Alfa Bank Hoax
Perkins Coie Partner Michael Sussman's Operation
CrowdStrike was hired to investigate who hacked the DNC servers, and to make sure it never happened again. Somehow, the focus of the project morphed from who hacked the DNC servers into something entirely different.
The Alfa Bank hoax had nothing to do with hackers. It was about Trump.
Rodney Joffe's company, Neustar, had access to the dedicated servers for the White House’s Executive Office of the President (EOP) as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided data security services to the White House.
Joffe and his team exploited this arrangement by surepticiously data mining the EOP’s DNS traffic (web traffic), and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.
The tasking orders given to the CrowdStrike technical team was to find evidence to support the Trump-Alfa Bank allegations in the Internet traffic Joffe had obtained from the White House. The team was not tasked with finding out who hacked the DNC server. There is a huge difference.
Researchers, tasked with supporting the claim, didn't find what they were tasked with finding and they were afraid what they were being given was so unsupported that they would be mocked. They argued, according to Sussmann’s indictment, that anyone familiar with analyzing internet traffic “would poke several holes” in the collusion theory. One researcher warned: “Let’s assume again that they are not smart enough to refute our ‘best case scenario.’ You do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association.”
Just like the Christopher Steele dossier, they made it all up. the Alfa Bank theory was never viewed as credible by researchers tasked with investigating it. Yet, they admitted that they hoped the media would make the claims stick.
The CIA concluded that Sussman's data wasn’t plausible. Many computer experts have since dismissed the Alfa Bank story as baloney.
|CrowdStrike||Technical experts search for proof of Trump-Russia collusion||More|
|Perkins Coie, LLP||Facilitator and bag man -- provided attorney confidentiality and distance to the conspirators||More|
|Slate Magazine||Chosen to leak the Trump-Russian collusion hoax||More|
|Manos Antonakakis||Collected the DNS data for the Alfa Bank project||More|
|James Baker||Recipient of Michael Sussman's kompromat||More|
|David Dagon||Collected the DNS data for the Alfa Bank project||More|
|Rodney Joffe||Crowdstrike executive that ran the operation||More|
|April Lorenzen||Assembled the data that was on the Sussman jump drives||More|
|Jake Sullivan||Created the hoax to distract from the Hillary server story||More|
|Michael Sussmann, Esq||Hired Crowdstrike and gave kompromat to FBI||More|
|Burisma||Major Sussman screw-up||More|
|Russiagate||DNC plot attempted to show a secret Trump-Russia connection||More|
Robert Mueller said as much, yet many on the left continued to ignore his absolution, just as they will likely ignore or paper over the special counsel’s conclusions, that the conspirators invented a story, forged evidence, and then presented it to the FBI and CIA as if it was something worth pursuing, derailing the Trump presidency for years.
We could go on and on, but much of the dossier and DNC allegations against Trump are “He likes Russia.” Trump never made his ambitions to try to warm Russian-American relations secret. If he was naive, it wasn’t compromised" — it’s all called political differences.
Yet “not technically plausible” and “user created” became the bywords of the day. Durham is chipping away at the conspiracy. And it is a conspiracy. The evidence is obvious.
“The only witness currently immunized by the government, Researcher-2, was conferred with that status on July 28, 2021 – over a month prior to the defendant’s Indictment in this matter. And the Government immunized Researcher-2 because, among other reasons, at least five other witnesses who conducted work relating to the Russian Bank-1 allegations invoked (or indicated their intent to invoke) their right against self-incrimination. The Government therefore pursued Researcher-2’s immunity in order to uncover otherwise-unavailable facts underlying the opposition research project that Tech Executive-1 and others carried out in advance of Sussman’s meeting with the FBI.”
The researchers were told they should not be looking for proof but just enough to “give the base of a very useful narrative.” The researchers argued, according to the indictment, that anyone familiar with analyzing internet traffic “would poke several holes” in that narrative, noting that what they saw likely “was not a secret communications channel with Russian Bank-1, but ‘a red herring,’”
“Researcher-1” repeated these doubts, the indictment says, and asked, “How do we plan to defend against the criticism that this is not spoofed traffic we are observing? There is no answer to that. Let’s assume again that they are not smart enough to refute our ‘best case scenario.’ You do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association.”
“Researcher-1” allegedly further warned, “We cannot technically make any claims that would fly public scrutiny. The only thing that drives us at this point is that we just do not like [Trump]. This will not fly in eyes of public scrutiny. Folks, I am afraid we have tunnel vision. Time to regroup?”
In a court filing, Durham alleged this operation directly spied on Trump tower, Trump’s home, and the Trump White House by exploiting “access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data.”
The anti-Trump operation used the “assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.”