Newly uncovered bombshell: Crowdstrike had no solid evidence Russians hacked the DNC computers

[tres borrachos]

Don't assume Hillary did it. Let's call for a better investigation into the murder to find out who really did it and why.

Why are you telling me. Call Bill Barr's office and tell him to get on it.

 

[marke]

Maybe the Democrats got a quick glance at what had potential to be leaked and decided that instead of taking the heat for their own internal issues they would hire a firm to create a boogeyman to blame.

Mr. Henry of Crowdstrike said Crowdstrike was hired by the law firm hired by the DNC to fabricate the Steele dossier. He also said the problem of hacking at the DNC was reported to the law firm by a contractor (not with CrowdStrike) who had been told months earlier of ongoing hacking into DNC computers. He was not sure what the FBI told the IT contractor handling the DNC computers or what, if anything, the contractor or the FBI had told the DNC.

Henry also had no explanation for why the FBI did not take the lead in the investigation but left it all up to CrowdStrike to look into it, even though it was both a criminal and a national security matter.

 

[marke]

Why are you telling me. Call Bill Barr's office and tell him to get on it.

Unlike pompous democrats, I don't think I know how to do Barr's job better than he does.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Joe Biden democrat mindset: 'We are not interested in facts, but in the truth, which is Russia! Russia! Russia!'

You constantly post things that are lies and then complain about people lying.

You are just like Donald Trump. The only difference is you claim to be a Christian.

 

[Jezcoe]

The conspiracy theory that Trump was acting upon in a portion of the Zelensky phone call was the conspiracy theory that a rich autocrat in the Ukraine had possession of the server(s) in question which held the DNC emails that were allegedly hacked by Russia. Why would the server(s) be allegedly held in the Ukraine? Because one of the main owners of Crowdstrike was the rich autocrat in the Ukraine.What Is CrowdStrike And How Are They Connected To Ukraine? * American Truth Today
Trump was just trying to verify the information that Crowdstrike, solely, claimed...That Russia hacked the emails from the DNC server(s). Trump was impeached for his troubles.

That Crowdstrike had issued a report on the server(s) in question was an established fact.

If you can't trust American Truth Today, who can you trust?

 

[tres borrachos]

Unlike pompous democrats, I don't think I know how to do Barr's job better than he does.

So, let me get this straight. You want an investigation into Barr's murder, but you really don't if Barr doesn't open one. Got it. Does Barr go to the bathroom for you too?

 

[Moot]

The conspiracy theory that Trump was acting upon in a portion of the Zelensky phone call was the conspiracy theory that a rich autocrat in the Ukraine had possession of the server(s) in question which held the DNC emails that were allegedly hacked by Russia. Why would the server(s) be allegedly held in the Ukraine? Because one of the main owners of Crowdstrike was the rich autocrat in the Ukraine.What Is CrowdStrike And How Are They Connected To Ukraine? * American Truth Today
Trump was just trying to verify the information that Crowdstrike, solely, claimed...That Russia hacked the emails from the DNC server(s). Trump was impeached for his troubles.

That Crowdstrike had issued a report on the server(s) in question was an established fact.

Crowdstrike wasn't the only cybersecurity firm to analyze and issue a report on the DNC's server...

Findings from Analysis of DNC Intrusion Malware | Fidelis Cybersecurity


https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam...st-senate-intel-committee-russia-election.pdf​

The RNC also used Crowdstrike...

Republicans hired the same cybersecurity firm as the hacked DNC, but it's not clear that was a bad idea​

 

[Deuce]

Now we find out what democrat insiders have known for years. The original claim attributed to Crowdstrike and rubber stamped by democrats in Obama administration and the leftist media that Russians stole the emails that ended up in Assange's hands was never backed by solid evidence of any kind.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails | Just The News

"Couldn't say for sure" is not the same thing as "never backed by solid evidence."

Any particular reason you decided to misrepresent the article?

 

[CaughtInThe]

If you can't trust American Truth Today, who can you trust?

Grown ass men being conned every single freaking day. It's so damn pathetic.

 

[Moot]

Mr. Henry of Crowdstrike said Crowdstrike was hired by the law firm hired by the DNC to fabricate the Steele dossier. He also said the problem of hacking at the DNC was reported to the law firm by a contractor (not with CrowdStrike) who had been told months earlier of ongoing hacking into DNC computers. He was not sure what the FBI told the IT contractor handling the DNC computers or what, if anything, the contractor or the FBI had told the DNC.

