The Gateway Pundit previously reported after the 2016 election on Breitbart.com’s video showing Google execs crying like children after Hillary Clinton’s loss.
A video recorded by Google shortly after the 2016 presidential election reveals an atmosphere of panic and dismay amongst the tech giant’s leadership, coupled with a determination to thwart both the Trump agenda and the broader populist movement emerging around the globe.
We now know more about why these execs may have been crying after the election – Google is funded Crowdstrike!
In July 2015 Google invested $100 million into Crowdstrike –
Google Capital, the two-year-old growth equity arm of search giant Google (GOOG), announced its first security investment on Monday morning.
The fund has pumped $100 million into cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. It was joined by cloud computing company Rackspace (RAX), which is a customer, and the firm’s existing investors Accel and Warburg Pincus. The new infusion represents a Series C round for the Irvine, Calif.-based company, bringing its total funding raised to date to $156 million.
Crowdstrike admitted this on their website.
At about this same time, the media reported in February of 2015 (four months before Trump even announced running for POTUS) the Intel community was advising Congress and the White House on the issue and extent of Russian hacking and blaming Russian hacking (going as far back as 2012) on Ukraine aggression.
This information was no doubt based on claims made by Crowdstrike. A year later, the only firm that investigated the DNC emails that were released by WikiLeaks was Crowdstrike.
We reported on May 11, 2019, that Roger Stone and his legal team are requesting the report from Crowdstrike, the firm connected with the Deep State and tied to Google.
Roger Stone is trying to get the Crowdstrike Report. https://t.co/zl7rmEz2NU
— Semi-Casual Observer (@CasualSemi) May 10, 2019
Their position is that if the Mueller team and the FBI did not inspect the DNC server, then how can they know that the server was hacked. This logical argument makes sense.
The chain of custody of evidence is kind of a big deal. If the FBI didn't have custody of the server, and if they never examined it, they cannot verify what happened to the data on it. https://t.co/0PmN50YAmy
— Praying Medic (@prayingmedic) May 10, 2019
The Mueller team is fighting back against the Stone team and arguing that it is not necessary to see the documents that support that Russia hacked the DNC.
This is preposterous!
If it is "so obvious" the Russian government orchestrated the email disclosures of the 2016 campaign, why are the #Mueller leftovers in the #RogerStone case asking the court to relieve them of that very obligation, saying they should "not be required to prove" that very fact? pic.twitter.com/WdfSzSsvF2
— Robert Barnes (@Barnes_Law) May 10, 2019
No reports to date show that the DNC server was inspected by the Mueller team and the FBI. Since this is the case, there is no way the Mueller team can claim the server was hacked.
More people believe that the DNC had emails stolen by an insider and this is how the DNC emails reached WikiLeaks. The WikiLeaks team has stated numerous times that Russians did not provide them with the DNC emails.
Since there is no proof for the emails being hacked, the reports that Russians were involved in the collusion delusion evaporate.
This would and should destroy the entire Russian sham make-believe case. Our reporting has been confirmed by others in the Intelligence community.
After speaking w/ my @FBI sources & a @nytimes reporter with direct knowledge of the handling of the @DNC server it's true – there was no direct examination or physically custody of the DNC server – an "image" (i.e. copy) of the server was examined only: https://t.co/yDJKCYmUQC
— Tony Shaffer (@T_S_P_O_O_K_Y) May 12, 2019
We reported that former NSA employee and whistle blower, Bill Binney, has reviewed the information provided online by WikiLeaks and it shows that the data coming from the DNC was not hacked but rather copied to a disk or flash drive!
Binney says:
The problem with the Mueller report and the Rosenstein indictment is it’s all based on lies. I mean the fact they’re still lying about the, saying the DNC was hacked by the Russians and the Russians gave it to WikiLeaks.
Well, we had some of our people and our group, the VIPS, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals, look at the data that WikiLeaks posted on the DNC data. They actually posted the DNC data…
…that entire set of data was read to a thumb drive or a CD Rom then physically transported. Now this is what Kim Dotcom is saying. This is what Julian Assange basically was inferring. Others have been saying the same things.”
NSA Whistleblower and longtime intelligence analyst Bill Binney on continuation of #RussiaGate fever: "The problem with the Mueller Report & the Rosenstein indictment is it's based on lies."
FULL INTERVIEW: https://t.co/qiTOpvNd2q pic.twitter.com/tDSSSg0j0H
— Status Coup (@StatusCoup) June 3, 2019
It’s clear the DNC was not hacked and it’s more likely an insider like a Seth Rich copied the files to a disk drive and turned them over to Wikileaks. This is more likely than reports that the Russians hacked the DNC.
Hat tips D. Manny and Yaacov Apelbaum