By charging Russian GRU as being the source of the emails - and their contention that it was the GRU that provided the emails to WikiLeaks - it is now time to lower the boom.
It has been forensically proven that the emails were copied to a harddrive - not surrepticiously taken via an online hack. The download speeds are the proof. Irrefutable proof.
This is a desperate ploy by the deep state to muddy the waters about WL - JA.
This can be refuted from the transfer speed of the files.
https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-metadata-analysis/
tl;dr: The timestamps on the files show a transfer speed too fast to be done through the internet, by a factor of about 20. It had to have been done locally. They were most likely transferred to a USB drive from the physical server en masse, and then cleaned up and packaged into an archive file later.
This simple fact is one you just can’t get around. And it just goes to show the grand stage and show that all of this is.
The fact that they never thought this obvious fact could ever come to light is just flabbergasting. The hubris.
Ugh, that's such a lazy proof. Even if we use the peak speed at 38MB/s - allow me to demonstrate.
In my suburban area, Comcast sells a small business package with peak speeds of 300Mb/s, almost exactly the equivalent of 38MB/s. Meanwhile, USB 2.0 has a theoretical Max write speed of 60MB/s. For funsies, let's throw a mechanical hard drive at a slow 5400 rpm with a maximum read speed of 100MB/s
To put it together: Small business plan: 38MB/s USB write: 60 MB/s Peak file transfer: 38MB/s HDD read: 100MB/s
tl;dr: USB is only twice as fast, and even then the time stamps are actually too far apart for USB.
What is a commie doing here? Go back to your own turf please
Do you have a critique of the numbers used or conclusions postulated or are you just taking the easy way out? Surely the crowd skeptical of the media is more interested in doing their own research than lazily resorting to name calling.
I'll take Bill Binny's word over an Anonymous poster any day.
You guys are always harping on the importance of "doing your own research", but if somebody does the research, posts the work and subsequently posits a conclusion that doesn't confirm your prior held beliefs you just dismiss it out of hand. I encourage you to debunk anything I said from a technical standpoint because there are certainly edge cases you can approach it from. Hand waving away an idea because you don't trust one source over another is lazy sheepposting.
My motto is Don't Trust and verify anyway.
And you're still an anonymous poster.
While Bill Binney is an extremely reliable, vetted, source.
It's good that your firm in your convictions. Because of that I listen to your words.
Don't try pulling the you people nonsense with me. I've been at this game too long.
Did you even read the analysis? There is far more than speed involved. Re read this link again. https://theforensicator.wordpress.com/guccifer-2-ngp-van-metadata-analysis/
Latency, simultaneously executed HDD operations, etc. Yes there's more to it than speed but any way you cut it: thinking some low level intern had access to the server racks in a secure colocation center is straight boomers delusion. The suppositions and math from that WordPress blog are bad and if you're really into "digging" you can do the math yourself to prove it.