Tag Archives: DNC

Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack, by Ray McGovern

There is still no evidence the Russians hacked the Democratic party, and the weight of the evidence suggests it was an inside job. From Ray McGovern at consortiumnews.com:

If you are wondering why so little is heard these days of accusations that Russia hacked into the U.S. election in 2016, it could be because those charges could not withstand close scrutiny. It could also be because special counsel Robert Mueller appears to have never bothered to investigate what was once the central alleged crime in Russia-gate as no one associated with WikiLeaks has ever been questioned by his team.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity — including two “alumni” who were former National Security Agency technical directors — have long since concluded that Julian Assange did not acquire what he called the “emails related to Hillary Clinton” via a “hack” by the Russians or anyone else. They found, rather, that he got them from someone with physical access to Democratic National Committee computers who copied the material onto an external storage device — probably a thumb drive. In December 2016 VIPS explained this in some detail in an open Memorandum to President Barack Obama.

On January 18, 2017 President Obama admitted that the “conclusions” of U.S. intelligence regarding how the alleged Russian hacking got to WikiLeaks were “inconclusive.” Even the vapid FBI/CIA/NSA “Intelligence Community Assessment of Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections” of January 6, 2017, which tried to blame Russian President Vladimir Putin for election interference, contained no direct evidence of Russian involvement.  That did not prevent the “handpicked” authors of that poor excuse for intelligence analysis from expressing “high confidence” that Russian intelligence “relayed material it acquired from the Democratic National Committee … to WikiLeaks.”  Handpicked analysts, of course, say what they are handpicked to say.

Never mind. The FBI/CIA/NSA “assessment” became bible truth for partisans like Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, who was among the first off the blocks to blame Russia for interfering to help Trump.  It simply could not have been that Hillary Clinton was quite capable of snatching defeat out of victory all by herself.  No, it had to have been the Russians.

Five days into the Trump presidency, I had a chance to challenge Schiff personally on the gaping disconnect between the Russians and WikiLeaks. Schiff still “can’t share the evidence” with me … or with anyone else, because it does not exist.

To continue reading: Still Waiting for Evidence of a Russian Hack

Advertisements

Just When You Thought ‘Russiagate’ Couldn’t Get Any Sillier…, by Thomas Knapp

Robert Mueller has uncovered precious little in his investigation, but the DNC wants to see what it can find, launching a lawsuit against Russia, the Trump campaign, and WikiLeaks that will almost certainly end up revealing more damaging information about the DNC and the Clinton campaign than about the defendants. From Thomas Knapp at antiwar.com:

April 20 is cannabis culture’s high holiday, and the Democratic National Committee celebrated it with fervor this year: Blaze up, get silly, file a bizarre lawsuit accusing the Russian government, Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, and transparency activist group WikiLeaks of conspiring to steal an election.

The suit confirms that after more than a year, special counsel Robert Mueller still hasn’t amassed the evidence required for a successful criminal prosecution, requiring proof “beyond a reasonable doubt.” A civil suit lowers that bar to “a preponderance of the evidence.”

But even that’s a long shot. The only credible evidence produced so far implicates only the Trump campaign, not the other two defendants, and only to the same extent that it likewise implicates the Clinton campaign.

That is, both campaigns admittedly tried to tap “Kremlin-connected” sources (defined as “anyone who’s ever been in Moscow”) for dirt on their opponents. Donald Trump Jr. met with a Russian lawyer in hopes of getting the goods on Hillary Clinton. The Clinton campaign commissioned a British former spy to work his Russian regime sources for salacious tidbits on Trump the Elder.

Central to the suit’s claims is alleged “Russian hacking” of the DNC’s servers, followed by an embarrassing release of emails showing, among other things, attempts by DNC to rig the 2016 primaries in favor of Clinton and against her main opponent, Bernie Sanders. Problems with the case:

First, the DNC refused to turn those servers over to the FBI for forensic analysis, instead hiring a friendly cybersecurity firm to announce the results it wanted announced.

Secondly, metadata in the “hacked” files released by “Guccifer 2.0” indicates transfer speeds consistent with an internal source at DNC copying the files directly to a USB drive rather than an external hacker accessing the servers.

Thirdly, while the subsequent announcement by the US intelligence community of its conclusions claims methods and IP addresses “consistent with” Russian state hackers, those methods and IP addresses are also “consistent with” every other type of hacker on Earth.

To continue reading: Just When You Thought ‘Russiagate’ Couldn’t Get Any Sillier…

 

DNC Ignores Its Own “Misconduct” In Its Lawsuit Against Russia, Trump, And Wikileaks, by Jon Hall

The DNC lawsuit is going to boomerang. From Jon Hall at fmshooter.com:

Last week, The Democratic National Committee (DNC) filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, the Russian government, and Wikileaks -alleging that the groups attempted to conspire and rig the 2016 election.

Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said of the suit:

[It’s] not partisan, it’s patriotic. If the occupant of the Oval Office won’t protect our democracy, Democrats will. It is our obligation to the American people. [Conspiring] is an act of unprecedented treachery: the campaign of a nominee for President of the United States in league with a hostile foreign power to bolster its own chance to win the presidency.

The DNC also claimed that the civil complaint was filed “to hold the defendants accountable for their misconduct and to ensure transparency.”

Misconduct? Transparency? The irony of the DNC using these words to describe their lawsuit should not be lost on anyone.

The DNC wasn’t exactly “transparent” when they destroyed their original servers and computers after falling victim to a hack, instead “replicating” all of the information to give to the FBI; and only allowing cybersecurity firm, Crowdstrike, to inspect their info at first.

And when it comes to “misconduct”, nothing fits the definition quite like the DNC’s rigging of primaries.  Bernie Sanders was pushed out of the primary race via superdelegates and Queen Hillary was coronated instead – it was her turn, after all.

Let us not forget the biggest and brewing scandal of them all – the story of the Awan Brothers, longtime Democratic aides that had access to a wealth of information on Capitol Hill and has supposedly given a USB of data to the Pakistani government.

Top Democrats have said nothing about Awan, yet the DNC posits they are fighting on behalf of transparency. Perhaps they should look in the mirror before making these egregious claims. Furthermore, Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 deleted e-mails are still undiscovered and lost – transparency be damned, all of Clinton’s e-mails were illegally deleted and she has yet to face any consequences from it.

Along with all of this, Wikileaks made an interesting point over the weekend…

In the context of a civil lawsuit, “discovery” is the process in which evidence can be obtained from the opposing party – including requests for answers to interrogatories, requests for production of documents, and requests for admissions and depositions.

To continue reading: DNC Ignores Its Own “Misconduct” In Its Lawsuit Against Russia, Trump, And Wikileaks

No Official Intel Used To Launch Russia Probe According To Controversial DOJ Document: Nunes, by Tyler Durden

It looks more and more like the Russia probe was launched from documents supplied by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, and nowhere else. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

After waiting eight months for the DOJ to turn over the “electronic communication” (EC) – the document which the FBI used to launch the original counterintelligence investigation against the Trump campaign, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) told Fox News that upon review – the EC reveals that no intelligence was used to launch the probe.

Nunes also touched on the fact that Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal pushed anti-Trump memos to the Obama State Department, written by Clinton “hatchet man” Cody Shearer and passed to Jonathan Winer, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State.

We now know that there was no official intelligence that was used to start this investigation. We know that Sidney Blumenthal and others were pushing information into the State Department. So we’re trying to piece all that together and that’s why we continue to look at the State Department,” Nunes told Maria Bartiromo on “Sunday Morning Futures.”

Nunes noted that no intelligence was shared with the U.S. from any of the members of the “Five Eyes” agreement – that being Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand and the USA.

We are not supposed to spy on each other’s citizens, and it’s worked well,” he said. “And it continues to work well. And we know it’s working well because there was no intelligence that passed through the Five Eyes channels to our government. And that’s why we had to see that original communication.”

This is relevant because the FBI says that the Trump investigation was kicked off after Australian diplomat Alexander Downer told the FBI that Trump campaign associate George Papadopoulos drunkenly admitted in a London pub that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. The New York Times reported last December that “Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.”

To continue reading: No Official Intel Used To Launch Russia Probe According To Controversial DOJ Document: Nunes

WikiLeaks To Countersue Democrats; “Discovery Is Going To Be Amazing Fun”, by Tyler Durden

The DNC’s suit against Russia, Wikileaks, and the Trump organization has to be one of the stupidest legal moves in years. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

WikiLeaks has hit back against a multimillion-dollar lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), announcing over Twitter that they are seeking donations for a counter-suit, noting “We’ve never lost a publishing case and discovery is going to be amazing fun,” along with a link which people can use to donate to the organization.

Discovery is a pre-trial process by which one party can obtain evidence from the opposing party relevant to the case. The Trump campaign, which is also named in the DNC filing, says the lawsuit will provide an opportunity to “explore the DNC’s now-secret records.”

Hours after the Washington Post broke the news of the lawsuit, President Trump tweeted “Just heard the Campaign was sued by the Obstructionist Democrats. This can be good news in that we will now counter for the DNC server that they refused to give to the FBI,” referring to the DNC email breach. Trump also mentioned “the Debbie Wasserman Schultz Servers and Documents held by the Pakistani mystery man and Clinton Emails.”

