Breaking… Durham Appendix: Clinton Supporters in FBI Lacked “Conclusive Irrefutable Evidence” of Russia’s Involvement of DNC Email Scandal — And Lisa Page Knew This!
July 31, 2025
Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) released the Durham investigation appendix on Thursday morning.
The appendix provides further truth on the Clinton Campaign’s plan to tie Trump to Russia and the FBI’s failure to investigate.
The information released on Thursday contains previously classified information exposing a reported Clinton campaign plan to falsely tie President Donald Trump to Russia.
The appendix also includes information that Clinton supporters in the FBI (a majority of the top brass officials) lacked “conclusive irrefutable evidence” of Russia’s involvement of the DNC email scandal.
According to the Durham annex:
Clinton’s supporters in the FBI lack conclusive irrefutable evidence of the Russian Federation’s involvement in the scandal, tied to the theft of the DNC’s correspondence. In the meantime, during the launched investigation, there has been a multitude of circumstantial evidence that the alias of Guccifer 2.0 (the name of the hacker who accepted responsibility for the incident) was in fact used to cover up a special unit of the GRU of the Russian Federation Defense Ministry’s general staff.
This comes from page 7 of the report that was released today.
So, once again, we discover the FBI had ZERO evidence that Russia hacked the DNC server or hacked the election.
This brings us back to the previous reports where we reported on the non-existent evidence that Russia hacked the DNC servers and spoiled the 2016 election.
In fact we reported this earlier today…
Barack Obama, James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, and every major mainstream media outlet lied for years to the American public by claiming “Russia hacked the election” to get President Trump elected in 2016.
They all knew this was a lie.
These liars all pushed the line that Crowdstrike had evidence that the DNC was hacked by Russia.
But that was not true.
We knew this was a lie from the beginning.
And we were absolutely correct.
Crowdstrike had absolutely no evidence that Russia hacked the DNC and then forwarded hacked emails to WikiLeaks. And they kept this to themselves.
A release of intel documents in 2020 that were held up by a corrupt liar, Rep. Adam Schiff, shows incredible information that destroys the Deep State’s many lies.
The biggest lie that the Russia collusion sham was based on was the tale that Russia hacked the DNC and then gave the hacked emails to WikiLeaks, who in turn released them before the 2016 election.
The whole story was a lie!
Crowdstrike had no evidence this ever took place.
Crowdstrike was hired by the DNC in April 2016 to investigate an alleged breach into the DNC servers.
They never had any evidence that the DNC was hacked.
Reporter Aaron Mate on Twitter identified the news first:
Mueller stuck in the word “appear”when suggesting Crowdstrike determined Russia stole DNC emails in the Mueller report:
On March 8, 2020 and before on June 16, 2019, we presented arguments against the Mueller gang’s assertion that Russians hacked the DNC.
Cyber expert Yaacov Apelbaum posted an incredible report with information basically proving that the Russians did not hack the DNC.
Apelbaum’s first argument is this –
According to the WaPo (using CrowdStrike, DOJ, and their other usual hush-hush government sources in the know), the attack was perpetrated by a Russian unit lead by Lieutenant Captain Nikolay Kozachek who allegedly crafted a malware called X-Agent and used it to get into the network and install keystroke loggers on several PCs. This allowed them to see what the employees were typing and take screenshots of the employees’ computer.
This is pretty detailed information, but if this was the case, then how did the DOJ learn all of these ‘details’ and use them in the indictments without the FBI ever forensically evaluating the DNC/HRC computers? And since when does the DOJ, an organization that only speaks the language of indictments use hearsay and 3rd parties like the British national Matt Tait (a former GCHQ collector and a connoisseur of all things related to Russian collusion), CrowdStrike, or any other evidence lacking chain of custody certification as a primary source for prosecution?
A second point by Apelbaum was –
… that three of the Russian GRU officers on the DOJ wanted list were allegedly working concurrently on multiple non-related projects like interfering with the 2016 United States elections (both HRC and DNC) while at the same time they were also allegedly hacking anti-doping agencies (Images 2-3).
Above are pictures of the individuals the FBI says were working on both the DNC/HRC email hacking and the Olympic doping projects.
The same guys were working on both projects which is all but impossible. (Do we really know if they’re even Russians?)
Apelbaum argues –
The fact that the three had multiple concurrent high impact and high visibility project assignments is odd because this is not how typical offensive cyber intelligence teams operate. These units tend to be compartmentalized, they are assigned to a specific mission, and the taskforce stays together for the entire duration of the project.
Next Apelbaum questioned the Mueller gang’s assertion that the ‘hacker’ named Guccifer 2.0 was a Russian –
Any evidence that Guccifer 2.0 is Russian should be evaluated while keeping these points in mind:
-
He used a Russian VPN service to cloak his IP address, but did not use TOR. Using a proxy to conduct cyber operations is a SOP [Standard Operating Procedure] in all intelligence and LEA [Law Enforcement Agency] agencies. [i.e. Russia would have masked their VPN service]
-
He used the AOL email service that captured and forwarded his IP address and the same AOL email to contact various media outlets on the same day of the attack. This is so overt and amateurish that its unlikely to be a mistake and seems like a deliberate attempt to leave traceable breadcrumbs.
-
He named his Office User account Феликс Эдмундович (Felix Dzerzhinsky), after the founder of the Soviet Secret Police. Devices and accounts used in offensive cyberspace operations use random names to prevent tractability and identification. Why would anyone in the GRU use this pseudonym (beside the obvious reason) is beyond comprehension.
-
He copied the original Trump opposition research document and pasted it into a new .dotm template (with an editing time of about 2 minutes). This resulted in a change of the “Last Modified by” field from “Warren Flood” to “Феликс Эдмундович” and the creation of additional Russian metadata in the document. Why waste the time and effort doing this?
-
About 4 hours after creating the ‘Russian’ version of the document, he exported it to a PDF using LibreOffice 4.2 (in the process he lost/removed about 20 of the original pages). This was most likely done to show additional ‘Russian fingerprints’ in the form of broken hyperlink error messages in Russian (Images 4 and 5). Why bother with re-formatting and converting the source documents? Why not just get the raw data out in the original format ASAP?
Apelbaum next discusses Guccifer 2.0 –
In June 21, 2016, Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai from