Trump offered to pardon Assange if he provided source for DNC emails

Re:Trump offered to pardon Assange if he provided source for... by megous on Friday September 18, 2020 @10:55AM (#24517539)

I just skimmed a mueller report. All instances where mentions of the hacking group names/numbers were, contained just assertions of what the group did. There was no to very little mention of how this information was determined in the surrounding text.

Yes, I guess it's a report. But it contains just assertions, so it's only meaningful if you trust the institution making it. I've read reports that actually contained the process the core conclusion were arrived at, like various opensource investigations from Bellingcat, etc. And these were indeed more convincing.

Not sure why hacker should just go by blind trust to institutions, lol.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Trump offered to pardon Assange if he provided source for... by hluska on Friday September 18, 2020 @11:36AM (#24518112)

You may want to give the report a full, focused read. While the redactions are annoying, Mueller makes one heck of a case over the full 400+ pages. His writing style is highly measured but frankly, it sounds like it had to be or it never would have made it into the public view. It’s interesting reading how slowly Mueller builds his points!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Trump offered to pardon Assange if he provided source for... by mugwort13 on Friday September 18, 2020 @12:36PM (#24518876)

Vague on purpose. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING claiming the DNC email (and more importantly the PODESTA emails) were "hacked" can be summed up in three words.

"According to Crowdstrike..."

That's it. No one else did any investigation, just Crowdstrike. The same underhanded, dishonest company that LulzSec and Anonymous felt the needs to expose time and time again for their fraudulent ways. People who have no problem lying or framing people.

[ Parent | on HN ]