial data transfer could have been done remotely over the Internet.
The initial copying activity was likely done from a computer system that had direct access to the data. By “direct access” we mean that the individual who was collecting the data either had physical access to the computer where the data was stored, or the data was copied over a local high speed network (LAN).
They may have copied a much larger collection of data than the data present in the NGP VAN 7zip. This larger collection of data may have been as large as 19 GB. In that scenario the NGP VAN 7zip file represents only 1/10th of the total amount of material taken.
This initial copying activity was done on a system where Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) settings were in force. Most likely, the computer used to initially copy the data was located somewhere on the East Coast.
The data was likely initially copied to a computer running Linux, because the file last modified times all reflect the apparent time of the copy and this is a characteristic of the the Linux ‘cp’ command (using default options).
A Linux OS may have been booted from a USB flash drive and the data may have been copied back to the same flash drive, which will likely have been formatted with the Linux (ext4) file system.
On September 1, 2016, two months after copying the initial large collection of (alleged) DNC related content (the so-called NGP/VAN data), a subset was transferred to working directories on a system running Windows. The .rar files included in the final 7zip file were built from those working directories.
The computer system where the working directories were built had Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) settings in force. Most likely, this system was located somewhere on the East Coast.
The .rar files and plain files that eventually end up in the “NGP VAN” 7zip file disclosed by Guccifer 2.0 on 9/13/2016 were likely first copied to a USB flash drive, which served as the source data for the final 7zip file. There is no information to determine when or where the final 7zip file was built.
The most important aspect of the report is the “estimated speed of transfer (23 MB/s)” at which the documents were copied. It’s inconceivable DNC documents could have been copied at such speed from a remote location.
Commentary by Jon Masters,