USG’s Bizarre Change of Position in the Roger Stone Case by Larry C Johnson

Larry Johnson-5x7
There is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that supports the US Government’s assertion that the Russian Government hacked the DNC. In fact, the forensic computer evidence that is available indicates that the emails from the DNC were downloaded onto something like a thumb drive.

There also is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that the Russians passed/delivered the DNC emails to Julian Assange/Wikileaks. There are only two ways to get DNC emails into the hands of Wiki people–an electronic transfer or a physical/human transfer. That’s it.

And here is what we know for certain. First, since Edward Snowden absconded with the NSA’s family jewels with the help of Wikileaks, U.S. and British intelligence assets have been monitoring every single electronic communication to and from Wikileaks/Julian Assange. They also have been conducting surveillance on all personal contacts with Assange and other key members of the Wikileaks staff.

Given these facts you would think it would be easy for Robert Mueller to explain how the Russians got their hands on the DNC emails and then passed them on to Wikileaks. But it is not easy because the foundation of the case against the Russians rests on assumptions and beliefs. No solid facts.

To reiterate a point I have raised in previous posts, the only entity to have forensic access to the DNC computers, i.e. CrowdStrike, is on the record in the person of the CrowdStrike CEO, Dimitri Alperovitch admitting they don’t know how the Russians got access.

Alperovitch told Washington Post Reporter Ellen Nakashima on June 14, 2016 the following:

CrowdStrike is not sure how the hackers got in. The firm suspects they may have targeted DNC employees with “spearphishing” emails. These are communications that appear legitimate — often made to look like they came from a colleague or someone trusted — but that contain links or attachments that when clicked on deploy malicious software that enables a hacker to gain access to a computer. “But we don’t have hard evidence,” Alperovitch said.

If CrowdStrike actually had conducted a legitimate forensic examination of the DNC server/servers then they absolutely would have had “hard evidence.”

Then, 13 months later, we have FBI Director Jim Comey admitting that the FBI relied on CrowdStrike for its “evidence.” Jim Comey testified to the House Intelligence Committee in March 2017 and stated the following:

“we never got direct access to the machines themselves. The DNC in the spring of 2016 hired a firm that ultimately shared with us their forensics from their review of the system.”

Now take a look at a very significant reversal of the US Government’s position in the case against Roger Stone. On 20 June 2019, US Attorney Jessie Liu filed a motion attempting to rebut the argument presented by Stone’s attorneys that there was no supporting evidence for the claim that Russia hacked the DNC. Here are the key snippets from her filing:

As the government has argued (Doc. 122, at 6, 9, 14), Russia’s role in the DNC hack is not material to the eighteen findings of probable cause that Stone appears to be challenging. . . . The  government produced the CrowdStrike reports because the Indictment in this case referenced, as background, CrowdStrike’s statements about the DNC hack. Stone’s statement that the government has no other evidence is not only irrelevant to this proceeding but is also mistaken.

Yet, when you read the original indictment, Roger Stone was put in the cross hairs because he was allegedly communicating with Wikileaks/Julian Assange about the DNC emails. And those emails are identified in the indictment as “stolen.” The Government is hoping to nail Stone on the charge of “lying” to Congress. Good luck with that.

It is a horrible irony that Stone is being persecuted with prosecution based on an even bigger lie–i.e., the Russians hacked the DNC. Russia did not hack the DNC. Let’s hope that Stone’s lawyers get a chance to demand the US Government put up the evidence or shut up.

This entry was posted in Larry Johnson, Russia, Russiagate. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to USG’s Bizarre Change of Position in the Roger Stone Case by Larry C Johnson

  1. Fred says:

    So hearsay evidence is the foundation of the governments case. What a wonderful evolution in social(ist) justice we are undergoing. Not quite the change we were hoping for in 2008.

  2. John Andrew Kociuba says:

    Most egregious abuse of American jurisprudence in U.S. History!

  3. Factotum says:

    Story to be continued………………………good summation so far. Put crack prosecutor Kamala Harris on this case now.

  4. John Merryman says:

    It’s not like denialism doesn’t have a long history. One generally to the detriment of those in denial.
    Though there are still some flat earthers still around.