Henry also had no explanation for why the FBI did not take the lead in the investigation but left it all up to CrowdStrike to look into it, even though it was both a criminal and a national security matter.

I read the transcript and must've missed where Mr. Henry said "Crowdstrike was hired by the law firm to fabricate the Steele Dossier". Can you quote or provide the page number where he said that?

Mr. Henry said the FBI doesn't usually take a lead roll in investigating the servers of private entities. They notify them of nefarious activity and that's about it.

I also read Yared Tamene, the IT contractors transcript and was surprised at just how much he had cooperated with the FBI and visa versa. I must say, the FBI wasn't very helpful in the first few months...but they did get everything they requested.


https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/ty54.pdf

FBI Got Everything It Asked for in DNC Investigation, Refuting ‘Missing Server’ Myth - Defense One

https://2u7df44dd82i2tiate1x20js-wp...he-Democratic-National-Committee-170117-1.pdf

 

[marke]

So, let me get this straight. You want an investigation into Barr's murder, but you really don't if Barr doesn't open one. Got it. Does Barr go to the bathroom for you too?

I support all investigations into Seth Rich's murder, whether Barr is involved or not. What possible harm cpould come from continuing to investigat a famous unsolved murder where no motive has been established and no suspect has been named?

 

[marke]

Crowdstrike wasn't the only cybersecurity firm to analyze and issue a report on the DNC's server...

Findings from Analysis of DNC Intrusion Malware | Fidelis Cybersecurity

https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam...st-senate-intel-committee-russia-election.pdf​

The RNC also used Crowdstrike...

Republicans hired the same cybersecurity firm as the hacked DNC, but it's not clear that was a bad idea​

Lots of firms, investigators and government officials have looked into the alleged hacking of the DNC computers. They cannot all be right because they have drawn differing conclusions from the evidence. I tend to think this report is compelling for 3 major reasons:

1. Their logic is beyond reproach.
2. They do not contradict findings by any of the organizations you mentioned.
3. They reveal facts that the otherd don't. For example, both CrowdStrike and Fidelis Security mention hacks from June 2016, but neither mention the big transfer of DNC data that took place on July 5, just 5 days before Seth Rich's murder. After reading their report I find it inexcusable that anyone, whether FBI, NSA, other government official, or private American citizen would dismiss the facts in the report without examination.

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack | The Nation

 

[marke]

"Couldn't say for sure" is not the same thing as "never backed by solid evidence."

Any particular reason you decided to misrepresent the article?

Mr. Henry could not assure the House committe that the DNC enmails were not stolen by a insider from the DNC. Why is that fact so repulsive to democrats, unless they do not like where the facts are leading?

 

[veritas1]

Now we find out what democrat insiders have known for years. The original claim attributed to Crowdstrike and rubber stamped by democrats in Obama administration and the leftist media that Russians stole the emails that ended up in Assange's hands was never backed by solid evidence of any kind.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails | Just The News

Like we've been saying from the start, Democrats pulled the whole Russia hoax out of their posteriors.

 

[Deuce]

Mr. Henry could not assure the House committe that the DNC enmails were not stolen by a insider from the DNC. Why is that fact so repulsive to democrats, unless they do not like where the facts are leading?

You didn't answer the question.

 

[marke]

I read the transcript and must've missed where Mr. Henry said "Crowdstrike was hired by the law firm to fabricate the Steele Dossier". Can you quote or provide the page number where he said that?

Mr. Henry clearly said he was hired by the law firm Perkins Coie. We know from public records that Perkins Coie was hired by the DNC to in turn hire Fusion GPS to produce the fake Steele dossier to be used in opposition to Trump.

Mr. Henry said the FBI doesn't usually take a lead roll in investigating the servers of private entities. They notify them of nefarious activity and that's about it.

He may have said that but he would have been wrong if by that he meant the reason the FBI did not take initial commanding interest in the hacking was because they do not usually involve themselves in a criminal hacking involving national security. Here is what was said:

Mr. Stewart: "I understand. Okay. Let me go back, if I could, just a little bit. I want to understand better your experience, again, both officially as a government agent and now in the private sector. If an entity like the DNC or any, you know, organization that has the obvious impact or import of the DNC had been informed that they had been hacked and by - hopefully they understood - by a foreign government, what would that organization typically do? I mean, would law enforcement at some point be involved with that investigation? And, again, I've asked this question before. I just want to - I don't think we got a chance to fully answer it."

