they were hacking into the dnc. then we had a fellow who basically had access, it seems to me had to have access to the network log of the dnc server, which means that any transactions going in to and out of the dnc network log get registered or logged inside that log. and it goes into a list of what packets come in from what ips and so on and going back and forth. so, that to me said from there, he listed out the raw data from the transactions in the log, which meant the time, the transmission started, the time it ended. the amounts of data that passed, you know, and any other identifying ips are buried in those packets that are passed, too. and if they would ever give them to you. but i think this is probably one the reasons the dnc didn t let the fbi look at it because it would at the rate. it was taken out at the rate of, well, 109 1976 mega
responsible for hacking inwh to the dnc s server, why would you call that into question since every smart person in washington knows that happened? i give up, no. when this first came out last year i started opposing that simply because of the way the intelligenceta community was talking and knowing that the nsa has all the fiber optic the united states and trace route programs embedded in hundreds of places all over the network. i knew they would know if packets were being passed around the u.s. or outside the u.s. or anywhere in the world they could trace themm and see who got them. they did that several yearsm ago with the chinese hack that came in that said it came from that building, i think in shanghai. well, they could do the samein thing with virtually any hack. right away i began to question that assertion that they were in to the