The DNCs emails werent only hacked, they were edited: report
Source: Salon
. . .
The first document published by hacker Guccifer 2.0 had been tampered with prior to being published, according to the Associated Press. In addition to not coming from the Democratic National Committee as Guccifer had promised it would be (it instead came from the email inbox of John Podesta, former chairman for the Clinton campaign), the document had the word "CONFIDENTIAL" written on it. Yet a former DNC official has said that the word "confidential" was not on the original document, indicating that Guccifer had airbrushed it in to spice it up for journalists.
If one document from the Clinton emails was altered, it stands to reason that others may have been as well. After all, releasing tainted leaks would hardly be a new practice for Russian hackers.
In 2017 researchers at the Citizen Lab group released a study indicating that Russian hackers have a pattern of tampering with documents leaked by its hackers to serve the purposes of its propaganda.
"This report describes an extensive Russia-linked phishing and disinformation campaign," the authors wrote. "It provides evidence of how documents stolen from a prominent journalist and critic of Russia was tampered with and then 'leaked' to achieve specific propaganda aims. We name this technique 'tainted leaks.'"
Read more: https://www.salon.com/2017/11/03/the-dncs-emails-werent-only-hacked-they-were-edited-report/
sandensea
(22,850 posts)angstlessk
(11,862 posts)WE did not vote in the orange buffoon...vlad did!
Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)...
LenaBaby61
(6,991 posts)But I knew it all along 😪
truthisfreedom
(23,337 posts)Electronic information is too easily altered.
BadgerKid
(4,715 posts)I think was the desired outcome.
DoctorPepper
(35 posts)This doesn't pass any kind of reasonable believability test.
Either they would have been hacked/leaked and released as-is, or the people responsible would have just faked them.
If they were not authentic, why did Debbie Wasserman Schultz lose her position at the DNC just before the convention?
And why just now is it being claimed that they were altered?
People are believing what they want to believe if it fits their worldview. Hey, whatever. I'm not stupid so I recognize this for what it is:
Desperation.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Some of us had emails to John Podesta show up at WikiLeaks and some of us knew for certain they had been altered. Hope this helps.
DoctorPepper
(35 posts)I don't know who "some of us" is, but I do know Wasserman-Schultz was not forced to resign over nothing.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)SergeStorms
(19,373 posts)with fabricated emails. They'd know very quickly if they were real or not.
Hekate
(95,681 posts)...have studied the issue of electronic hacking very closely. It's not a new subject, and not repeat, not, a tin foil hat conspiracy theory. When Senator Max Cleland of Georgia, a war hero who lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam, lost his Senate re-election bid, the vote totals in a bunch of counties were as follows 18181818. On electronic voting machines.
So in the 2016 election, all the shit that went down and all that is being revealed this week -- let's just say that "most of us" old time DUers are shocked and sickened -- but NOT surprised.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)emulatorloo
(45,672 posts)your attempt at deflection through red herrings and whataboutism ain't gonna work, sorry
As to "desperation" yr projecting.
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)... to fabricate thousands of emails without being detected immediately.
Do you think I could fabricate even two dozen emails you allegedly sent without being detected immediately? My fake emails wouldnt match your usual email writing style, the things you would be emailing about at any given time. Now imagine thousands of emails being faked without detection by the alleged sender followed by proof that they couldnt have sent a particular message at the time the fake was dated and time-stamped.
How do make up email chit-chat? Did you enjoy our lunch yesterday? What do you think about that meeting this morning? Did your sister have her baby yet?
Had all the emails been faked, they could have been debunked within hours.
Obviously, the more persuasive tack would be to have actual emails and then edit some of them after the fact. We know this was done because when people started poring over the released emails, some of them were found to be duplicates one as originally sent, and one edited the originals having been (mistakenly, Im sure) included in the batch released.
You seem to think this is an either/or situation either the emails were all faked, or they were all legitimate. That is simply not the case.
Merlot
(9,696 posts)Although most reading the article understood that. Only readers with ...shall we say... a partisan world view would misinterpret the article to such a degree.
NanceGreggs
(27,835 posts)Demit
(11,238 posts)That's why the documents weren't 100% faked.
And re: Debbie Wasserman Schultz, ever heard of optics? In addition to many people not liking her anyway, b/c of how bad she was at her job heading the DNC, replacing her was a decisive response, a resolution to the story, bogus as it was.
JHan
(10,173 posts)L. Coyote
(51,134 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Brazile, surely part of any honest story, far below at bottom?
I keep forgetting to go over and check that site out. Very worthwhile. It has a similar graphic I saw on Morning Joe the other day. Podesta was the top two projects that day.
Although only major nodes/vectors, whatever they're called, are listed, I suspect all these techniques are used here.
Hello, DUers from troll farms. Drop dead.
SunSeeker
(54,224 posts)They took routine emails and turned them into something they were not. Treasonous collusion.
floppyboo
(2,461 posts)as far as I can tell - July 22 and July 25 respectively.
The DNC were warned in November 2015 that they were targets and had been attacked.
What ever happened to guccifer 2.0? He was locked up and then - poof! No trial? Did I miss something big, or does this whole thing stink.
emulatorloo
(45,672 posts)Hekate
(95,681 posts)We. Were. Mugged.
FarPoint
(13,741 posts)It was a no brainier for me... WikiLeaks / Russian Trolls...had one mission..to be outrageous and inflammatory to the Presidential Election....
I posted at the time it happened that folks can not ever accept any information obtained illegally..ever....but media reports took them as accurate....
See...I told you so! Not official and scrubbed and run through the propaganda mill.
markpkessinger
(8,627 posts)I mean, having a "confidential" stamp removed isn't exactly the same as altering the text of the email itself. Unless the folks involved are alleging that the leaked emails were not what they wrote, then this argument is pretty weak sauce. And to my knowledge, at least, none of them have said that. And as NanceGreggs points out above, if indeed the substance of the emails had been faked, any of the staffers involved could have produced theior own copies within hours, which would have proven that the leaked once had been substantively altered. So why do you suppose they haven't done that?
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Just because some originals haven't been made public does not mean copies of emails have not been turned over to the FBI which is still investigating the hack and I believe at least 6 people have been charged. Staffers have stated many times that some of the those leaked emails could not be verified.
emulatorloo
(45,672 posts)I don't recall more detail than that.
No Podesta didn't deny his risotto recipe.
Is there a reason why you are so invested in believing this story is a lie? Seems well researched and documented, source is reliable.
meow2u3
(24,961 posts)Russian hackers did indeed alter Clintons' emails to incriminate her falsely.
No wonder Clinton didn't get more votes: Rust Belt voters were too naive to see that the Wikileaks dump of her and Podesta's emails were forgeries.
This explains what the russkies did: https://citizenlab.ca/2017/05/tainted-leaks-disinformation-phish/
Documents stolen from a prominent journalist and critic of the Russian government were manipulated and then released as a leak to discredit domestic and foreign critics of the government. We call this technique tainted leaks.
The operation against the journalist led us to the discovery of a larger phishing operation, with over 200 unique targets spanning 39 countries (including members of 28 governments). The list includes a former Russian Prime Minister, members of cabinets from Europe and Eurasia, ambassadors, high ranking military officers, CEOs of energy companies, and members of civil society.
After government targets, the second largest set (21%) are members of civil society including academics, activists, journalists, and representatives of non-governmental organizations.
David__77
(23,892 posts)Wouldnt that be good information to have in the public domain?