REVEALED: Who Gave Democratic Emails To Wikileaks And Why They Were A Leaker And NOT A Hacker [VIDEO]While all of the mainstream media and anonymous CIA sources claim that Russia was behind the hacks of the emails from the Democratic National Committee and top Clinton aide John Podesta, the truth has been revealed to be completely different.By way of background, top American intelligence veterans say that it was a leak, not a hack.A New York Times report on Monday alluding to  overwhelming circumstantial evidence  leading the CIA to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin  deployed computer hackers with the goal of tipping the election to Donald J. Trump  is, sadly, evidence-free. This is no surprise, because harder evidence of a technical nature points to an inside leak, not hacking   by Russians or anyone else.Monday s Washington Post reports that Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has joined other senators in calling for a bipartisan investigation of suspected cyber-intrusion by Russia. Reading our short memo could save the Senate from endemic partisanship, expense and unnecessary delay.In what follows, we draw on decades of senior-level experience   with emphasis on cyber-intelligence and security   to cut through uninformed, largely partisan fog. Far from hiding behind anonymity, we are proud to speak out with the hope of gaining an audience appropriate to what we merit   given our long labors in government and other areas of technology. And corny though it may sound these days, our ethos as intelligence professionals remains, simply, to tell it like it is   without fear or favor.We have gone through the various claims about hacking. For us, it is child s play to dismiss them. The email disclosures in question are the result of a leak, not a hack. Here s the difference between leaking and hacking:Leak: When someone physically takes data out of an organization and gives it to some other person or organization, as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning did.Hack: When someone in a remote location electronically penetrates operating systems, firewalls or any other cyber-protection system and then extracts data.Even the head of U.S. intelligence   James Clapper   testified on Monday that the connection between Russia and Wikileaks is weak. And U.S. intelligence agencies are now refusing to brief the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on whether or not Russia was actually the source of the Wikileaks documents.And the NSA executive who created the agency s mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees, the 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a  legend  within the agency and the NSA s best-ever analyst and code-breaker, who mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened ( in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Union s command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons )   told Washington s Blog that the Democratic emails were leaked by either NSA insiders or DNC insiders.The former intelligence analyst, British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, and chancellor of the University of Dundee (Craig Murray) revealed earlier this week that the Podesta leak and the DNC leak were leaked by two different insiders, that both of the leakers were Americans with no ties to Russia, and that one was from the American intelligence services.Subsequently, Murray revealed further details on the leaks.Specifically, in an interview with Scott Horton on Tuesday, Murray said that   because John Podesta s company is a registered lobbyist for the Saudi Arabian government   the NSA and other intelligence agencies were monitoring their emails as a matter of course.Murray said that an insider from an American intelligence service (read: NSA) leaked the Podesta emails to Wikileaks. Indeed, an intermediary to the NSA whistleblower handed the emails to Murray in a park in Washington, D.C.Murray said that Wikileaks head Julian Assange tells him that the leaker of the DNC emails was a DNC insider.When asked if Seth Rich was the DNC leaker, Murray responded that he doesn t know   but that it s possible that Rich was murdered because someone thought that he was the source of the DNC leak.  ZeroHedgeWatch this short interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and John Pilger. Pay close attention to Assange s reaction when Pilger asks if he s suggesting Seth Rich was the leaker.Watch Assange s reaction to Pilger s question during the same interview in slow motion (below). What do you think? Is he nodding in agreement to his question about Seth Rich?THE RUSSIA HOAX: Julian Assange acknowledges murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich was Wikileaks' source. Why is MSM covering this up? #Trump pic.twitter.com/FS297JooQI  ViveLaFrance (@vivelafra) December 11, 2016Again, NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved. Thanks largely to the material released by Edward Snowden, we can provide a full picture of NSA s extensive domestic data-collection network including Upstream programs like Fairview, Stormbrew and Blarney. These include at least 30 companies in the U.S. operating the fiber networks that carry the Public Switched Telephone Network as well as the World Wide Web. This gives NSA unparalleled access to data flowing within the U.S. and data going out to the rest of the world, as well as data transiting the U.S.In other words, any data that is passed from the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) or of Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC)   or any other server in the U.S.   is collected by the NSA. These data transfers carry destination addresses in what are called packets, which enable the transfer to be traced and followed through the network.The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any  hacked  emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network. This process can sometimes require a closer look into the routing to sort out intermediate clients, but in the end sender and recipient can be traced across the network.The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating   saying things like  our best guess  or  our opinion  or  our estimate  etc.   shows that the emails alleged to have been  hacked  cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider   as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.For entire story Washington s Blogpolitics
