USG's Bizarre Change of Position in the Roger Stone Case by Larry C Johnson

There is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that supports the US Government's assertion that the Russian Government hacked the DNC. In fact, the forensic computer evidence that is available indicates that the emails from the DNC were downloaded onto something like a thumb drive.

There also is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that the Russians passed/delivered the DNC emails to Julian Assange/Wikileaks. There are only two ways to get DNC emails into the hands of Wiki people--an electronic transfer or a physical/human transfer. That's it.

And here is what we know for certain. First, since Edward Snowden absconded with the NSA's family jewels with the help of Wikileaks, U.S. and British intelligence assets have been monitoring every single electronic communication to and from Wikileaks/Julian Assange. They also have been conducting surveillance on all personal contacts with Assange and other key members of the Wikileaks staff.

Given these facts you would think it would be easy for Robert Mueller to explain how the Russians got their hands on the DNC emails and then passed them on to Wikileaks. But it is not easy because the foundation of the case against the Russians rests on assumptions and beliefs. No solid facts.

To reiterate a point I have raised in previous posts, the only entity to have forensic access to the DNC computers, i.e. CrowdStrike, is on the record in the person of the CrowdStrike CEO, Dimitri Alperovitch admitting they don't know how the Russians got access.

Alperovitch told Washington Post Reporter Ellen Nakashima on June 14, 2016 the following:

CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with “spearphishing” emails. These are communications that appear legitimate — often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted — but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said.

If CrowdStrike actually had conducted a legitimate forensic examination of the DNC server/servers then they absolutely would have had "hard evidence."

Then, 13 months later, we have FBI Director Jim Comey admitting that the FBI relied on CrowdStrike for its "evidence." Jim Comey testified to the House Intelligence Committee in March 2017 and stated the following:

“we never got direct access to the machines themselves. The DNC in the spring of 2016 hired a firm that ultimately shared with us their forensics from their review of the system."

Now take a look at a very significant reversal of the US Government's position in the case against Roger Stone. On 20 June 2019, US Attorney Jessie Liu filed a motion attempting to rebut the argument presented by Stone's attorneys that there was no supporting evidence for the claim that Russia hacked the DNC. Here are the key snippets from her filing:

As the government has argued (Doc. 122, at 6, 9, 14), Russia’s role in the DNC hack is not material to the eighteen findings of probable cause that Stone appears to be challenging. . . . The  government produced the CrowdStrike reports because the Indictment in this case referenced, as background, CrowdStrike’s statements about the DNC hack. Stone’s statement that the government has no other evidence is not only irrelevant to this proceeding but is also mistaken.

Yet, when you read the original indictment, Roger Stone was put in the cross hairs because he was allegedly communicating with Wikileaks/Julian Assange about the DNC emails. And those emails are identified in the indictment as "stolen." The Government is hoping to nail Stone on the charge of "lying" to Congress. Good luck with that. 

It is a horrible irony that Stone is being persecuted with prosecution based on an even bigger lie--i.e., the Russians hacked the DNC. Russia did not hack the DNC. Let's hope that Stone's lawyers get a chance to demand the US Government put up the evidence or shut up.

Alperovitch told Washington Post Reporter Ellen Nakashima on June 14, 2016 the following:

CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with “spearphishing” emails. These are communications that appear legitimate — often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted — but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said.

Comments

[Fred]

So hearsay evidence is the foundation of the governments case. What a wonderful evolution in social(ist) justice we are undergoing. Not quite the change we were hoping for in 2008.

[John Andrew Kociuba]

Most egregious abuse of American jurisprudence in U.S. History!

[Factotum]

Story to be continued...........................good summation so far. Put crack prosecutor Kamala Harris on this case now.

[John Merryman]

It's not like denialism doesn't have a long history. One generally to the detriment of those in denial.
Though there are still some flat earthers still around.

[pretzelattack]

it has absolutely nothing to do with socialism. robert mueller is not a socialist, and the dnc and donors driving this horsecrap are not socialists, either.

[pretzelattack]

who are you referring to? i would hope it isn't the author.

[JerseyJeffersonian]

Last thing "justice" dept. wants is discovery probing into the "hacking", Crowdstrike's blather, the feebs behavior re Crowdstrike. Could unravel several prosecutions & pose inconvenient questions about their role in this.

[ed]

Kamala Harris? (https://www.facebook.com/KamalaHarris/videos/the-root-senator-harris-on-russia-interference/326556747910098/ ). I wonder.

[casey]

Amen, brother. I hope Seth Rich gets some justice, though I know that is highly unlikely,

[Fred]

Sure, using the instruments of state power to spy on political opponents, charge them and thier supporters with dubious charges and denigrating them in the media are not standard operating procedures in socialist run governments. On the off topic statement let me respond that I am heartened to hear that the DNC and donors are not socialists; though I wonder where they will get a candidate for 2020 since all of the top 20 who just debated one another sure seem to be.

