Three years of endless media coverage, an extensive investigation by Mueller’s team, people went to jail…….. and still, no proof.
I understand I am a mere citizen, in a red state, doomed to be ignored and insulted by those who feign indignation ANYONE would question their assumptions. Yet, here I am. Where’s the proof? I want to know and ALL Americans deserve to know.
Are we “racist” because we question the obvious?
Within our small group, we have searched for proof of Russians hacking the DNC or Podesta. We have tracked the claims made by CrowdStrike, the only ones allowed to review the DNC servers…. only to have their wild claims, debunked.
CrowdStrike based their conclusions on three fundamental elements:
1. We closely followed the CrowdStrike claim of D-30 Howitzer tracking software was hacked in a similar fashion by Cozy Bear and Fuzzy Bear……. it fell apart.
2. We followed the CrowdStrike Claim of a London Think Tank, IISS, which counts armaments/size of standing armies of all countries…. only to have IISS debunk CrowdStrike. (International Institute for Strategic Studies)
3. Russian language strings in the code…… debunked when we learned we could purchase a similar keyboard in Brooklyn for about $14.
In May of 2017, Crowdstrike backed off the basis for their findings…….. but their spox said it did not matter, because the “17 intel agencies” came to the same conclusion…….
…….. but the 17 intel agencies were relying on CrowdStrike for analysis. See what they did there?
BUT …. what if you learned there were no 17 intel agencies who reviewed the material and made an assessment? What if there were were only a few dozen hand-picked people from CIA/FBI and a few people from Clapper’s staff……. because that’s what happened.
We’re supposed to trust our intel community, right? Yet, given what has been revealed in the last 3yrs about political appointees from the Obama Admin and various partisan members of agencies, are we “racist” because we doubt Brennan, Clapper, and Comey?
What if you learned Peter Strzok was one of the hand-picked members of the team who WROTE the ICA………. Did you that little tidbit?
Why not put the issue to rest and provide the proof to all Americans? And don’t use the old excuse of “sources and methods”.
Keep in mind, head of the NSA, Mike Rogers, did not agree with Comey, Clapper, and Brennan, in the Assessment. AND a rebuttal opinion, which is normal for such reports, was not provided.
Yesterday, the NYTimes reported US Atty in CT, John Durham is interviewing CIA officials. If we read the article, instead of merely breezing past a headline, it looks as though Durham is questioning CIA officials on how they came to the conclusions about Russian hacking…. which appeared in two reports.
- December 29, 2016 Joint Analysis Report (JAR)
- January 7, 2017, Intel Community Assessment (ICA).
This is the final work product which was presented to President Obama, BIDEN, Susan Rice, et als, and then the salacious portions were presented to President Elect Trump.
Understand, Mueller’s investigation cleared President Trump of working with Russians, but the Mueller report BEGINS by assuming Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta —– for which we have no proof — and one set of Mueller’s indictments of Russians (the Russian troll farms) are falling apart in DC Court.
Allowing the narrative “Russians hacked the DNC” and “We were attacked by a hostile foreign power, and Trump was helped” allows the Dems to continue the premise, “Donald Trump is an illegitimate President”.
Bottom line: Russian may have hacked the DNC and successfully phished Podesta. The claim may or may not be true. As an American, I STILL don’t know. Do you?
If Durham’s investigation destroys the premise for the JAR and the ICA, and exposes the JAR and ICA as loose intel, twisted for a political goal, then the entire “Russian Hacking” story falls apart.
The MSM, DNC, Bad actors, know that few people will take the time to read the JAR and ICA.
We did.
Here are the links, again.
As civilians, I invite you to reread these reports and see for yourself. The information contained herein looks loose, suspicious, unclear.
See what you think, devoid of pundits opinions.
Judge for yourself.
Update: From Real Clear Investigations ( Link )
” Except that the ICA did not reflect the consensus of the intelligence community. Clapper broke with tradition and decided not to put the assessment out to all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies for review. Instead, he limited input to a couple dozen chosen analysts from just three agencies — the CIA, NSA and FBI.
Agencies with relevant expertise on Russia, such as the Department of Homeland Security, Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s intelligence bureau, were excluded from the process.
While faulting Clapper for not following intelligence community tradecraft standards that Clapper himself ordered in 2015, the House Intelligence Committee’s 250-page report also found that the ICA did not properly describe the “quality and credibility of underlying sources” and was not “independent of political considerations.” “