In a statement which goes into the various items they’ll be pursuing in court, the Trump campaign said the following:

While this lawsuit is frivolous and will be dismissed, if the case goes forward, the DNC has created an opportunity for us to take aggressive discovery into their claims of ‘damages’ and uncover their acts of corruption for the American people,” 

If this lawsuit proceeds, the Trump Campaign will be prepared to leverage the discovery process and explore the DNC’s now-secret records about the actual corruption they perpetrated to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Everything will be on the table, including:

How the DNC contributed to the fake dossier, using Fusion GPS along with the Clinton Campaign as the basis for the launch of a phony investigation.

Why the FBI was never allowed access to the DNC servers in the course of their investigation into the Clinton e-mail scandal.

• How the DNC conspired to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination over Bernie Sanders.

• How officials at the highest levels of the DNC colluded with the news media to influence the outcome of the DNC nomination.

• Management decisions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Donna Brazile, Tom Perez, and John Podesta; their e-mails, personnel decisions, budgets, opposition research, and more.

To continue reading: WikiLeaks To Countersue Democrats; “Discovery Is Going To Be Amazing Fun”

Lawyers For The DNC Argue That Primary Rigging Is Protected By The First Amendment, by Elizabeth Pos

The lawyers for the DNC don’t have a prayer of getting a “fraud” exception read into the First Amendment. From Elizabeth Vos at disobedientmedia.com:

The ongoing litigation of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit and the appeal regarding its dismissal took a stunning turn yesterday. The defendants in the case, including the DNC and former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, filed a response brief that left many observers of the case at a loss for words.

The document, provided by the law offices of the Attorneys for the Plaintiffs in the case, Jared and Elizabeth Beck, and appears to argue that if the Democratic Party did cheat Sanders in the 2016 Presidential primary race, then that action was protected under the first amendment. Twitter users were quick to respond to the brief, expressing outrage and disgust at the claims made by representatives of the DNC and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

The Defense counsel also argued that because of Jared Beck’s outspoken twitter posts, the plaintiffs were using the litigation process for political purposes: “For example, Plaintiffs’ counsel Jared Beck repeatedly refers to the DNC as “shi*bags” on Twitter and uses other degrading language in reference to Defendants.” Fascinatingly, no mention is made regarding the importance of First Amendment at this point in the document.

The defense counsel also took issue with Jared Beck for what they termed as: “…Repeatedly promoted patently false and deeply offensive conspiracy theories about the deaths of a former DNC staffer and Plaintiffs’ process server in an attempt to bolster attention for this lawsuit.”

This author was shocked to find that despite the characterization of the Becks as peddlers of conspiracy theory, the defense counsel failed to mention the motion for protection filed by the Becks earlier in the litigation process. They also failed to note the voice-modulated phone calls received by the law offices of the Becks which contained a caller-ID corresponding to the law offices of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a defendant in the case. In light of this context, the Becks hardly appear to be peddlers of conspiracy theory.

The DNC defense lawyers then argued that: There is no legitimate basis for this litigation, which is, at its most basic, an improper attempt to forge the federal courts into a political weapon to be used by individuals who are unhappy with how a political party selected its candidate in a presidential campaign.”

To continue reading: Lawyers For The DNC Argue That Primary Rigging Is Protected By The First Amendment

Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele? by Robert Barnes

This article is repetitive, perhaps annoyingly so, but the author makes a very good point. From Robert Barnes at lawandcrime.com:

Special Counsel Robert Mueller indicted foreign citizens for trying to influence the American public about an election because those citizens did not register as a foreign agent nor record their financial expenditures to the Federal Elections Commission. By that theory, when will Mueller indict Christopher Steele, FusionGPS, PerkinsCoie, the DNC and the Clinton Campaign? Mueller’s indictment against 13 Russian trolls claimed their social media political activity was criminal because: they were foreign citizens; they tried to influence an election; and they neither registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act nor reported their funding to the Federal Elections Commission.

First, if Mueller’s theory is correct, three things make Steele a criminal: first, he is a foreign citizen; second, he tried to influence an election, which he received payments to do (including from the FBI itself); and third, he neither registered as a foreign agent nor listed his receipts and expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Also, according to the FBI, along the way, Steele lied…a lot, while the dossier he disseminated contained its own lies based on bought-and-paid for smears from foreign sources reliant on rumors and innuendo.

Second, if Mueller’s theory is correct, three things make FusionGPS a criminal co-conspirator: it knew Steele was a foreign citizen; it knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election; and it knew, and facilitated, Steele neither registering as a foreign agent nor reporting his funding from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commission.

Third, if Mueller’s theory is correct, then three things make PerkinsCoie a potential target: it knew Steele was a foreign citizen; it knew, and paid, Steele to influence an election; and it knew, and facilitated, Steele neither registering as a foreign agent nor reporting his funding from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign to the Federal Election Commission, by disguising its receipt of payments from the Clinton campaign as a “legal expense.”

To continue reading: Does Mueller Indictment Mean Clinton Campaign Can Be Indicted for Chris Steele?