[Small_buggy]

Not admittedly

[Damien petty]

The corrupt FBI know Russia didn’t hack the DNC. The fact they never looked at the DNC Server should be brought up every time some liberal politician blames Russia for the election of Trump

[Jim Ticehurst]

larry...you are aging well...But Right as usual..Prime Rib..Lots of Meat...I think from looking at it..The FBI and Mueller and State Department and Obama Justice Department Knew that China hacked Hillarys Home Computer in 2015...The Cjinese were angry about The Indictment of Five of its TOP Hackers in 2014..Angry about the TPP.So they knew about that...All The Government stolen data,,,So they FBI gave Hillary time to Destroy Data..Computers Phone etc that would PROVE the Chinese Hacking/..And AAre Blaming the Russians for it..I Think That's The Dirty Underwear Exposure they are afaid of...Keep it up Larry..no Quarter Mate... If I read Right..The Hillary date went to DCLEAKS First

[Roger Stone]

Help me at StoneDefenseFund.com
Roger Stone

[h]

Rep Louis Gohmert did in fact confirm, once and for all, that every single email in/out of Hillary's computer, including attachments etc were scooped up by the Chinese. He confirmed this dangler last week in a report by The Epoch Times, Jeff Carlson - "Far more of a threat than the Russians were to our last election or the Chinese were who actually hacked Hillary Clinton's personal server as our intel community established without any question, even though the FBI refused to ever examine uh the evidence. So, no question China was involved."

The link to the Gohmert interview is embedded in this article. He states 2it matter a factly right around 2:20 - https://www.theepochtimes.com/china-hacked-clintons-email-server-congressman-confirms_2980965.html

[h]

Another interesting nugget from the gov's response to Stone's motion is in a footnote "Although the reports produced to the defendant are marked as 'draft,' counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the government that they are the latest version of the report produced."

The FBI/DOJ never recv'd a final CrowdStrike report. Yet, the former Dir of the FBI wants the public to believe this draft of a draft report is legitimate evidence to be used against Stone. Puhleaze.

Contrast the hacking nonsense to the growing body of evidence pointing towards a 'leak.' Assange and Craig Murray have consistently stated that the DNC material was leaked. Couple their statements with the only nonpolitical forensic evidence made available to date from Binney, Johnson and Et Al plus the fact that there was indeed correspondence b/w Seth Rich and Assange.

So yeah, after three years it's time to take a garden hose to that smoldering 'hack' fire and to ignite a roaring fire under the 'leaked' evidence. May Stone's lawyers be successful.

[Factotum]

Suspect Mueller Team did not "indict" because Trump was a sitting President; but rather they knew they could not take him to trial and prove their case, without opening other investigations they really, really wanted closed. Just like Stone is pursuing. Mueller Report sounds more like an after the fact deep state CYA report, than anything else. Salt it with "facts" one may need later in other settings.

[The Twisted Genius]

h, I also think Clinton's email server was hacked by the Chinese at the very least. It was just too lucrative a target to pass up. And if the FBI said they have evidence of that, I have no reason to doubt it. OTOH, there is zero forensic evidence in the public arena of this. By Larry Johnson's reasoning, it never happened. There is also zero forensic evidence in the public arena that the OPM was hacked by the Chinese or anyone else. It's just as likely that never happened either.

[The Twisted Genius]

h, although CrowdStrike concluded it was Russian hackers who hit the DNC, they never offered any definitive proof. They just noticed the similarities between methods and tools used to hack the DNC to methods and tools used in other hacks. This circumstantial attribution is rightly criticized by many. Real attribution is made through much more aggressive hack back and collection methods as illustrated in the indictment of the GRU 12. The evidence cited in that indictment clearly did not come from CrowdStrike. They don't have that kind of capability. Of course neither the DOJ or IC are releasing the raw intel backing up their claims in the GRU 12 indictment so doubt will continue.

The claim that a NSA response to a FOIA request proves there was correspondence between Assange and Rich is based on a wild leap of faith. The FOIA request was wide ranging asking for much more than Assange-Rich correspondence. That request asked for anything "referencing or containing communications between Seth Rich and any of the following: Julian Assange, Wikileaks, Kim Dotcom, Aaron Rich, Shawn Lucas, Kelsey Mulka, Imran Awan, Abid Awan, Jamal Awan, Hina Alvi, Rao Abbas, and/or any person or entity outside of the United States." It also asked for any records referencing financial transaction between Rich and the above individuals/entities and any communications from or to any member of Congress or Congressional committee referencing Rich or any of the above named individuals/entities. This is the wide ranging request that resulted in finding 15 documents (32 pages) that NSA still wouldn't release because of classification. These documents could include Assange talking up the Seth Rich conspiracy, but we don't know from the NSA response.

As for the Roger Stone case, I'm not following it and have no real opinion. He seems an odd, shifty character, but there's nothing illegal in that.

[Factotum]

Yes, the very curious Awan family of "tech experts" from Pakistan hired by a slew of Democrats. Good to see them back in the mix. Their entire pattern of facts, including the alleged computers and data left in a rental unit, before they quickly left the country when all of this was breaking - so many loose threads that need to be tied up.

[harry]

Yes. Good point.

[h]

The Twisted Genius - might you expand on your last thought 'It's just as likely that never happened either.'

It seems to suggest that since there is no forensic evidence in the public sphere then how can we, the public, be certain the OPM hack and Hillary's server being compromised even occurred. Just want to be sure I'm intuiting your last statement correctly. Thanks in advance.

[TomM]

Could anyone display a legitimate website for donations to Roger Stone? I am reluctant to trust whatever appears in my email solicitations because I don't really know if they're authentic

[Steven Zore]

Globalist How's that?

[Vic Mackey]

Well, actually, the DNC has been taken captive by socialists. The leading Democratic candidate for President is an avowed lifelong socialist who joins and quits the party in between elections.

Mueller, on the other hand, represents the Bushite RINO old boys network, formerly known as the Rockefeller Republicans, who currently share common cause with the left's desire to ruin and oust Trump and destroy populism. The enemy of their enemy has become their friend. That's how Mueller ended up with 2 dozen Democrat lawyers in his special persecutor's office.