revealed who gave democratic emails to wikileaks and why they were a leader and not a hacker video while mainstream media anonymous cia sources claim russia behind hacks emails democratic national committee top clinton aide john modesta truth revealed completely way background top american intelligence veterans say leak new york times report monday alluding overwhelming circumstantial evidence leading cia believe russian president vladimir putin deployed computer hackers goal tipping election donald trump sadly this surprise harder evidence technical nature points inside leak hacking russian anyone washington post reports james landlord member senate intelligence committee joined senators calling bipartisan investigation suspected russia reading short memo could save senate endemic partisanship expense unnecessary follows draw decades experience emphasis security cut uninformed largely partisan fog far hiding behind anonymity proud speak hope gaining audience appropriate merit given long labor government areas technology and corn though may sound days ethos intelligence professionals remains simply tell like without fear gone various claims hacking for us child play dismiss the email disclosures question result leak hack here difference leaking hacking leak when someone physically takes data organization gives person organization edward snowden chelsea manning when someone remote location electronically penetrate operating systems firewall system extracts head intelligence james clipper testified monday connection russia wikileaks weak and intelligence agencies refusing brief house permanent select committee intelligence whether russia actually source wikileaks nsa executive created agency mass surveillance program digital information served senior technical director within agency managed six thousand nsa employees nsa veteran widely regarded legend within agency nsa analyst mapped soviet structure anyone else knew predicted soviet invasions happened encrypted soviet union command system provided us allies surveillance soviet troop movements russian atomic weapons told washington blog democratic emails leaked either nsa insiders dnc former intelligence analyst british ambassador uzbekistan chancellor university dundee craig murray revealed earlier week modesta leak dnc leak leaked two different insiders leaders americans ties russia one american intelligence murray revealed details interview scott morton tuesday murray said john modesta company registered lobbyist saudi arabia government nsa intelligence agencies monitoring emails matter said insider american intelligence service read nsa leaked modesta emails wikileaks indeed intermediary nsa whistleblower handed emails murray park washington said wikileaks head julian passage tells leader dnc emails dnc asked seth rich dnc leader murray responded know possible rich murdered someone thought source dnc leak zerohedgewatch short interview wikileaks founder julian passage john silver pay close attention passage reaction silver asks suggesting seth rich passage reaction silver question interview slow motion what think is padding agreement question seth rich the russia hoax julian passage acknowledges murdered dnc staffer seth rich wikileaks source why mm covering trump vivelafrance vivelafra december nsa able identify sender recipient hacking involved thanks largely material released edward snowden provide full picture nsa extensive domestic network including upstream programs like fairies stormbrew barney these include least companies operating fiber networks carry public switched telephone network well world wide web this gives nsa unparalleled access data flowing within data going rest world well data transiting words data passed servers democratic national committee dnc hillary roda clinton hrc server collected nsa these data transfers carry destination addresses called packets enable transfer traced followed bottom line nsa would know hacked emails dnc hrc servers routed network this process sometimes require closer look routing sort intermediate clients end sender recipient traced across various ways usually anonymous sportspeople intelligence agencies equivocating saying things like best guess opinion estimate etc shows emails alleged hacked traced across network given nsa extensive trace capability conclude dnc hrc servers alleged hacked fact evidence absent otherwise would surely brought forward since could done without danger sources methods thus conclude emails leaked insider case edward snowden chelsea manning such insider could anyone government department agency access nsa databases perhaps someone within entire story washington blogpolitics
