17 June 2019 — South Front
The US’ conclusion that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) appears to be based on a redacted draft of the Crowdstrike report.
The Grizzly Steppe joint report by the FBI and US Department of Homeland Security concluded that Russia hacked the DNC servers back in 2018, and it was predominantly based on a claim by cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike, which was highly scrutinized, according to an article by Breitbart’s former reporter Lee Stranahan.
The entire narrative was based on the fact that the DNC wouldn’t let the Department of Justice review the allegedly hacked servers, but rather only provided an analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike.
But a new court filing Trump adviser Roger Stone made it even more questionable.
Suspecting they could prove the Russian hacking claim was false, lawyers representing Roger Stone requested the full Crowdstrike report on the DNC hack. When the DOJ responded to the Stone motion, they made a rather significant admission. Not only did the FBI not review the DNC server, the FBI/DOJ never even saw the Crowdstrike report.
The most significant part is that the report was defined as a “draft,” but a footnote contains the following: “counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the government that they are the last version of the report produced.”
Click to see full-size image
The FBI and DOJ were only allowed to see a “draft” report prepared by Crowdstrike, and that report was redacted… and that redacted draft is the “last version of the report produced”; meaning, there are no unredacted & final versions.
To put it in even simpler terms: the conclusion that Russia hacked the DNC servers was based on a redacted draft of a report that the cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike didn’t even bother to finalize.
I missed the previous DOJ filing, but this seems significant.
The DOJ informed the court it doesn’t have the unredacted Crowdstrike reports.
Big Cases Bot@big_cases
New filing in United States v. Stone: Reply to Oppositionhttps://www.usatoday.com/documents/6154179-Reply-to-Opposition …
2,035 people are talking about this
Conservative Treehouse also outlined how outrageous the move was:
“This means the FBI and DOJ, and all of the downstream claims by the intelligence apparatus; including the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, all the way to the Weissmann/Mueller report and the continued claims therein; were based on the official intelligence agencies of the U.S. government and the U.S. Department of Justice taking the word of a hired contractor for the Democrat party….. despite their inability to examine the server and/or actually see an unredacted technical forensic report from the investigating contractor.
The entire apparatus of the U.S. government just took their word for it…
…and used the claim therein as an official position….
…which led to a subsequent government claim, in court, of absolute certainty that Russia hacked the DNC.
Think about that for a few minutes.”
Crowdstrike is so questionable that even the government of Ukraine admonished a report by them that was later retracted and amended, which claimed that Russia hacked the Ukrainian military.
“In connection with the emergence in some media reports which stated that the alleged “80% howitzer D-30 Armed Forces of Ukraine removed through scrapping Russian Ukrainian hackers software gunners,” Land Forces Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine informs that the said information is incorrect.
Ministry of Defence of Ukraine asks journalists to publish only verified information received from the competent official sources. Spreading false information leads to increased social tension in society and undermines public confidence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” the statement by the government read.
So, yes, the US government accepted information as fact from a company that even Ukraine, which is also desperate to paint Russia as an aggressor, wouldn’t accept.