  5. pretzelattack says:

    it has absolutely nothing to do with socialism. robert mueller is not a socialist, and the dnc and donors driving this horsecrap are not socialists, either.

  6. pretzelattack says:

    who are you referring to? i would hope it isn’t the author.

  7. JerseyJeffersonian says:

    Last thing “justice” dept. wants is discovery probing into the “hacking”, Crowdstrike’s blather, the feebs behavior re Crowdstrike. Could unravel several prosecutions & pose inconvenient questions about their role in this.

  8. casey says:

    Amen, brother. I hope Seth Rich gets some justice, though I know that is highly unlikely,

  9. Fred says:

    Sure, using the instruments of state power to spy on political opponents, charge them and thier supporters with dubious charges and denigrating them in the media are not standard operating procedures in socialist run governments. On the off topic statement let me respond that I am heartened to hear that the DNC and donors are not socialists; though I wonder where they will get a candidate for 2020 since all of the top 20 who just debated one another sure seem to be.

  10. Small_buggy says:

    Not admittedly

  11. Damien petty says:

    The corrupt FBI know Russia didn’t hack the DNC. The fact they never looked at the DNC Server should be brought up every time some liberal politician blames Russia for the election of Trump

  12. Jim Ticehurst says:

    larry…you are aging well…But Right as usual..Prime Rib..Lots of Meat…I think from looking at it..The FBI and Mueller and State Department and Obama Justice Department Knew that China hacked Hillarys Home Computer in 2015…The Cjinese were angry about The Indictment of Five of its TOP Hackers in 2014..Angry about the TPP.So they knew about that…All The Government stolen data,,,So they FBI gave Hillary time to Destroy Data..Computers Phone etc that would PROVE the Chinese Hacking/..And AAre Blaming the Russians for it..I Think That’s The Dirty Underwear Exposure they are afaid of…Keep it up Quarter Mate… If I read Right..The Hillary date went to DCLEAKS First

  13. Roger Stone says:

    Help me at
    Roger Stone

  14. h says:

    Rep Louis Gohmert did in fact confirm, once and for all, that every single email in/out of Hillary’s computer, including attachments etc were scooped up by the Chinese. He confirmed this dangler last week in a report by The Epoch Times, Jeff Carlson – “Far more of a threat than the Russians were to our last election or the Chinese were who actually hacked Hillary Clinton’s personal server as our intel community established without any question, even though the FBI refused to ever examine uh the evidence. So, no question China was involved.”
    The link to the Gohmert interview is embedded in this article. He states 2it matter a factly right around 2:20 –

  15. h says:

    Another interesting nugget from the gov’s response to Stone’s motion is in a footnote “Although the reports produced to the defendant are marked as ‘draft,’ counsel for the DNC and DCCC informed the government that they are the latest version of the report produced.”
    The FBI/DOJ never recv’d a final CrowdStrike report. Yet, the former Dir of the FBI wants the public to believe this draft of a draft report is legitimate evidence to be used against Stone. Puhleaze.
    Contrast the hacking nonsense to the growing body of evidence pointing towards a ‘leak.’ Assange and Craig Murray have consistently stated that the DNC material was leaked. Couple their statements with the only nonpolitical forensic evidence made available to date from Binney, Johnson and Et Al plus the fact that there was indeed correspondence b/w Seth Rich and Assange.
    So yeah, after three years it’s time to take a garden hose to that smoldering ‘hack’ fire and to ignite a roaring fire under the ‘leaked’ evidence. May Stone’s lawyers be successful.

  16. Factotum says:

    Suspect Mueller Team did not “indict” because Trump was a sitting President; but rather they knew they could not take him to trial and prove their case, without opening other investigations they really, really wanted closed. Just like Stone is pursuing. Mueller Report sounds more like an after the fact deep state CYA report, than anything else. Salt it with “facts” one may need later in other settings.

  17. h, I also think Clinton’s email server was hacked by the Chinese at the very least. It was just too lucrative a target to pass up. And if the FBI said they have evidence of that, I have no reason to doubt it. OTOH, there is zero forensic evidence in the public arena of this. By Larry Johnson’s reasoning, it never happened. There is also zero forensic evidence in the public arena that the OPM was hacked by the Chinese or anyone else. It’s just as likely that never happened either.

