CS edits

Why FBI Relied on Crowdstrike Examination of DNC Server after Alleged Russian Hack

"The FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers,” wrote DNC deputy communications director Eric Walker.
According to an unnamed intelligence official, no U.S. intelligence agency has performed its own forensics analysis on the hacked servers. FBI and Homeland Security relied on analysis by third-party security firm CrowdStrike, which investigated the breach for the DNC.
- thehill.com/policy/national-security/312767-fbi-never-examined-hacked-dnc-servers-report (01/04/17)

Even that narrative is questionable.

"[Former] FBI Director James Comey and [former] Homeland Security chief Jeh Johnson both testified to Congress about the DNC’s reluctance to cooperate in a case the Democrats nonetheless relentlessly hyped as tantamount to an act of war." A week before Comey’s testimony, the DNC even blamed the FBI for having never requested access. Yet an unnamed senior FBI official contradicted the DNC the very next day, telling The Hill that "The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed... This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information."
- amgreatness.com/2020/02/14/impeachment-was-cover-for-crowdstrike-and-democrats-got-what-they-wanted/ (2/14/2020)

In hindsight, isn't it obvious that the whole procedure was highly irregular, especially in light of the extreme sensitivity of the "Russian election interference" allegation? Who directed the FBI to disregard procedure and not insist on doing a forensic exam of the DNC server -- especially if the alleged "Russian hacking" was going to serve as a pretext to derail Donald Trump's legitimate presidency?

The hacking of the DNC server is what initiated the entire Trump/Russia hoax. How can we trust the DNC or Obama administration officials - contradicting each other's statements - on such an significant matter? Consider the timeline:
1. The DNC’s server was hacked.
2. WikiLeaks announced they were in possession of emails damaging to Clinton. They did not say how they obtained the emails, but denied that Russia provided them.
3. The DNC hired CrowdStrike, a private contractor, to examine their server; CrowdStrike concluded that the Russians were responsible.
4. The DNC refused to allow the FBI or Homeland Security anywhere near their server. The FBI accepted CrowdStrike’s unverified and redacted report and passed it on to Mueller's special counsel.
5. The New York Times wrote an article supporting the DNC’s version of the story. Then Comey's FBI leaked information to bolster this narrative and the Times ran a second story.
6. The DNC version of events got repeated so frequently and passionately that it became accepted as true.
7. In this way the DNC (a) deflected criticism of the content of the emails and (b) projected a narrative that Russians wanted to bolster Trump's election changes. This planted the first seeds of the Trump/Russian collusion narrative.
- Crowdstrike CEO: No Direct Evidence Russia Stole or Exfiltrated DNC Emails, redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/05/08/huge-crowdstrike-ceo-has-no-direct-evidence-russia-stoleexfiltrated-dnc-emails/
>add date of redstate.com article
>It would really illustrate the timeline nature if you include the dates of each numbered point.

In Congressional testimony, CrowdStrike’s CEO Shaun Henry could not state unequivocally that Russians hacked the DNC server or exfiltrated data from it. "There are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just don’t have the evidence that says it actually left."
- Testimony of Shaun Henry to House Intelligence Committee (12/5/17), https://t.co/1mQJBgBMbw?amp=1
Yet upon this thinnest of predicates was founded a $???M special counsel that failed to find wrongdoing by the President, an  impeachment proceeding that concluded no wrongdoing by the President, and a relentless media narrative that for 3.5 years has attempted to unseat a duly-elected President.
>I have heard and read $40 million, need to find direct citation
>Include link directly to Henry's testimony

Bottom line: While we do know that the 2016 Clinton Campaign and DNC paid for the discredited Steele Dossier, we still don't know what data the DNC server held that the DNC hoped to hide from the FBI -- data which remains hidden to this day. We don't know exactly what acts of wrongdoing the Obama administration hoped to conceal from their employers, the American people. However, we do know that everyone in Mr. Obama's cabinet used private Gmail addresses for surreptitious email communication, to avoid federal records retention laws. We do know that the Steele dossier (which the FBI certified to the Court as reliable, and upon which the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) relied in granting warrants that legitimized spying on candidate and President Donald Trump) contained nothing more than rumors and innuendo, and had been discredited by the FBI itself. After the FBI's stunning malfeasance was revealed, Judge Boasberg censured the FBI, suggesting that prior cases might be overturned due to the FBI's demonstrated lack of credibility. We do know that when the Crossfire Razor investigation regarding General Michael Flynn was about to be closed for lack of evidence, the FBI's Peter Strzok overrode agency decisions and insisted it remain open so they could frame Trump's incoming National Security Advisor, Flynn.
>should state what Judge Boasberg's position was (head of the FISC)
>add Lt. Gen. Michael before Flynn
Three years later, there are still more unanswered questions than facts. We must continue pressing for answers to explain the inexplicable behavior of the DNC, the FBI, and the Obama administration.