Hey dumbfuck, what part of the āvictimā did NOT consider Stoneās words a threat do you not understand? Never been proven Mule-er the Senile wanted Stone to lie? Mule-er is a corrupt asshole who should have been given life in prison years ago. Anything he claims about Trump or his associates can be taken as garbage.
The odds of that are about 1000 to 1.
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.thehill.com
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mondwww.redstate.com
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mond
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Yes I'm sure that was Mueller's thinking. Where did you churn that conspiracy theory from? Laughable.
None of it to do with election 2016 which is what Mueller was supposed to investigate and evidence gathered was from FISA warrants obtained based on false pretenses.Convicted on seven felony counts. Just like a typical friend of Trump. Manifort, Cohen, Gates, Flynn. Rouge's gallery beloved by morons!Man was a casualty of Mueller witch hunt that never should have happened.
Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence, days before prison term set to begin
The White House announced Friday that President Trump signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting the "unjust sentence" of Roger Stone, just days before the longtime political operative is slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special...www.foxnews.com
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mond
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Yes I'm sure that was Mueller's thinking. Where did you churn that conspiracy theory from? Laughable.
Itās in the court filings for the case. Not a conspiracy. A legal argument. And it should be obvious.
After what Stone did to this country, he deserves to have a big, black cellmate.Man was a casualty of Mueller witch hunt that never should have happened.Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence, days before prison term set to begin
The White House announced Friday that President Trump signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting the "unjust sentence" of Roger Stone, just days before the longtime political operative is slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special...
An Oval Office blow job was a far piece from an Arkansas land deal. But there weren't so many ancillary convictions straight out of a corrupt campaign.None of it to do with election 2016 which is what Mueller was supposed to investigate and evidence gathered was from FISA warrants obtained based on false pretenses.Convicted on seven felony counts. Just like a typical friend of Trump. Manifort, Cohen, Gates, Flynn. Rouge's gallery beloved by morons!Man was a casualty of Mueller witch hunt that never should have happened.Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence, days before prison term set to begin
The White House announced Friday that President Trump signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting the "unjust sentence" of Roger Stone, just days before the longtime political operative is slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special...
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mond
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Yes I'm sure that was Mueller's thinking. Where did you churn that conspiracy theory from? Laughable.
Itās in the court filings for the case. Not a conspiracy. A legal argument. And it should be obvious.
Legal argument based on FISA warrants obtained under false pretenses.
www.businessinsider.com
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mond
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Describe the role of Concord Management in the proceedings
Concord Management was a front company and bankrolled some of the IRC activities.
Does Fitton explain why Stone's prosecution was inappropriate? Because the facts of the matter are pretty much indisputable. There's so much documentation demonstrating Stone lied and then tried to cover it up, that few people actually try to argue his innocence.
You're purposely distorting the truth.
"Source close to the investigation says FBI didn't need the DNC servers because it already had the forensic data from upstream collection."
The bureau made āmultiple requests at different levels,ā according to Comey, but ultimately struck an agreement with the DNC that a āhighly respected private companyā would get access and share what it found with investigators.
Comey: DNC denied FBIās requests for access to hacked servers
The DNC and the bureau have been quibbling in public reports over whether the request was made.
Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
"Interesting admission in Crowdstrike CEO Shaun Henryās testimony. Henry is asked when āthe Russiansā exfiltrated the data from DNC. Henry: āWe did not have concrete evidence that the data was exfiltrated from the DNC, but we have indicators that it was exfiltrated.ā
More from Crowdstrikeās Shaun Henry: āThere are times when we can see data exfiltrated, and we can say conclusively. But in this case it appears it was set up to be exfiltrated, but we just donāt have the evidence that says it actually left.ā
This takes me back to the qualified, ambiguous Mueller language I highlighted in my @RCInvestigates report āCrowdstrikeout.ā The attribution of DNC hacking to Russia is tentative & appears at least partly based on inference, not hard evidence.
Recall that the Mueller report, in recounting the alleged Russian theft of emails, added the qualifier that the GRU āofficers *appear* to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments.ā Perhaps they werenāt sure, because Crowdstrike wasnāt either.
Henry: āSir, I was just trying to be factually accurate, that we didnāt see the data leave, but we believe it left, based on what we saw.ā
Thereās a quote from Assange ā maybe someone can find it, I canāt rn ā saying that itās possible that many different actors, including state actors, got inside the DNC system, but that doesnāt mean they actually stole (aka exfiltrated) the emails Wikileaks later released.
To be clear, Crowdstrike says it believes Russians hacked into DNC. But it admits to not having direct evidence that Russians actually exfiltrated the emails from DNC. This would track w/ what Assange has said: Russia may have hacked DNC, but they didnāt provide stolen emails."
I want to stress what a pretty big revelation this is. Crowdstrike, the firm behind the accusation that Russia hacked & stole DNC emails, admitted to Congress that it has no direct evidence Russia actually stole/exfiltrated the emails. More from Crowdstrike president Shaun Henry:
Huge: Crowdstrike CEO Has NO Direct Evidence Russia Stole/Exfiltrated DNC Emails
DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., speaks during a Florida delegation breakfast, Mond
Overstated and out of context. There was ample information and evidence that demonstrated it was Russia beyond any reasonable doubt. Far more information and evidence was provided by law enforcement that went way beyond the capabilities that CrowdStrike had available to them.
Although CrowdStrike didnāt watch the files be exfiltrated, the DoJ was able to review traffic logs which demonstrated such.
Factually false
Itās in the Mueller report, troll. They tracked the data movement from the DNC servers to the Russianās AWS server in Arizona.
You have no facts.
I seriously doubt that the Mueller team had access to the DNC server. We know the FBI was not allowed access.
And the fact that Mueller never heard of GPS Fusion cast doubt that his team even conducted an investigation.
There is one thing I would bet on.....the DNC Server has been obliterated.
Access to the actual servers isnāt necessary and would be highly unusual. This is a cyber crime. The evidence isnāt housed on a physical device. Itās data, which the DoJ most certainly did have access to.
The idea that his team didnāt conduct an investigation and made up their whole report on the hacking is beyond ridiculous.
You do realize neither Crowdstrike nor the FBI investigated the Podesta emails and all Crowdstrike investigated was the hack?
Not true.
Crowdstrike didn't investigate Podesta's hack, but the DoJ did. The results of that investigation are on page 37 of the Mueller report. They tracked the spearphishing campaign that they used to get Podesta's emails back to the GRU.
Yeah, that was the basis for indicting those 12 Russians who will never appear in a U.S. court. When their lawyer showed up for the trial, Mueller had no case to present, so we know that whole thing is bogus. Mueller has no evidence for any of the accusations he makes. None.
The lawyer that appeared before court was representing Concord Management, not āthe 12 Russiansā. The case was not presented because Mueller was not interested in a dog and pony show since the defendant never presented before the court and remained outside our jurisdiction.
So youāre clearly misinformed
Describe the role of Concord Management in the proceedings
Concord Management was a front company and bankrolled some of the IRC activities.
A front for who?
Really, Billo? I think Mr. Stone was destroyed because he knows President Trump and friends him.After what Stone did to this country, he deserves to have a big, black cellmate.Man was a casualty of Mueller witch hunt that never should have happened.Trump commutes Roger Stone's sentence, days before prison term set to begin
The White House announced Friday that President Trump signed an Executive Grant of Clemency commuting the "unjust sentence" of Roger Stone, just days before the longtime political operative is slated to report to prison to serve more than three years for charges stemming from former Special...
Why do you think he lied?
