Connect with us

Russian Hacking Of DNC Server Allegation Seems To Fall Apart, Contradicted By the Official Timeline, Here’s The Analysis [Opinion]


Russian Hacking Of DNC Server Allegation Seems To Fall Apart, Contradicted By the Official Timeline, Here’s The Analysis [Opinion]

OPINION| Lawrence David|  ICYMI| A review of the timeline surrounding the determination by Crowdstrike and the government’s claim as to what triggered the Trump-Russia collusion investigation reveals we might have missed an important anomaly in the official story.

The official narrative says that the investigation of Donald Trump’s possible ties to Russia began following a May 2016 meeting between Australian diplomat Andrew Downer and Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos.

There were conflicting reports that that meeting took place either on May 6th or May 10th, 2016.

Here’s the excerpt from Special Counsel Weissmann/Mueller report that describes the events. Note Weissmann assigns a meeting date of May 6th, 2016:


There’s a potential problem with that date, though.  Multiple sources state that a report citing Russia as the party that hacked the DNC server wasn’t released until more than a month later.

That report was compiled by a cyber forensics firm operating under the name Crowdstrike.

(Buzzfeed) The FBI did not examine the servers of the Democratic National Committee before issuing a report attributing the sweeping cyberintrusion to Russia-backed hackers, BuzzFeed News has learned.

Six months after the FBI first said it was investigating the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s computer network, the bureau has still not requested access to the hacked servers, a DNC spokesman said. No US government entity has run an independent forensic analysis on the system, one US intelligence official told BuzzFeed News.

“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (DC) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” Eric Walker, the DNC’s deputy communications director, told BuzzFeed News in an email.

The FBI has instead relied on computer forensics from a third-party tech security company, CrowdStrike, which first determined in May of last year that the DNC’s servers had been infiltrated by Russia-linked hackers, the U.S. intelligence official told BuzzFeed News.

Multiple independent sources have cited June 14th, 2016 as the date that Crowdstike’s report was released, see here and here:

This timeline raises a critical question about Andrew Downer’s assertion that Papadopoulos told him the Russians had ‘dirt’ on Hillary in the form of her emails.  

According to a December 30, 2017 report in the NY Times. Papadopoulos allegedly learned of the emails In late April of 2016, at a London hotel, where he met with Joseph Mifsud and was told by Mifsud that he had just learned from high-level Russian officials in Moscow that the Russians had “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton. 

If Crowdstike’s report wasn’t released until two months after Mifsud’s meeting with Papadopoulos, there’s only two ways Mifsud could tell Papadopoulos that Russia had hacked the DNC server.  

Someone with inside information had to have passed the story to Mifsud.  And Mifsud, who had never met Papadopoulos prior to that April meeting, would have had to have had a reason for reaching out to him.

Either Mifsud was a Russian asset – something the intelligence community has insisted was the case – or he was a Western intelligence asset sent to feed the information to Papadopoulos.  

In his unusually voluminous report, Special Counsel Robert Mueller cited no evidence that Mifsud had any connection to Russia’s intelligence services.  And, when questioned about Mifsud during a congressional hearing, Mueller demurred.

Casting further doubt on the Crowdstrike conclusion that Russia had hacked the DNC server comes from multiple sources:

Consortium News:

Executive Summary

Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computer. After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device.

When lawyers representing Roger Stone requested the full Crowdstrike report on the DNC hack the DOJ response included rather significant admission. Not only did the FBI not review the DNC server or cloud data,  the FBI/DOJ never even saw the final Crowdstrike report. (H/T CTH)

And yet, the DOJ and the FBI embarked on a three-year-long witch hunt relying on that report and never interviewing Julian Assange who emphatically denied any involvement with the Russians or any other state actor.

Meanwhile, the murder of Seth Rich, a DNC IT specialist remains unsolved and the entire Russian election interference narrative continues to rely on Crowdstrike’s uncorroborated assertion that Russia hacked the DNC server.

That server was the subject of the phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that triggered the latest impeachment drive:

Now does the intelligence community’s ridiculous promotion of second-hand information from someone who heard something about that phone call even after President Trump released the transcript of the call, make sense?

That call, coupled with US Attorney General William Barr and US Attorney John Durham having possession of Joseph Mifsud’s cell phones explain the more recent all out attempt by the Mockingbird Media to convince you of their latest ‘Trump must be removed narrative.’ H/t The GateWay Pundit

Continue Reading

Father, Husband, Son. Mark is just a regular guy from a blue color family who writes opinion articles. Sidney, a victim of ideological based social media censorship, knows first hand just how dangerous Silicon Valley's unchecked power over who gets to speak, and be heard, on the internet is and prays daily that the 1st Amendment will once again reign supreme. To this end he has co-founded, a social media site where the 1st Amendment is the Community Standard. Mark has Economics & Political Science degrees from Rutgers University.

Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

To Top