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: REVEALED: Who Gave Democratic Emails To Wikileaks And Why They Were A Leaker And NOT A Hacker [VIDEO]While all of the mainstream media and anonymous CIA sources claim that Russia was behind the hacks of the emails from the Democratic National Committee and top Clinton aide John Podesta, the truth has been revealed to be completely different.By way of background, top American intelligence veterans say that it was a leak, not a hack.A New York Times report on Monday alluding to  overwhelming circumstantial evidence  leading the CIA to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin  deployed computer hackers with the goal of tipping the election to Donald J. Trump  is, sadly, evidence-free. This is no surprise, because harder evidence of a technical nature points to an inside leak, not hacking   by Russians or anyone else.Monday s Washington Post reports that Sen. James Lankford, R-Oklahoma, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has joined other senators in calling for a bipartisan investigation of suspected cyber-intrusion by Russia. Reading our short memo could save the Senate from endemic partisanship, expense and unnecessary delay.In what follows, we draw on decades of senior-level experience   with emphasis on cyber-intelligence and security   to cut through uninformed, largely partisan fog. Far from hiding behind anonymity, we are proud to speak out with the hope of gaining an audience appropriate to what we merit   given our long labors in government and other areas of technology. And corny though it may sound these days, our ethos as intelligence professionals remains, simply, to tell it like it is   without fear or favor.We have gone through the various claims about hacking. For us, it is child s play to dismiss them. The email disclosures in question are the result of a leak, not a hack. Here s the difference between leaking and hacking:Leak: When someone physically takes data out of an organization and gives it to some other person or organization, as Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning did.Hack: When someone in a remote location electronically penetrates operating systems, firewalls or any other cyber-protection system and then extracts data.Even the head of U.S. intelligence   James Clapper   testified on Monday that the connection between Russia and Wikileaks is weak. And U.S. intelligence agencies are now refusing to brief the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on whether or not Russia was actually the source of the Wikileaks documents.And the NSA executive who created the agency s mass surveillance program for digital information, who served as the senior technical director within the agency, who managed six thousand NSA employees, the 36-year NSA veteran widely regarded as a  legend  within the agency and the NSA s best-ever analyst and code-breaker, who mapped out the Soviet command-and-control structure before anyone else knew how, and so predicted Soviet invasions before they happened ( in the 1970s, he decrypted the Soviet Union s command system, which provided the US and its allies with real-time surveillance of all Soviet troop movements and Russian atomic weapons )   told Washington s Blog that the Democratic emails were leaked by either NSA insiders or DNC insiders.The former intelligence analyst, British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, and chancellor of the University of Dundee (Craig Murray) revealed earlier this week that the Podesta leak and the DNC leak were leaked by two different insiders, that both of the leakers were Americans with no ties to Russia, and that one was from the American intelligence services.Subsequently, Murray revealed further details on the leaks.Specifically, in an interview with Scott Horton on Tuesday, Murray said that   because John Podesta s company is a registered lobbyist for the Saudi Arabian government   the NSA and other intelligence agencies were monitoring their emails as a matter of course.Murray said that an insider from an American intelligence service (read: NSA) leaked the Podesta emails to Wikileaks. Indeed, an intermediary to the NSA whistleblower handed the emails to Murray in a park in Washington, D.C.Murray said that Wikileaks head Julian Assange tells him that the leaker of the DNC emails was a DNC insider.When asked if Seth Rich was the DNC leaker, Murray responded that he doesn t know   but that it s possible that Rich was murdered because someone thought that he was the source of the DNC leak.  ZeroHedgeWatch this short interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and John Pilger. Pay close attention to Assange s reaction when Pilger asks if he s suggesting Seth Rich was the leaker.Watch Assange s reaction to Pilger s question during the same interview in slow motion (below). What do you think? Is he nodding in agreement to his question about Seth Rich?THE RUSSIA HOAX: Julian Assange acknowledges murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich was Wikileaks' source. Why is MSM covering this up? #Trump pic.twitter.com/FS297JooQI  ViveLaFrance (@vivelafra) December 11, 2016Again, NSA is able to identify both the sender and recipient when hacking is involved. Thanks largely to the material released by Edward Snowden, we can provide a full picture of NSA s extensive domestic data-collection network including Upstream programs like Fairview, Stormbrew and Blarney. These include at least 30 companies in the U.S. operating the fiber networks that carry the Public Switched Telephone Network as well as the World Wide Web. This gives NSA unparalleled access to data flowing within the U.S. and data going out to the rest of the world, as well as data transiting the U.S.In other words, any data that is passed from the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) or of Hillary Rodham Clinton (HRC)   or any other server in the U.S.   is collected by the NSA. These data transfers carry destination addresses in what are called packets, which enable the transfer to be traced and followed through the network.The bottom line is that the NSA would know where