Crowdstrike is the IT company the DNC hired to investigate the hacking of their computer network. Crowdstrike was brought in because the DNC refused to give the FBI access to their computers.
Crowdstrike attributed the DNC hack to Russia simply because of the tools the hackers used, nothing else. But investigators have found those same 'Russian hacking tools' are available from a variety of sources.
This discovery nullifies significant portions of Crowdstrike's initial report. So there is absolutely no proof Russians hacked the DNC after all.Read more
“What was produced by the intelligence community at the request of Ms. Rice were detailed spreadsheets of intercepted phone calls with unmasked Trump associates in perfectly legal conversations with individuals.
The overheard conversations involved no illegal activity by anybody of the Trump associates, or anyone they were speaking with. In short, the only apparent illegal activity was the unmasking of the people in the calls.”
— Former U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova told The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative GroupRead more
Remember when Susan Rice took to the Sunday news shows and told America repeatedly that the deaths of those heroes in Benghazi, Libya were due to an 'internet video' no one had ever seen?
The fact that everyone knew she was brazenly lying didn't seem to phase her at all. Think about that.
Well now Susan Rice is back and she's trying to convince America that there was nothing 'inappropriate' about their surveillance of Donald Trump and his associates during the 2016 election campaign.
The same surveillance she previously said had never occurred...
Blogger DWebster analyzed Susan Rice's latest attempt at pulling the wool over America's eyes, with her 'weasel words', in this comment DWebster left at TheHill.com. Check it out!Read more
Meanwhile, the media has demanded no proof about the Russia nonsense, for which no evidence has been produced after almost a year of fishing by the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign (one and the same).
It is clear what happened. The Obama administration used the Russia ruse as an excuse to conduct surveillance on the campaign of the opposing party's presidential candidate.Read more
I'll throw my hat into the ring, as this plot rivals some of the best fiction I've ever read.
1. The Comey/Clinton "investigation" had its intended effect - it gave the appearance that Comey was an impartial participant at worst, and anti-Clinton as best. Pure, unadulterated smokescreen, and one of the best ones I've ever seen.
Of course, we know this wasn't remotely possible, as Comey's immediate family was financially benefitting from the Clinton Foundation. It was pure smokescreen because...Read more
I do not know what the facts are, yet. The facts that are apparent to me are the Media Assault on Trump, period.
1. Trump makes a seemingly unsubstantiated claim.
2. Trump refuses to back down on the claim (Usual for him)
3. Trump requests an investigation of his claims (NOT usual for him)
4. MSM and the entire establishment, rather than investigating claims, call Trump a liar and demand he retract and apologize.
The real story here—and it's frustrating, to say the least, that it is not emphasized—is that the actions of Attorney General Lynch, in dramatically relaxing the dissemination of raw surveillance data in the last few weeks of the Obama administration, cannot possibly have been anything but an act intended to unmask the identities of Trump et al. to the public.
Of course the media would rather commit mass suicide than investigate that crime.Read more
Here’s how I see it. There were illegally obtained intercepts of Trump communications (call them wiretaps, or intercepts, or whatever).
They show Trump did nothing wrong but they can be used to continue to push the narrative ‘Trump was involved with the Russians to hack the election’ and keep the Trump administration mired in a haze of innuendos and suspicion thereby damaging his administration.
But they have a problem.Read more
It was reported January that one of Obama's last executive orders included dissemination of NSA intelligence without restrictions of personally identifiable information? How is that not front and center in this discussion?
How can so many unambiguous statements be contrary to common sense and be refuted days or hours later and it not be concluded that EVERYONE involved is a fearless liar.Read more
The public is being played for a fool over this surveillance issue. Shock, shock that there might be surveillance of Trump and/or it would have been done by the Brits? Give me a break.
I have been an avid, voracious hobby reader of all things espionage for decades. I have read for decades of the little trick of the NSA/CIA and GCHQ/MI6, getting around domestic spying restrictions by having the other country's agencies doing the spying.Read more