  18. h, although CrowdStrike concluded it was Russian hackers who hit the DNC, they never offered any definitive proof. They just noticed the similarities between methods and tools used to hack the DNC to methods and tools used in other hacks. This circumstantial attribution is rightly criticized by many. Real attribution is made through much more aggressive hack back and collection methods as illustrated in the indictment of the GRU 12. The evidence cited in that indictment clearly did not come from CrowdStrike. They don’t have that kind of capability. Of course neither the DOJ or IC are releasing the raw intel backing up their claims in the GRU 12 indictment so doubt will continue.
    The claim that a NSA response to a FOIA request proves there was correspondence between Assange and Rich is based on a wild leap of faith. The FOIA request was wide ranging asking for much more than Assange-Rich correspondence. That request asked for anything “referencing or containing communications between Seth Rich and any of the following: Julian Assange, Wikileaks, Kim Dotcom, Aaron Rich, Shawn Lucas, Kelsey Mulka, Imran Awan, Abid Awan, Jamal Awan, Hina Alvi, Rao Abbas, and/or any person or entity outside of the United States.” It also asked for any records referencing financial transaction between Rich and the above individuals/entities and any communications from or to any member of Congress or Congressional committee referencing Rich or any of the above named individuals/entities. This is the wide ranging request that resulted in finding 15 documents (32 pages) that NSA still wouldn’t release because of classification. These documents could include Assange talking up the Seth Rich conspiracy, but we don’t know from the NSA response.
    As for the Roger Stone case, I’m not following it and have no real opinion. He seems an odd, shifty character, but there’s nothing illegal in that.

  19. Factotum says:

    Yes, the very curious Awan family of “tech experts” from Pakistan hired by a slew of Democrats. Good to see them back in the mix. Their entire pattern of facts, including the alleged computers and data left in a rental unit, before they quickly left the country when all of this was breaking – so many loose threads that need to be tied up.

  20. harry says:

    Yes. Good point.

  21. h says:

    The Twisted Genius – might you expand on your last thought ‘It’s just as likely that never happened either.’
    It seems to suggest that since there is no forensic evidence in the public sphere then how can we, the public, be certain the OPM hack and Hillary’s server being compromised even occurred. Just want to be sure I’m intuiting your last statement correctly. Thanks in advance.

  22. TomM says:

    Could anyone display a legitimate website for donations to Roger Stone? I am reluctant to trust whatever appears in my email solicitations because I don’t really know if they’re authentic

  23. Steven Zore says:

    Globalist How’s that?

  24. Vic Mackey says:

    Well, actually, the DNC has been taken captive by socialists. The leading Democratic candidate for President is an avowed lifelong socialist who joins and quits the party in between elections.
    Mueller, on the other hand, represents the Bushite RINO old boys network, formerly known as the Rockefeller Republicans, who currently share common cause with the left’s desire to ruin and oust Trump and destroy populism. The enemy of their enemy has become their friend. That’s how Mueller ended up with 2 dozen Democrat lawyers in his special persecutor’s office.

  25. Ben L. says:

    stonedefensefund dot com

  26. Jeff C-C says:

    IMHO, Mueller topped it when he indicted the Russian “Concord Management and Consulting.” No laws are alleged to be broken, and they aren’t allowed to see the evidence against them.
    They asked to have the indictment thrown out, and the judge replied, “The key question . . . is not whether the defendants’ agreed-upon conduct violated [disclosure laws] — or any other statute — but whether it was deceptive and intended to frustrate the lawful government functions” of the Justice and State departments and Federal Election Commission, which regulate foreign involvement. “At this stage, that is more than enough.”

