When it comes to CrowdStrike, the conspiracy theory is not that they have some server in Ukraine, but that the Mueller report dead ends in a cold case with no public evidence. The conspiracy theory is what's in the Mueller report itself, in the form of an as yet unsubstantiated indictment.
Dr. Hill says whatever evidence there is may just have to stay classified, and it's the unanimous conclusion of the intelligence community that we don't have to do any messy trials or present evidence to establish guilt. Just trust us.
That an indictment is an allegation, still unproved, has been lost in the fray. Spin doctors knew it would be. They count on journalists repeating allegations as fact, that's how Russiagate built so much momentum in the first place.
We know the GRU hacked into the DNC because CrowdStrike said it did, and provided an elaborate story that proved CrowdStrike has even more prowess than the GRU when it comes to hacking the hackers.
The indictment reads like a commercial (oh, and the Russians had to stop and research Powershell commands while hacking the DNC Exchange Server, nod to Microsoft).
Problem: the whole story is opaque and unsubstantiated. Is Guccifer 2.0 really the GRU in disguise? Of course! Why? Because CrowdStrike says so, and says it has the evidence to back it up.
The FBI rubber stamped their report (redacted) and thereby signed over the investigation to a private company, much as the wars in Mesopotamia were turned over to Blackwater and Halliburton/KBR.
Now that the justice system has been privatized, along with the military, the question remains: how do you use the Constitution to restore the Constitution? I'm not sure it has such self-rebooting powers.
Click here for Part 2.
