UPDATE on the “60 Minutes” Sham Report on Crowdstrike: Impeachment Was Cover for CrowdStrike and Democrats Got What They Wanted
Republicans shouldn’t gloat over Trump’s victory over his impeachment foes. It was always just a ruse meant to “memory hole” the malicious activity of CrowdStrike in concocting the alleged “Russian hack” of the DNC servers. There’s much more going on here than meets the eye. — Michael Thau
Earlier today we posted on ’60 Minutes’ lastest piece of trash journalism where they pushed a shoddy Crowdstrike segment while at the same time smearing President Trump and The Gateway Pundit.
Pelley, in his report, claimed Crowdstrike was correct in assessing that the DNC was hacked by Russians in 2016. But all ’60 Minutes’ offers as proof is hearsay and weak arguments.
Cyber expert Yaacov Apelbaum told The Gateway Pundit the 60 Minutes and Crowdstrike claims are complete rubbish.
If Crowdstrike gave the FBI any data it was drive images (we don’t even know which ones). This did not include memory dumps, network pocket captures, firewall activity, etc. This type of data is crucial and should have been examined in real-time by the FBI. If indeed any drive images were given to the FBI, these would have been contaminated because they continued to use these drives for weeks after the alleged hack.
Crowd Strike was completely wrong (most likely intentionally) about the Russian hack of the Ukrainian Artillery allegation. And we know for a fact that they used the same forensic techniques to reach that conclusion as they did on the DNC hack.
Michael Thau reported on Crowdstrike-DNC scandal at American Greatness last week.
With his permission we are reposting the article here at The Gateway Pundit
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A lot of people are laughing at the huge mistake the Democrats made by trying to impeach President Trump. Besides being stuck with Trump, the argument goes, they may also pay a heavy price in November for single-mindedly pursuing impeachment without being able even to gesture at any underlying crime.
But it might be a good idea to think a bit before joining in.
All the ruckus Democrats raised over Trump’s concern about the Biden family’s wheeling and dealing in Ukraine turned out to be very useful in ways some Republicans are not calculating. It did, after all, make the rest of us forget the other subject broached in that now historic chat with President Volodymyr Zelensky: the alleged Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee’s servers that we’re all supposed to think netted the emails WikiLeaks published during the 2016 Democratic National Convention.
The Democrats’ apparently self-destructive obsession allowed the media, once more, to distract from the crucial question on which the president keeps trying to focus our attention: Why did the DNC repeatedly reject FBI and Department of Homeland Security requests to examine their supposedly hacked machines?
Whenever Trump raises that question, the establishment press tries to smother public interest by carpet-bombing us with stories about how delusional he is. We’re told over and over again that absolutely nothing out of the ordinary occurred and the words “debunked conspiracy theory” are scattered like shrapnel at anyone bold enough to dissent.
But it’s all misdirection and blatant lies.
Comey claimed he didn’t know why the DNC rejected the FBI’s “[m]ultiple requests at different levels” to collect forensic evidence. Johnson was so unsettled by the DNC’s refusal even so much as to discuss the case with the DHS that he twice remarked he “should have brought a sleeping bag and camped out in front of” their headquarters.
A week before Comey’s remarks, the DNC even tried to shift the blame, claiming it was all the FBI’s fault for having “never requested access.” Apart from Comey’s testimony, they were also contradicted in no uncertain terms the very next day, when a senior FBI official told The Hill:
The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise . . . This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information.
That third party was CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm on the DNC’s payroll. The firm was the only entity ever allowed to inspect the Democrats’ allegedly hacked machines as well as the first to finger Russia publicly for the alleged crime. Trump also mentioned CrowdStrike to Zelensky.
But the establishment press spent a couple of days bullying the American reading and viewing audience into thinking any concerns about CrowdStrike were nuts. Then Democrats started shouting hysterically their patent nonsense that Trump’s remarks about Biden were an impeachable offense. The unrelenting media coverage of their obviously hopeless quest to oust him kicked in.
Within just a few days of hearing their name, everyone had forgotten all about CrowdStrike. And a public discussion of the very questionable role the company played in the Democrats’ efforts to destroy the president was, thus, forestalled.
What a Lucky Coincidence
Neither Hillary Clinton nor any of her surrogates ever once challenged the authenticity of any of the emails WikiLeaks published. Instead, from the very beginning, her sole strategy was relentlessly hammering home the narrative that there was a Russian plot allegedly responsible for making them public.
