Crowdstrike. I’m guessing you’ve heard that name. But what do you really know about it, and what involvement, if any, did it have in the 2016 election?
If you rely on mainstream media for your news, it’s a good bet yhatall you know is Crowdstrike’s involvement is unsubstantiated/debunked.
Is it? Don’t be so sure.
From Oleg Atbashian’s article for frongpagemag.com, we have this:
In the last few days, media talking heads have been saying the word “CrowdStrike” a lot, defining it as a wild conspiracy theory originating in Moscow
Let’s look at the facts:
Fact 1. In 2016 the DNC hired the Ukrainian-owned firm CrowdStrike to analyze their server and investigate a data breach.
Fact 2. CrowdStrike experts determined that the culprit was Russia.
Fact 3. The FBI never received access to the DNC server, so the Russian connection was never officially confirmed and continues to be an allegation coming from the DNC and its Ukrainian-owned contractor.
Fact 4. Absent the official verdict, other theories continue to circulate, including the possibility that the theft was an inside job by a DNC employee, who simply copied the files to a USB drive and sent it to WikiLeaks.
Now that Trump had asked the newly elected Ukrainian president Zelensky to look into CrowdStrike during that fateful July phone call, the media all at once started telling us that “CrowdStrike” is a code word for a conspiracy theory so insane that only Trump could believe in it, which is just more proof of how insane he is.
But if Trump had really said what Mr. Wallace and the media claim, Ukrainians would be the first to call him on it and the impeachment would’ve been over by now. Instead, Ukrainians back Trump every step of the way.
Does that generate a little interest on your part? Maybe a lot of interest? I hope so. Because it should.
Simply stated, any discussion of foreign interference in the 2016 election that doesn’t include Crowdstrike, doesn’t honestly discuss the 2016 election.
I await the Horowitz and Durham reports.