  27. h, I was being somewhat sarcastic when I said the OPM hack likely never happened based on the premise cited by Larry Johnson when he declares “[t]here is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that supports the USG’s assertion that the Russian Government hacked the DNC” or that “[t]here also is zero forensic evidence in the public arena that the Russians passed/delivered the DNC emails to Julian Assange/Wikileaks.” The assumption is that if the raw forensic and/or intelligence information is not declassified and released, it doesn’t exist. It is an erroneous assumption relied on only to bolster the desired narrative.
    I’ve seen a decade of forensic data and intelligence supporting a wide collection of nation-state hacks of US systems. None of that data has been made public, yet it certainly exists and those penetrations did take place. Based on that track record, I’m inclined to believe the DNC, OPM and Clinton’s email server were compromised by Russia in the case of the DNC and Chine in the cases of OPM and Clinton. The specificity of the assertions made in the GRU 12 indictment only reinforces my contention that the Russians did indeed hack the DNC.
    However, the fact that I have not seen the forensic data an/or intelligence information on those three penetrations leaves room for healthy skepticism. I do not fault Larry Johnson and many others for harboring that skepticism. But the absence of forensic data/intelligence information in the public sphere is not proof that it does not exist.

  28. Twisted,
    What you fail to grasp (and it is not your fault because you have no experience in this arena) is that in the judicial system and a court proceeding like this they must produce the evidence or else forego making the charge. I’m sure you are aware of circumstances where the Feds declined prosecution because they did not want to disclose sources/methods. But that is not the case here. They are pressing forward with a false, unsupported premise. Stay tuned.

  29. Larry, the DOJ did make the charge in the GRU 12 and IRA indictments. They must have convinced the court they had the evidence to bring those charges forward. You’re right in that I have no idea at what point classified information must be declassified in order to introduce it in court or at what point a court can throw out an indictment.

  30. Brother T,
    I’m not intending to insult your intelligence. It goes without saying that you were an accomplished intel analyst and at the top of your craft. I have that background as well from the CIA side of the house. But, I was also involved in the development of the Pan Am 103 case, which did rely on evidence developed from intel sources, and from a host of money laundering cases I’ve been involved with over the past 26 years. I would kindly suggest you are putting way too much faith in the Mueller indictment. It is very poorly written and certainly deficient in laying out the evidence. One of the companies, as you may know, is not taking this lying down and will challenge in court. Without the forensic evidence from the DNC hack, which both Comey and Roger acknowledge they had no access to, the case will be very hard to prove.

  31. Larry, I’ve never been an intel analyst, although I worked extremely close with them once I started working cyber ops. I think you’re putting way too much faith in DNC system forensics or lack thereof. Once we started using aggressive collection and hack back tactics, our ability to determine attribution increased dramatically from when we only had the forensics from hacked systems. Based on your considerable judicial experience, do you know if Mueller’s indictments were reviewed by grand juries before being brought to court?

  32. Of course he presented this to a grand jury. People with zero expertise in the matter. I’m sure you’re familiar with the saying, “indict a ham sandwich?”

  33. Is it more likely that Russia mada a perfeckt hack, without leaving hard evidence of the theft or delivery. I belive it is and inside job, were somebody use a stick witch was delivered to W.L. If any of this had happened electronic, I guess NSA (or another branch) would find any hard evidence. In this case we haven`t seen hard evidence of anything, but Clintons cirkle and Trumps team should have got equal treatment, witch they never did, because of political branches. Hopefully the swamp will be drained.

  34. joe schmoe says:

    Liu should be jailed for life if this is proven to be a witch hunt.
    These lying criminal NWO bastards in the FBI, DOJ, IRS, NSA, are gonna set the stage for a bloody civil war

  35. blue peacock says:

    Where’s Trump in all this? I don’t see him do anything for his compadres. Or is he in it just for himself and his family?

  36. Just sayn says:

    As nothing government does is by accident; IMHO it is possible and probably that parties of the Israeli government US government did all the hacks and are intentionally blaming China and Russia despite the fact that Israel meddling in US elections is common knowledge and they have the most to gain as do the criminals at all levels of US government. Justice is not the point, nor is TRUTH. Cover-up of secrets and conflict are the goal. Therefore China And Russia have little to gain from any hacks. DNC, Israel, and certain oligarchial mil industry, government pond scum do. Who are a governments enemies are found in their Gulags. Hillary,Bolton, Comey are free. Jullian, Chelsea,Roger among others are wrongfully caged Seth Rich and others are dead. That’s hard evidence.

  37. turcopolier says:

    “nothing government does is by accident;” Laughable idiocy hopefully based on college BS sessions.