Paying any attention to all the proof of her corruption and incompetence would be unpatriotic, Clinton warned, because the real threat was its publication in the first place. That was all part of a nefarious plot hatched by that arch-fiend Putin to throw the election to Trump. The real story here, we were told, is that the Kremlin attacked, not just her campaign, but literally all of America on Trump’s behalf. A New York Times headline published a few days after the DNC emails started dropping said it all: “Democrats Allege D.N.C. Hack Is Part of Russian Effort to Elect Donald Trump.”
The Times supported Clinton’s allegations by citing some unnamed “researchers” who’d claimed that “the D.N.C.’s server had been breached by Russian intelligence agencies.” Besides not naming CrowdStrike, the Times failed to mention that the “researchers” it used to substantiate the Democrats’ accusations were on the DNC’s payroll.
It sure was lucky that CrowdStrike’s conclusions turned out to be so useful for Hillary Clinton. The DNC’s tech firm couldn’t have come up with something better suited to transform WikiLeaks’ disturbing revelations about her into suspicions about her opponent if they’d concocted it out of thin air just for that purpose.
Interestingly, CrowdStrike had first publicly announced the alleged Russian breach of the DNC’s servers exactly two days after WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange had warned that the DNC emails were coming by declaring he had “upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton . . . We have emails pending publication.”
But CrowdStrike’s conclusions wouldn’t have been very useful at all had they been the only ones fingering the Russians. To get any mileage out of their allegations, Clinton obviously needed confirmation by some authority not on the DNC’s payroll.
And, lo and behold, the very next day she was blessed by yet another remarkable coincidence. Some anonymous FBI officials just happened to leak information to the New York Times for a follow-up story with the incredibly useful headline: “Spy Agency Consensus Grows That Russia Hacked D.N.C.”
According to the Times, a “federal investigation, involving the F.B.I. and [other] intelligence agencies” had concluded that “the Russian government was behind the theft” of the emails WikiLeaks had just published. So certain was Russia’s guilt that senior intelligence agency officials had even informed President Obama.
The Ministry of Truth
Though Robert Mueller had to admit there was no evidence that anyone in Trump’s campaign was involved, many of the president’s supporters have never understood that Mueller’s report affirms that Russia is partly responsible for putting Trump in the White House by stealing the emails WikiLeaks released in the run-up to the election and passing them on for publication. Cataloging the misdirection and deceit contained in Mueller’s report is a job for another day.
But, rest assured, President Trump’s suspicions about CrowdStrike’s role in starting the malicious narrative that he owes his victory to Putin are more than justified.
When the press says Trump is delusional and tries to bully Americans into accepting Democratic Party propaganda, neither believe a word of it nor knuckle under. We’ve barely scratched the surface of the overwhelming evidence of CrowdStrike’s perfidy on behalf of the Democratic Party and haven’t even begun to look into any of the volumes that emerged after Comey accepted their forensics. And President Trump is right that it’s about time someone began looking into it.
It’s worth noting Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and Roger Stone were the only establishment figures known to have pushed the idea that CrowdStrike’s story about Russia having hacked the DNC was complete nonsense. Flynn and Manafort were even trying to convince Trump.
It’s also interesting that the other CrowdStrike executive in charge of investigating the alleged DNC breach along with Dmitri Alperovitch was Shawn Henry, who was in charge of the FBI’s cyber operations before joining the firm. At this point, no one will be surprised to learn he was promoted to the position by none other than Robert Mueller during the latter’s less than stellar tenure running the agency.
If the Department of Justice expended one-tenth the energy investigating CrowdStrike’s role in propagating the story that Trump owes his victory to Russian intelligence that it has on effectively silencing the department’s three most prominent critics for crimes, almost all of which at best are trivialities having nothing to do with election interference by Russia or anyone else and at worst never even occurred, the full story about the plot against Trump might finally start to be understood.
Until this happens (and who knows?), the Justice Department makes the same sinister mockery of its name that Orwell’s deceitful Ministry of Truth and sadistically hateful Ministry of Love do in 1984.
The FBI’s investigation of CrowdStrike’s story accusing Russia of hacking the DNC servers was about as far from following legitimate procedures as it possibly could have been. Two plus two can never equal five, no matter how much those in power or the despicable jackals of the establishment press try to bully us into saying they can.
Adam Carter, who’s made some of the most important contributions to and catalogued the overall evidence that CrowdStrike’s story is a ruse, contributed to this report.