Telling RussiaGate Transcripts
— Missing the big story, corporate media selectively choose what to report relative to recent release of House Intelligence Committee transcripts.
Updates
5/27/22 Update: Alpha Bank & Trump Tower Conspiracy
May 11, 2020 UPDATE: How did DNC emails get to Wikileaks?
Aaron Maté, in Pushback of The Grayzone, analyzes the Russian hacking and collusion allegations:
Original Article
Former CIA analyst and government critic, Ray McGovern, who once delivered presidential daily briefings, dissected what should have been the biggest news story from the recent release of the House Intelligence Committee transcripts:
Observe Crowdstrike executive Shawn Henry describing how DNC documents were set up to become exfiltrated (extracted) by the Russians, but note he provides no evidence and states that he can’t provide any evidence that material was actually exfiltrated from the DNC system.
Conclusion? There is no proof Russians hacked the DNC computer system! Not only did the FBI fail to examine the DNC computer system but it also failed to demand that Crowdstrike present its final report on the matter.
Crowdstrike’s first report was preliminary and produced only a “moderate degree of confidence” of Russian hacking by the FBI, CIA and NSA agencies. Significantly, this report opened the door and set the table for numerous future Russiagate allegations, bombshell after bombshell ad nauseam almost all supported by a parade of anonymous sources. The American public got dosed!
Crowdstrike’s second report produced a “high degree of confidence” by the FBI and CIA, however, the NSA — the agency most likely to know — importantly maintained its “moderate degree” opinion. The second report was professionally and academically refuted, much of it retracted. However, the media failed to adequately report the refutation or the retraction.
The Crowdstrike reports were morphed into the infamous Christopher Steele dirty dossier to help create the Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) of Jan. 6, 2017 whereby Russians were formally accused of hacking the DNC and colluding to influence the 2016 presidential election.
When the ICA report was originally released to the public it was presented sensationally by the media as the product of a review of 17 US intelligence agencies. In reality, the ICA was written by only a few handpicked agents from three intel agencies. Clearly, the public was hoodwinked on the gravity of the matter. Even Joe Biden, in one of the recent Democratic debates, claimed the ICA report was compiled by 17 agencies, as have many advantage-seeking politicians and pundits.
Crowdstrike failed to complete its third and final report, thus leaving the public’s consciousness hanging, for nearly three years, in a belief Russians hacked the DNC. The US corporate media rolled right along with the accusations while adding even more sensationalism into the controversial mix.
[NOTE: Future disclosures proved Crowdstrike’s technical services and Steele’s dossier (produced under the auspices of Fusion GPS) were contracted by the DNC and Clinton Campaign.]
DNC Emails Were Leaked, not Hacked
The below chart shows when Crowdstrike installed into the DNC computer system its Falcon protect and prevent measures. What’s mysterious is the fact that a sizable number of the DNC emails were acquired after the Falcon installation. Clearly, if Crowdstrike was all it was cracked up to be, no further DNC documentation should become exposed (note, in the chart below when the last DNC emails were acquired).
Interesting Questions:
- Were the DNC email exposures a product of an inside leak onto a thumb drive and then passed on to the Wikileaks journal for publication?
- Why did the FBI not examine the DNC computer system itself and why did it rely solely on Crowdstrike, which held a vested interest given it was contracted by the DNC?
- Why were key and crucial witnesses like Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange, former UK ambassador Craig Murray and internet mogul Kim Dotcom never questioned?
- Where is Professor Joseph Mifsud?
- Has the media behaved the way it has in order to cloak its guilt over helping to create Trump into the monster he has become? Keep in mind, Trump was never properly vetted before, during and shortly after he made his presidential announcement. The Wikileaks publication proving Trump was a pied piper candidate for Clinton, the failure to adequately report on the extent of Trump’s known mob associations and the veterans scheme he used to promote his speech aboard the USS Iowa are but a few examples. It’s almost like Trump was encouraged by corporate media to move to the top of the crowded GOPwinger pack, this in a belief he’d lose to the penultimate insider Hillary Clinton.
- Do folks realize had Clinton won in 2016 and become re-elected in 2020, America would have had a Bush or a Clinton at the top of 10 of the 11 most recent presidential administrations (president, VP or secretary of state)? Had Clinton won in 2016, a Bush or a Clinton would have been president in four of five administrations. No wonder why Trump won. It had nothing to do with the Russians!