Here is the earlier exchange Mr. Stewart was referring to which Mr. Henry had avoided answering:

Mr. Stewart: So help me understand. I don't want to come back to that, because I don't understand that well, but I think I got enough to go on for now. Help me understand if they suspect a hack has occurred, which is a criminal activity, true?
Mr. Henry: Yes.
Mr. Stewart: So there's a crime that's been committed. Why would not the FBI have at least some role in the investigation subsequent to that hack?
Mr. Henry: So why would the FBI not have a role?
Mr. Stewart: Yeah. I mean, they said: Hey, they contact them. You've been hacked, which is a crime. I don't understand why the FBI wouldn't lead or at least have some roile in investigating the evidence associated with that crime."

Mr. Henry still dodged the question. Why was CrowdStrike investigating the hacking and the FBI not allowed to get involved? However, Mr. Henry did finally answer the question later after dancing all around with distractions and non-answers. He said: "You're asking me to speculate. I don't know the answer."


The FBI, the CIA, and 17 other intelligence agencies, according to democrat spokespeople at the time, relied solely on CrowdStrike's assessment, upon which the Trump-haters from the Obama administration background launched an all-out witch hunt investigation of President Trump.

I do not buy the stupid answers provided by Trump-hating government officials and DNC contractors who falsely claimed Trump was behind the supposed "hacking" which CrowdStrike testified they could not even prove occurred.

 

[grainbelt]

Perhaps, but the times are a-changing.

Trump is a bull in a china shop, and he chose exactly the right person to be AG.

The only thing that would keep Obama and Clinton from being indicted is a tradition of not doing so to high public figures.

Except that their acts were not only criminal, but a threat to our very democracy; literal treason.

If that goes unpunished, it absolutely will happen again.

Just like Obama's crimes were done keeping in mind that Clinton got away with his; free as a bird, richer than heck with liberal Fake News and history books censoring out his actual crimes and abuses of power.

So why would he or Obama or some future president care what half the country thinks, who they hold in utter contempt?

Screw past tradition. Indict.

I'm gonna be that guy. Do you apply the treason tag evenly? You seem very invested here. Buy did you think trump was exhibiting treasonous behavior when he tried to leverage significant economic and political aid due to Ukraine for political help against Biden? Just need to know how committed you are to your denunciation of treason.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[CaughtInThe]

some of these people literally still believe Pizzagate.

 

[marke]

You didn't answer the question.

Here is testimony from the House hearing:

"Mr. Stewart: Okay. What about the emails that everyone is so, you know, knowledgeable of? Were there also indicators that they were prepared but not evidence that they actually were exfiltrated?

Mr. Henry: There's not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence -"

In other words, the CrowdStrike team does not have evidence the emails were hacked other than the fact Wikileaks ended up with them. Not a strong case for the Trump/Russian democrat hoax conspiracy theory.

 

[marke]

You didn't answer the question.

Here is testimony from the House hearing:

"Mr. Stewart: Okay. What about the emails that everyone is so, you know, knowledgeable of? Were there also indicators that they were prepared but not evidence that they actually were exfiltrated?

Mr. Henry: There's not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence -"

In other words, the CrowdStrike team does not have evidence the emails were hacked other than the fact Wikileaks ended up with them. Not a strong case for the Trump/Russian democrat hoax conspiracy theory.

 

[iguanaman]

Now we find out what democrat insiders have known for years. The original claim attributed to Crowdstrike and rubber stamped by democrats in Obama administration and the leftist media that Russians stole the emails that ended up in Assange's hands was never backed by solid evidence of any kind.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails | Just The News

Not only do we know the Russians did it but we even know the names of the GRU agents involved. They were indicted by Mueller who had overwhelming evidence to convict them if they showed up to court.

 

[iguanaman]

If you don't like John Solomon as the messenger, you can always go directly to the source ...

https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/sh21.pdf

And this is what this post is about? You are really losing it. The FBI verified what Crowdstrike said and so did Mueller. They all examined the same image of the DNC servers.

MR. HENRY: We said that we had a high degree of confidence it was the
Russian Government.And our analysts that looked at it that had looked at these
types of attacks before, many different types of attacks similar to this in different
environments, certain tools that were used, certain methods by which they were
moving in the environment,and looking at the types of data that was being
targeted, that it was consistent with a nation-state adversary and associated with
Russian intelligence

 

[Deuce]

Here is testimony from the House hearing:

"Mr. Stewart: Okay. What about the emails that everyone is so, you know, knowledgeable of? Were there also indicators that they were prepared but not evidence that they actually were exfiltrated?

