Relevance: The Awan brothers, the DNC, and Seth Rich's death are central to #pizzagate. Finding out who was involved in his alleged murder will blow the lid off pizzagate
.
Here's the link to a breaking story:
http://truepundit.com/dnc-payments-to-it-guru-crowdstrike-coincide-with-seth-rich-and-shawn-lucas-deaths/
In their report, America First Media Group shows that the first payments made were preemptive measures on May 5th, 2016. They add that the next payment to Crowdstrike, totaling $98,849.84, took place on July 11th. ...
The report indicates: “The final payment to date is August 3rd, 2016. This coincides with another murder in the District of Columbia. Shawn Lucas, who died on August 2nd of last year, was the DNC Process Server and close friend of Seth Rich.”
The Awan brothers truly are the key to blowing this conspiracy wide open.
view the rest of the comments →
SoSpricyHotDog ago
This is huge. Should be easy for Crowdstrike to explain these payments, right?
Well, let's hear it Crowdstrike! We would love to see the itemized breakdown of the services rendered for these massive payments (when compared to the other transaction amounts)
Are_we__sure ago
Dude, are you kidding? Do you not know how much specialized IT services cost? Especially when you're security's ALREADY been compromised? Do you know how few firms are capable of doing what they do? They are a cutting edge, next generation cybersecurity firm. Massive payments?
Their competitor FireEye made 100 million last year.
Here's some of what they did.
Installed their software on every DNC machine.
Monitor all program activity on these machines. ....what commands are being executed.
Compare this activity to a massive database of computer activity from PC's they monitor. (A database that monitors about a trillion computer events a year.)
Isolate the security events to compare them to previous hacks. Look for identifiers
So what's your basis for saying these payments are out of the ordinary?
SoSpricyHotDog ago
The chronology of the payments... the other smaller payments surrounding these larger ones. Furthermore, it was the FBI that funded the outsourced investigation via Crowdstrike. The funding did NOT come from the DNC: https://www.usaspending.gov/transparency/Pages/RecipientProfile.aspx?DUNSNumber=969809446&FiscalYear=2015
Source: http://www.mcclatchydc.com
I'm not questioning the amounts themselves... if anything they are LOW. I work in this space, on a playing field similar to Crowdstrike, and the cost of licensing/software setup/analysis to conduct an investigation such as this should cost significantly more. Especially when you look at some of their other contracts that have been awarded.
Did you actually read the resulting Crowdstrike report? The "evidence" of a hack? It was an embarrassment... I could have done a far better job making fabricated evidence look/sound better than they did for 20% of the contract amounts they were given. Nearly a total of $350,000 between the FBI/DNC to put a shitty PDF report out that focuses on generic security tips and some activity from a out-of-date Ukrainian exploit that left fingerprints all over the server?
All the while, the FBI never found it prudent to look at the server themselves?
Come on dude. Your skepticism is healthy, but, this stinks and you know it.
Are_we_sure ago
No. It was not. Your quote shows nothing of the sort. If that's the whole your evidence, you've jumped to a completely unsupported conclusion. That's like saying the FBI bought a Ford the same year I my care was delivered. Therefore the FBI paid for my car.
That's because the nonsense news site pushing these articles have not shown ALL THE PAYMENTS. Which is why I asked my question. They are cherry picking.
And why do you find this odd? Personally, to me it seems like some small expenses that a person can put on a company card and larger payments that are invoiced....notice how this theory ignores the dates of when the invoices were sent.
If Crowdstrike's report was so bad, why did their competitors confirm it? They had an opportunity to damage a rival company by undermining their research.
Why did Threat Connect confirm their work? Why did Fidelis confirm their Work? Why did SecureWorks confirm their work? Why did FireEye confirm their work?
SoSpricyHotDog ago
No... my evidence comes from the fact that the FBI specifically admitted they paid Crowdstrike to handle this investigation for them. They've also openly admitted to not having looked at/interfaced with the DNC servers at any point in time. Your "argument" makes no sense.
