I commend to your attention this new and really excellent overview of the fraudulence of Mueller's claims regarding "Russian interference".

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/05/crowdstrikeo...

And note that Fox News is already starting to cover it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkK-DSeFNs

I think that Mate's observations could be usefully supplemented by the cyberanalytic discoveries of Forensicator, Adam Carter, and other astute analysts, most of which are archived on Adam's excellent website:

http://g-2.space

Mate notes quite properly that the indeterminacy of Mueller's claims regarding the timing of the exfiltration of the DNC documents indicates that the NSA did not provide concrete evidence for the alleged hacking - the report refers to this occurring "between approximately 25 May, 2016 and June 1, 2016". In fact, Forensicator's recent analysis shows that the document were exfiltrated in two tranches, on May 23 and May 25. So Mueller was even partially wrong on the time frame.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/05/crowdstrikeo...

As regards the timeline of transfer, one could add that the claim that G2.0 transferred the purloined emails no sooner than a week prior to their publication on July 22 makes no sense whatever, inasmuch as Wikileaks needed to screen each email it published to insure its absolute authenticity. If it had published anything tainted with fraud, its reputation would have been in tatters. Which is why we had to wait a number of weeks for the Podesta emails to be released.

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/18/the-guccifer-2-0-gaps-in-muellers-...

Crowdstrike's claim that Russian intelligence was behind the alleged DNC hack, if not based on hard data from the NSA, had to be based on the nature of the malware used. But this is a notoriously inaccurate way of ascribing blame for a hack, since malware that Russian intelligence may have used previously could be readily available to other hackers. Indeed, that appears to be the case for the malware which Crowdstrike claims was used.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fbidhs-joint-analysis-report-fatally-flaw...

Whether there actually was a hack in April 2016, as Crowdstrike claims, or whether Crowdstrike concocted the evidence for such a hack, so as to blame Russia for the Wikileaks releases, is an unresolved issue. It appears that much of the malware which Crowdstrike alleged to "find" on the DNC computer had been compiled AFTER the date on which Crowdstrike entered the DNC computers, as noted by cyberanalyst Stephen McIntyre.

https://disobedientmedia.com/2017/12/fancy-frauds-bogus-bears-malware-mi...

Also notable is the fact that the exfiltrations of DNC emails occurred several weeks AFTER that date. So Crowdstrike was either grossly incompetent - or the exfiltrations reflected a LEAK.

In describing Bill Binney's discussion of transfer rate speeds, Mate makes a common error. Binney's data pertains to a transfer of DNC documents which Guccifer 2.0 made on July 5 - NOT the exfiltration of the DNC emails published by Wikileaks. The transfer rate was consistent with download to a thumbdrive, but too fast for transatlantic transmission at the time. Mate correctly notes the logical objection of Stone's prosecutors that the thumbdrive transfer in question might have occurred in Russia after the hack had occurred. But neither they nor Mate bring up Forensicator's brilliant deduction that the transfer occurred in the Eastern Time Zone. So the transfer might have occurred in Washington DC, or perhaps Peru - but certainly not Russia. Yet Guccifer 2.0 is alleged by Mueller to be a Russian intelligence operative who hacked the DNC - and suggested to be the source of the Wikileaks DNC emails. These findings are completely inconsistent with that theory - but completely consistent with the possibility that he was someone who had direct access to the DNC computers and downloaded their contents to a thumbdrive.

http://g-2.space/ustimezones/

Forensicator has shown that other transfers by G2.0 occurred in the Central and Pacific Time Zones. Crowdstrike has offices in those time zones.

Adam Carter has adduced a number of additional reasons to believe that Guccifer 2.0 is NOT a Russian hacker, but rather an entity intentionally POSING as a Russian hacker. And, as Mate aptly notes, his grandstanding behavior would be completely inconsistent with that of professional Russian intelligence.

As regards the personnel of Crowdstrike, Mate notes that Shawn Henry, co-founder of the company, used to be Robert Mueller's deputy at the FBI. To be more specific, Henry was in charge of counterintelligence, in which capacity he utilized false computer personas in sting operations. Which is why, the day after G2.0 first appeared, a savvy person on the net concluded that Shawn Henry was G2.0's puppet master.

http://www.g-2.space/henrysabug2/; https://caucus99percent.com/content/shawn-henry-crowdstrike-was-fingered...

These points are simply intended to supplement Mate's excellent, insightful analysis. They further strengthen the conclusion that Mueller doesn't have a clue as to how Wikileaks obtained the DNC emails, and that his contention that Russian intelligence hacked the DNC in early 2016 isn't backed by hard, credible evidence. Moreover, as Mate compellingly demonstrates, Mueller's claims that the online activities of the Internet Research Agency represented a serious effort backed by the Russian government to sway American voters to support Trump, are a virtual joke.

You can bet that the only reason that Mueller didn't charge the Trump campaign with "collusion" was that he realized that ultimately he would need to prove his contentions in a court of law. Whereas, since "the Russians" he indicted would never see the inside of an American courtroom, he felt he could make up any fraudulent narrative he chose to back the Deep States' claims about "Russian meddling".

My own best guess is this: US intelligence, which had been monitoring Wikileaks carefully, detected that someone at the DNC was planning to leak DNC emails to Wikileaks. The DNC then huddled with their computer experts at Crowdstrike and came up with the strategem of claiming that the DNC had been hacked by "the Russians" who then gave their emails to Wikileaks. In that way, media attention could be diverted from the damning content of the emails to the vile Russkies and their stooge Assange; Hillary would be shielded, while the Deep State's bete noires Russia and Assange would be slammed - an ideal ruse! So Crowdstrike concocted evidence for a hack, and also created the persona Guccifer 2.0 to take credit for the hacking and the impending Wikileaks release, while intentionally leaving "Russian fingerprints" on his postings. Guccifer 2.0 subsequently made contacts with Assange that could be used as evidence by later investigators (i.e. Mueller) that G2.0 had indeed transferred the emails to Wikileaks.

But they knew that this plan could only work if the actually leaker was eliminated or otherwise silenced.

Here's why I conclude that the DNC was tipped off:

https://caucus99percent.com/content/how-did-crowdstrikeguccifer-20-know-...

And here are my speculations about the leaker - an issue which, for the time being, Aaron is wise to avoid:

https://caucus99percent.com/content/reasons-suspect-seth-rich-participat...