Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
295,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 8:
Line 8: − + −
→2016 presidential election
:{{See also|United States Presidential Election, 2016|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
:{{See also|United States Presidential Election, 2016|Trump-Russia collusion hoax|Ukrainian collusion}}
George Eliason of ''Washingtonsblog'' investigated Crowdstrike’s claim that Russian's hacked the DNC.
George Eliason of ''Washingtonsblog'' investigated Crowdstrike’s claim that Russian's hacked the DNC.
<ref>[https://washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-say-hello-fancy-bear-2.html Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart- Say Hello to Fancy Bear], George Eliason, ''''Washingtonsblog'', January 3, 2017.</ref> Eliason raised several questions about Atlantic Council senior fellow Dmitri Alperovitch's [[conflict of interest]].
<ref>[https://washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/crowdstrikes-russian-hacking-story-fell-apart-say-hello-fancy-bear-2.html Russian Hacking Story Fell Apart- Say Hello to Fancy Bear], George Eliason, ''''Washingtonsblog'', January 3, 2017.</ref> Eliason raised several questions about Atlantic Council senior fellow Dmitri Alperovitch's [[conflict of interest]]. When questioned under oath, director [[James Comey]] admitted that the FBI had never investigated Crowdstrike's claim of Russians hacking the [[DNC]]. The unproven allegation was repeated by [[fake news]] [[mainstream media]] and incorporated into the Mueller report.
:*In the wake of the JAR-16-20296 dated December 29, 2016 about hacking and influencing the 2016 election, the need for real evidence is clear. The joint report adds nothing substantial to the October 7th report. It relies on proofs provided by the cyber security firm '''[[Crowdstrike]]''' that is clearly not on par with intelligence findings or evidence. At the top of the report is an “as is” statement showing this.
:*In the wake of the JAR-16-20296 dated December 29, 2016 about hacking and influencing the 2016 election, the need for real evidence is clear. The joint report adds nothing substantial to the October 7th report. It relies on proofs provided by the cyber security firm '''[[Crowdstrike]]''' that is clearly not on par with intelligence findings or evidence. At the top of the report is an “as is” statement showing this.