Mr. Henry: There's not evidence that they were actually exfiltrated. There's circumstantial evidence -"

In other words, the CrowdStrike team does not have evidence the emails were hacked other than the fact Wikileaks ended up with them. Not a strong case for the Trump/Russian democrat hoax conspiracy theory.

You're still not answering the question. Why did you change the claim in your thread title?

 

[Moot]

Mr. Henry clearly said he was hired by the law firm Perkins Coie. We know from public records that Perkins Coie was hired by the DNC to in turn hire Fusion GPS to produce the fake Steele dossier to be used in opposition to Trump.



He may have said that but he would have been wrong if by that he meant the reason the FBI did not take initial commanding interest in the hacking was because they do not usually involve themselves in a criminal hacking involving national security. Here is what was said:

Mr. Stewart: "I understand. Okay. Let me go back, if I could, just a little bit. I want to understand better your experience, again, both officially as a government agent and now in the private sector. If an entity like the DNC or any, you know, organization that has the obvious impact or import of the DNC had been informed that they had been hacked and by - hopefully they understood - by a foreign government, what would that organization typically do? I mean, would law enforcement at some point be involved with that investigation? And, again, I've asked this question before. I just want to - I don't think we got a chance to fully answer it."

Here is the earlier exchange Mr. Stewart was referring to which Mr. Henry had avoided answering:

Mr. Stewart: So help me understand. I don't want to come back to that, because I don't understand that well, but I think I got enough to go on for now. Help me understand if they suspect a hack has occurred, which is a criminal activity, true?
Mr. Henry: Yes.
Mr. Stewart: So there's a crime that's been committed. Why would not the FBI have at least some role in the investigation subsequent to that hack?
Mr. Henry: So why would the FBI not have a role?
Mr. Stewart: Yeah. I mean, they said: Hey, they contact them. You've been hacked, which is a crime. I don't understand why the FBI wouldn't lead or at least have some roile in investigating the evidence associated with that crime."

Mr. Henry still dodged the question. Why was CrowdStrike investigating the hacking and the FBI not allowed to get involved? However, Mr. Henry did finally answer the question later after dancing all around with distractions and non-answers. He said: "You're asking me to speculate. I don't know the answer."


The FBI, the CIA, and 17 other intelligence agencies, according to democrat spokespeople at the time, relied solely on CrowdStrike's assessment, upon which the Trump-haters from the Obama administration background launched an all-out witch hunt investigation of President Trump.

I do not buy the stupid answers provided by Trump-hating government officials and DNC contractors who falsely claimed Trump was behind the supposed "hacking" which CrowdStrike testified they could not even prove occurred.

So, Henry never said what you claimed?

Fusion GPS and Crowdstrike were never in contact with each other...they aren't even in the same business. You're barking up two different trees.

Mr. Henry said Crowdstrike was in contact with the FBI the entire time and they provided the FBI everything they asked for. This was backed up by Yared Tamene's testimony.

Crowdstrike employees are former FBI cyber forensic officers...and their assessment was backed up by other cyber-forensic firms and the entire IC community.

With all the conspiracies and witchunts the Dems were supposed to have engaged in....how come they didn't win the election?

The fact is, Trump benefited from the Russians hacking the DNC...not the democrats.

 

[marke]

So, Henry never said what you claimed?

Fusion GPS and Crowdstrike were never in contact with each other...they aren't even in the same business. You're barking up two different trees.

Mr. Henry said Crowdstrike was in contact with the FBI the entire time and they provided the FBI everything they asked for. This was backed up by Yared Tamene's testimony.

Crowdstrike employees are former FBI cyber forensic officers...and their assessment was backed up by other cyber-forensic firms and the entire IC community.

With all the conspiracies and witchunts the Dems were supposed to have engaged in....how come they didn't win the election?

The fact is, Trump benefited from the Russians hacking the DNC...not the democrats.

No, the democrat operatives CrowdStrike and Fusion GPS did not work together. They were both hired by the Trump-hating law firm Perkins-Coie to help Hillary in the 2016 election. Yes, Trump will benefit from the fake collusion and fake hacking lies of those Trump-hating actors whose dirty secret deeds are now being exposed as formerly hidden government records are being released over democrat objections.