A story in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) claims that Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutors may charge actual Russians for the “hack” of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) that occurred in early 2016. [emphasis added to quotes]
The Justice Department has identified more than six members of the Russian government involved in hacking the Democratic National Committee’s computers and swiping sensitive information that became public during the 2016 presidential election, according to people familiar with the investigation.
As usual, these are anonymous sources allegedly in the know about what is supposed to be a sensitive investigation involving national security. As usual, if true, this must be another illegal leak from Jeff Sessions’s supposedly professional DOJ.
When, if ever, is Sessions going to act upon all these illegal leaks? When, if ever, is President Trump going to see to it that Sessions acts upon all these illegal leaks, or else?
The WSJ sources claim that
Prosecutors and agents have assembled evidence to charge the Russian officials and could bring a case next year. … Discussions about the case are in the early stages … If filed, the case would provide the clearest picture yet of the actors behind the DNC intrusion.
Some DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents are “eager” to file charges in this case, even though it’s “highly unlikely” that any Russian operatives will ever actually be arrested.
Apparently publicly identifying the alleged “actors” seems more important, for some unstated reason, than actually having a trial with the so-called evidence placed under public scrutiny for all to see and weigh its credibility.
This question remains: How can the DOJ, the FBI, or anyone else assemble evidence that proves Russians hacked the DNC when the server in question has never, ever, ever been forensically examined by the FBI or DOJ investigators?
We know this for absolute fact because former FBI head James Comey testified under oath that the server was not even examined by investigators. He wouldn’t lie under oath, would he?
By now, the chain of evidence would have been corrupted, so even if the server has subsequently been examined, of what use would any “evidence” be to a real investigation?
It’s certainly in the best interest of the DNC and the Clinton campaign to keep the meme going that Russians were the hackers. That narrative came, in the first place, from a contractor hired by the DNC, which simply later told the FBI that “the Russians done it!” Comey took them at their word, apparently. Server sight unseen.
Then-head of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, called the contractor when this alleged hack occurred, instead of calling law enforcement. The contractor then installed software, supposedly to help find the hackers. At that point, any “evidence” on the server became corrupted. How easy is it to plant “evidence,” anyway?
Wikileaks has stated multiple times that Russians did not provide them with the allegedly hacked information that they published.
It’s easy to imagine why some in the FBI and DOJ (including the leakers to the WSJ) might want to publicly name some Russians, even if the FBI/DOJ know that nothing will come of it.
Maybe in fact because they know nothing will come of it.
If no Russians will ever be arrested, then no trial will ever take place. There will be no public exposure of the so-called evidence. We the People won’t be able to determine for ourselves how credible (or incredible) their “evidence” is.
Some cyber experts have already determined that there’s no way that foreign actors could have “hacked” the DNC server. According to these experts, the data was downloaded too quickly to have been stolen via a hack from a foreign country (or even from within our country). Instead, they have determined that the intrusion must have been an “inside job” where someone with access to the server downloaded data to an external device. This would be consistent with, say, disgraced employees who offloaded terabytes of information to a private server.
(For those previously made familiar with the cyber experts’ article that was published in The Nation in August, note the later addition of an editorial note backtracking, nearly apologizing, and trying to “explain” to their liberal readers–and the Deep State, too–why they dared to go against the “party line,” so to speak. It says volumes. It almost seems as if this may be why suddenly some in the FBI and DOJ want to publicly name some Russians, any Russians, just to debunk their former colleagues who originally questioned the thesis that the “Russians done it.”)
Imagine how easy it will be for experts to debunk the so-called evidence that the FBI and DOJ now apparently claim to have, if it’s exposed in a trial.
No, these Deep State actors want to name some Russians because that will lend credence to the meme that the Russians did it, which will lend credence to the meme that President Trump’s campaign “colluded” with the Russians. Their goal is not any trial or conviction.
The goal of the Deep State is to protect the guilty within their ranks (Uranium One? Collusion with the Clinton campaign?) and to provide grounds, no matter how specious, that may possibly be used to impeach President Trump.
For what it’s worth, RT has reported their own response to this bombshell news that the identities of the Russian hackers are known.
Maybe now would be a good time for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher to reveal his own evidence.