DNC / Perkins Coie hired Crowdstrike for perjury

Bombshell revelations about Crowdstrike, Perkins Coie (the DNC/DCCC law firm), and the DNC in a court filing made on September 29. Although most of it is redacted, the filing shows that:

1) Crowdstrike was hired by Perkins Coie, the law firm for the DNC, rather than by the DNC itself. Fusion GPS was hired in the same way and around the same time.

2) Perkins Coie hired Crowdstrike for the following:

CrowdStrike will work at Firm’s direction and will assist Firm [Perkins Coie] with providing legal advice to Firm Client [the DNC] by performing professional services related to cybersecurity (the “Services”).

That explains why Crowdstrike didn’t attempt to remediate the security breach. It was not hired to remediate anything. Crowdstrike was hired as an expert witness (or a false witness, or an expert forgery maker) for the DNC and the Hillary campaign against GOP and the Trump campaign.

3) DNC and Perkins Coie retained Crowdstrike on May 2-3 of 2016 — not on May 6, as it has been claimed by almost everybody over the last three years.

Now they claim attorney – client and/or attorney work product privileges. H/t @Techno_Fog

6 thoughts on “DNC / Perkins Coie hired Crowdstrike for perjury

  1. In DOJ Atty Jessie Liu’s response to Stone’s motion to compel Crowdtrike report, the first sentence of her factual background reads:

    “By May 2016, the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (“DCCC”) became aware that their computer systems had been compromised by intrusions, and they hired the cybersecurity company CrowdStrike to identify the extent of the intrusions and mitigate the threat.”

    Building from your point “Crowdstrike didn’t attempt to remediate the security breach. It was not hired to remediate anything. Crowdstrike was hired as an expert witness (or a false witness, or an expert forgery maker) for the DNC and the Hillary campaign against GOP and the Trump campaign.”

    So where’s the contract supporting Liu’s factual assertion?

  2. In your section on Donna Brazile talking about destroying the evidence, I noticed you didn’t include what she said publicly.

    Brazile: After Hacking, DNC Replicated Server for FBI Then ‘Destroyed’ Machines, By Nicholas Ballasy December 13, 2017

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/brazile-hacking-dnc-replicated-server-fbi-destroyed-machines/

    NY Times: “In the six weeks after CrowdStrike’s arrival, in total secrecy, the computer system at the D.N.C. was replaced. For a weekend, email and phones were shut off; employees were told it was a system upgrade. All laptops were turned in and the hard drives wiped clean, with the uninfected information on them imaged to new drives.”

    Brazile: “The person we hired was the former No. 3 at the FBI, and they worked it out. …We made a replica of everything and turned it all over to [the FBI]. We also let them see all of the evidence from all of the individual computers, from everything else. So we, trust me, it cost us quite a penny to make replicas and then we destroyed the machines and then bought the staff people new laptops,” she said.

    So, am I wrong in concluding that Crowdstrike spent those six weeks tampering with and destroying evidence before Sussmann and the DNC met with the FBI in mid June–so they could deny them access to the servers that they ALREADY DESTROYED?

    Comey, Brennan and Clapper altered the nation’s defense posture against a nuclear armed Russia based on evidence purchased by Hillary Clinton through her lawyers at Perkins Coie?

    That about right?

    BTW Leo, the clarity of your analysis is a joy. Thank you for sharing your insights.

    Regards,

    Bob

  3. Great catch!

    I’d always read that Sussmann called Shawn Henry on the 4th and they installed their software on the 5th. I was also told that the DNC hired Crowdstrike. But it was Sussmann (Perkins Coie) the whole way.

    Under the alter ego theory, the corporate separateness between Hillary Clinton and the DNC must be disregarded.

    The alter ego theory asserts that the separateness of a corporation should be disregarded if two elements are established:

    (1) that the corporation is not only influenced by the owners, but that there is such unity of ownership and interest that their separateness has ceased; and

    (2) that the facts are such that adherence to the normal attributes of separate corporate existence would sanction a fraud or promote injustice

    Donna Brazille sank HRC with her article in Politico describing the funding agreement.

    Paul Sperry tweeted this, but seems to have deleted it.

    “And why didn’t the DNC tell their sister organization, the DCCC, that their servers were hacked too, until over a month later, AFTER they had “fixed” their own? They’d known for over 7 months they’d been “hacked” before they even took action.”

    Do you know whether the DNC and Crowdstrike worked in such secrecy that they never told the DCCC about the “Russian hack” until six weeks later?

      1. True, but catching them contradicting themselves, or acting in ways contradictory to the conditions they allege, isn’t a waste of time.

        From the December 13, 2016 NYT Article “The Perfect Weapon: How Russian Cyberpower Invaded the U.S.”:

        “Though D.N.C. officials had learned that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had been infected, too, they did not notify their sister organization, which was in the same building, because they were afraid that it would leak.”

        Can you imagine? Russia’s “massive attack on the American election system” was so dire, so emergent, that for six whole weeks the DNC left the DCCC to fend for itself like a lamb tied to a tree surrounded by Russian wolves ““genetically driven” to attack American democracy.”

Leave a Reply