and how any  hacked  emails from the DNC, HRC or any other servers were routed through the network. This process can sometimes require a closer look into the routing to sort out intermediate clients, but in the end sender and recipient can be traced across the network.The various ways in which usually anonymous spokespeople for U.S. intelligence agencies are equivocating   saying things like  our best guess  or  our opinion  or  our estimate  etc.   shows that the emails alleged to have been  hacked  cannot be traced across the network. Given NSA s extensive trace capability, we conclude that DNC and HRC servers alleged to have been hacked were, in fact, not hacked.The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods. Thus, we conclude that the emails were leaked by an insider   as was the case with Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning. Such an insider could be anyone in a government department or agency with access to NSA databases, or perhaps someone within the DNC.For entire story Washington s Blogpolitics
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: revealed who gave democratic emails to wikileaks and why they were a leader and not a hacker video while mainstream media anonymous cia sources claim russia behind hacks emails democratic national committee top clinton aide john modesta truth revealed completely way background top american intelligence veterans say leak new york times report monday alluding overwhelming circumstantial evidence leading cia believe russian president vladimir putin deployed computer hackers goal tipping election donald trump sadly this surprise harder evidence technical nature points inside leak hacking russian anyone washington post reports james landlord member senate intelligence committee joined senators calling bipartisan investigation suspected russia reading short memo could save senate endemic partisanship expense unnecessary follows draw decades experience emphasis security cut uninformed largely partisan fog far hiding behind anonymity proud speak hope gaining audience appropriate merit given long labor government areas technology and corn though may sound days ethos intelligence professionals remains simply tell like without fear gone various claims hacking for us child play dismiss the email disclosures question result leak hack here difference leaking hacking leak when someone physically takes data organization gives person organization edward snowden chelsea manning when someone remote location electronically penetrate operating systems firewall system extracts head intelligence james clipper testified monday connection russia wikileaks weak and intelligence agencies refusing brief house permanent select committee intelligence whether russia actually source wikileaks nsa executive created agency mass surveillance program digital information served senior technical director within agency managed six thousand nsa employees nsa veteran widely regarded legend within agency nsa analyst mapped soviet structure anyone else knew predicted soviet invasions happened encrypted soviet union command system provided us allies surveillance soviet troop movements russian atomic weapons told washington blog democratic emails leaked either nsa insiders dnc former intelligence analyst british ambassador uzbekistan chancellor university dundee craig murray revealed earlier week modesta leak dnc leak leaked two different insiders leaders americans ties russia one american intelligence murray revealed details interview scott morton tuesday murray said john modesta company registered lobbyist saudi arabia government nsa intelligence agencies monitoring emails matter said insider american intelligence service read nsa leaked modesta emails wikileaks indeed intermediary nsa whistleblower handed emails murray park washington said wikileaks head julian passage tells leader dnc emails dnc asked seth rich dnc leader murray responded know possible rich murdered someone thought source dnc leak zerohedgewatch short interview wikileaks founder julian passage john silver pay close attention passage reaction silver asks suggesting seth rich passage reaction silver question interview slow motion what think is padding agreement question seth rich the russia hoax julian passage acknowledges murdered dnc staffer seth rich wikileaks source why mm covering trump vivelafrance vivelafra december nsa able identify sender recipient hacking involved thanks largely material released edward snowden provide full picture nsa extensive domestic network including upstream programs like fairies stormbrew barney these include least companies operating fiber networks carry public switched telephone network well world wide web this gives nsa unparalleled access data flowing within data going rest world well data transiting words data passed servers democratic national committee dnc hillary roda clinton hrc server collected nsa these data transfers carry destination addresses called packets enable transfer traced followed bottom line nsa would know hacked emails dnc hrc servers routed network this process sometimes require closer look routing sort intermediate clients end sender recipient traced across various ways usually anonymous sportspeople intelligence agencies equivocating saying things like best guess opinion estimate etc shows emails alleged hacked traced across network given nsa extensive trace capability conclude dnc hrc servers alleged hacked fact evidence absent otherwise would surely brought forward since could done without danger sources methods thus conclude emails leaked insider case edward snowden chelsea manning such insider could anyone government department agency access nsa databases perhaps someone within entire story washington blogpolitics