Sunday, April 2, 2017

17 Intel Agencies Agree: None of Us Ever Investigated the DNC's E-Mail Server

Not One.

Because you certainly can't have a law enforcement agency dedicated to fighting crime and corruption like the FBI pawing through the Democrat Party's server!

No, that investigation was all done by a private firm hired by the DNC, and the results were spoon-fed to the Intel Community for rubber-stamping by Obama appointees. The phony number 17 comes from Clapper who speaks for all 17 agencies as DNI.

Jeff Dunetz at The Lid:

"Reported in January, the FBI based its decision that it was the Russians that hacked into the DNC computers on a report commissioned by the DNC and generated by a company called CrowdStrike (the FBI was never allowed to examine the DNC server). The VOA recently caught CrowdStrike creating a bogus and unrelated hacking charge against Russia, and making up the facts to prove its veracity.

To make their determination that the Democrats were hacked by Russia, the FBI relied exclusively on information from private digital forensics company Crowdstrike. It wasn’t the FBI’s fault the DNC wouldn’t allow the FBI to look a their servers for the hacking investigation, instead forced them to use the Crowdstrike report paid for by the Party. ...

The VOA reported:
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year’s American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented data published by an influential British think tank. ...

CrowdStrike was first to link hacks of Democratic Party computers to Russian actors last year, but some cybersecurity experts have questioned its evidence. The company has come under fire from some Republicans who say charges of Kremlin meddling in the election are overblown.

After CrowdStrike released its Ukraine report, company co-founder Dmitri Alperovitch claimed it provided added evidence of Russian election interference. In both hacks, he said, the company found malware used by “Fancy Bear,” a group with ties to Russian intelligence agencies.

CrowdStrike’s claims of heavy Ukrainian artillery losses were widely circulated in U.S. media.

On Thursday, CrowdStrike walked back key parts of its Ukraine report.

The company removed language that said Ukraine’s artillery lost 80 percent of the Soviet-era D-30 howitzers, which used aiming software that purportedly was hacked. Instead, the revised report cites figures of 15 to 20 percent losses in combat operations, attributing the figures to IISS.
The company who the DNC and FBI relied on not only made up a problem that didn’t exist, but then blamed it on Putin’s Russia. Shouldn’t that call into question the entire premise that it was the Russians who hacked into the DNC?

Even before the Democrats were using the Russian hack story in a lame attempt damage the nascent Trump presidency, they were using the tale as a tool to deflect from the Clinton scandals–before Wikileaks started publishing the Podesta emails. They took a joke made by the future president and turned it into a scandal, and when Wikileaks began publishing the Podesta emails, they simply added it to the Putin charges.

Now I am not suggesting that Putin is a boy scout, he is a despicable tyrant. Was the report commissioned purely for campaign purposes? Based on the fact that the company has close ties to the Obama team, is friends with Hillary Clinton, and is connected closely to Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk (another friend of the DNC) can we really believe the report was done without  DNC input, or did members of the party the campaign direct Crowdstrike toward the Russians, which the company already has a beef with?  If everything was above board—well why didn’t the DNC allow the government intelligence sources to look at their server?

But most importantly, why is the FBI relying on this report, and why isn’t the House or Senate Committees investigating the Crowdstrike report?".......

Oh, I think Crowdstrike and the Democrats who hired them will have to testify:

Donald J. Trump    
Is it true the DNC would not allow the FBI access to check server or other equipment after learning it was hacked? Can that be possible?

I support Ukrainian freedom--and tiny little Montenegro's, too--but this DNC server-crap stinks to high heaven.

Maybe the Russians weren't even in the loop. iBankCoin:

"Is it a stretch to suggest that the CrowdStrike report on the DNC hack was fabricated to pin the DNC hack on Russia?

Let’s not forget that Dr. Steve Pieczenik – former CIA spookmaster and expert on all things cloak and dagger, completely laid out what’s going on:
“We initiated a counter-coup through Julian Assange, who’s been very brave and really quite formidable in his ability to come forth and provide all the necessary emails that we gave to him to undermine Hillary and Bill Clinton.”
In other words, ‘white hats’ within US intelligence agencies passed the emails to Julian Assange in order to wrestle control of the USA out of the hands of the Clinton cabal of Neocon globalists.".......

Maybe that's how it went down. Maybe there are Deep-State patriots who knew all the Clinton Crime Family's dirty deals, from selling military secrets to the Chinese to selling pardons to Iran sanctions violators to selling hi-tech secrets to the Russians at Skolkovo and selling uranium out of the State Department. Sell, sell, sell, sell. The Clintons would sell the Statue of Liberty to the North Koreans for a missile silo if there was a crooked nickel in it.

Not to mention Felony Clinton's nasty habit of getting spies killed with her Open Book Server.

Maybe they used that criminal Assange because they couldn't let Granny Grifter and Dollar Bill go unchallenged. Whatever else the Russians are guilty of, maybe the DNC-hacking "Russians" aren't really Russian after all.

Will Not Be Testifying: Seth Rich
Mini-me Magnum, P.I.-UPDATE: Byron York:

"Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has sent a letter to FBI Director James Comey demanding the story behind the FBI’s reported plan to pay the author of a lurid and unsubstantiated dossier on candidate Donald Trump. In particular, Grassley appears to be zeroing in on the FBI’s deputy director, Andrew McCabe, indicating Senate investigators want to learn more about McCabe’s role in a key aspect of the Trump-Russia affair.

Grassley began his investigation after the Washington Post reported on February 28 that the FBI, “a few weeks before the election,” agreed to pay former British spy Christopher Steele to investigate Trump. Prior to that, supporters of the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign had paid Steele to gather intelligence on Clinton’s Republican rival."........

Meanwhile, Clintonstooge Terry McAuliffe and his gang of Clinton bundlers paid Mrs. McCabe $1,600,000.00 for her state senate campaign.





No comments:

Post a Comment