Again, you are wrong. The source of information on these articles and the payments themselves are being pulled from the government's own public repository of contracts and expenditures. That image is the full representation of monies paid to Crowdstrike via the DNC. The link I provided also provides the full payment list made from the FBI to Crowdstrike. There is no cherry picking being done.
What work? The report was a pile of useless nonsense that any Comp Sci 101 student could have pulled out of their ass. It was garbage and there were just as many tech/IT firms that undermined the work and scrutinized it as being extremely amateurish/inaccurate - you think that these other tech firms (which also rely almost entirely on the public sector for revenue) are going to spit in the face of their #1 client?
Also, are you just pretending that Assange is not offering up concrete evidence that Russia had no involvement with these "hacks"? Just like the media, the intel agencies and these IT firms - when the truth comes to light and we know that Russia did NOT hack the DNC, you are going to need to sit quietly on your side of this debate and absorb what actually happened. Then, once that sinks in, you'll need to ask yourself WHY this happened... and WHY there was such a coordinated effort behind obfuscating the details/truth.
Until then, you could always send an email to your local representative and inquire as to why the FBI's own IT/Tech division failed to investigate the DNC servers for this topic that has completely engulfed the media with accusations and endless "guilty until proven innocent" verbiage.
I think your skepticism, while appreciated, is not going to hold up on this one.
RweSure ago
You have not shown this at all. If you have evidence of this please provide it.
Also remember that the FBI reached out to the DNC in 2015 saying there was evidence they were hacked by the same Russian groups that Crowdstrike later identified.
Of course, I'm not wrong. I know what their source of information is and I know how to search the FEC website. And when I search the FEC website, I see that the DNC made 17 payments to Crowdstrike in 2016.
https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?two_year_transaction_period=2016&data_type=processed&committee_id=C00010603&recipient_name=crowdstrike&min_date=01%2F01%2F2015&max_date=12%2F31%2F2016
So this image DOES NOT list the total payments. https://i0.wp.com/disobedientmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Screen-Shot-2017-09-21-at-2.31.26-PM.png
Assange? You're kidding right? Anything you say about his evidence is hoping right now.
SoSpricyHotDog ago
FBI Paying Crowdstrike here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article131308584.html
As for your comment here:
I was 100% incorrect. My apologies. I attempted to modify the URL string to change the search parameters and got the same exact results depicted in the .png - there were more payments after all. That definitely dampens the "Cherry-picked" transactions to your point.
You really think Assange would offer the notion that he has concrete evidence that Russian DID NOT conduct the hack if he was lying? What would the end game be? He's got a lot more on the line then you or I do. It would be a terrible decision for him to flaunt that and do a bait and switch.
I have far more faith in a validity of Assange then the Media any day of the week.
Always a pleasure! Upvoat.
RweSure ago
Yeah, the FBI paid Crowdstrike in JULY 2015!!!
This is months before anyone talked about the DNC being hacked. This is the point you are missing. This is a different contract. Don't you see that?
The FBI got their hands on the actual malware used in the Attack and were able to examine that. That's why getting their hands on the servers weren't a big deal.
SoSpricyHotDog ago
Time will tell my skeptical friend, time will tell. I've still yet to see any evidence, plus, under oath there has been nothing of admission that no evidence actually exists (well beyond 2015). There seems to be some serious gaps on both sides. With evidence promised on both sides.
I've got my money on the Russian hacks actually = Domestic leaks.
You clearly have your money riding on the Russian hacks = Russian hacks.
If I'm right, the erosion of the official narrative will be rapid and far reaching...
If you are right, that raises some serious, serious questions regarding Russia. If the other links you provided re: collusion/business dealings are then tied to the Russian hacks, we're entering into impeachment mode.
Just want to let you know that I enjoy these debates/discussions with you and I think you are far from a shill. You add a very healthy amount of skepticism to this channel and you're clearly a very intelligent individual on top of that.
Commoner ago
Timing is everything!
quantokitty ago
Right! Can't wait to see this!
$5.00 -- Social Media Content $95,000 -- Pizza & walnut-covered pasta