  38. Factotum says:

    Are you demanding Trump “obstruct justice” and work behind the scenes to bail out his friends?

  39. All,
    From a 2 July entry on the ‘Lawflog’ blog run by Ty Clevenger, who acts for Ed Butowsky in his suit against Michael Gottlieb, CNN and the ‘New York Times’:
    ‘This afternoon I issued subpoenas to the FBI, CrowdStrike, and the Democratic National Committee for their records on murdered DNC employee Seth Rich. The subpoenas further demand all evidence that Russian hackers were responsible for obtaining DNC emails in 2016 that were later published by Wikileaks.
    ‘Two weeks ago, attorneys representing Roger Stone forced prosecutors to admit that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Obama-era intelligence officials never examined the DNC servers that purportedly were hacked by the Russians. Instead, Mueller and Obama officials relied on redacted draft reports prepared by CrowdStrike, Inc., a private company hired by the law firm Perkins Coie, the same law firm that hired Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele.
    ‘Hopefully, we will soon know why the DNC did not want the FBI (or anyone else) looking at those servers. Maybe because the DNC knew that one of its own employees leaked the emails?’
    The subpoenas are well worth reading. That to the FBInis at ; that to the DNC at .
    The original lawsuit, filed on 12 March, is at
    A 3 July report on the ‘Law360’ site, which is behind a paywall, appears to relate to an attempt to get the suit tossed out.
    (See )
    If any legally competent members of this committee had a view on the likelihood of Clevenger and Butowsky getting the materials they are seeking, that would I think be of great interest.

  40. Pat — I posted a comment on Ty Clevenger’s subpoenas to the FBI and CIA for materials relating to Seth Rich. It has gone into spam. Belated Happy 4th of July.

  41. Factotum says:

    Interesting to see Sy Hersh’s name come up in these subpeona requests – time to also resurrect his main stream media rejected “The Red Line and the Rat Line” – a factually lurid investigation of Obama and Clinton’s Middle East foreign policy moves. How did Hersh figure into the potentially deadly DNC Russiagate caper?

  42. Factotum says:

    Asked and answered: What Seymour Hersh’s role in this and why are his communications under subpoena; Allegedly from Hersh’s “audio tape”:
    ….“I have a narrative of how that whole f*** thing began, it’s a Brennan operation, it was an American disinformation and f*** the f*** President, at one point when they, they even started telling the press, they were back briefing the press, the head of the NSA was going and telling the press, f*** c*** Rogers, was telling the press that we even know who in the GRU, the Russian Military Intelligence Service, who leaked it. I mean [it’s] all b****…. Trump’s not wrong to think they all f*** lie about him.”….
    Makes me ask the question again: how would we know if CNN is not one of the deep state’s disinformation instruments ensuring the free flow of planted information? What else justifies their continued place in the media marketplace.

  43. MrTea says:

    Here is the original supposed revelation of the analyst who worked for Crowdstrike on the DNC server
    and a piece from Politico regarding the government’s case against Stone
    web searching for the relevant terms will readily demonstrate the disturbing “full court press” from the establishment media to front for the government’s case…the write-ups in the Times, the Bezos Post and the other Usual Suspects read like they could have been written by the same person. Speaking of which the original article by none other than Watergate Bernstein in Rolling Stone in 1977 (NOBODY in the MSM has ever acknowledge the existence of this piece, not even Bernstein!) is relevant

  44. MrTea says:

    Stone probably made some people upset when he published his books on LBJ’s role in the JFK hit/coverup and on the Clintons’ serial abuse of women. I think you can still see them on Amazon (though the “Factor 8” video about the contaminated blood scandal that came out of the Arkansas prison system is long gone).

  45. Fred says:

    Interesting that today’s Morning Joe has on David Ishikoff, now of Yahoo news (how the mighty have fallen), who is pedling a book saying Seth Rich’s murder was not only a robbery gone bad but news surrounding it was a Russian IO campaign. Seth Rich’s story being aired on Fox being an effort to distract from the appointment Meuller and this story not in anyway meant to distract from Epstein’s arrest but to peddle a book like is done on the other network morning shows.

Comments are closed.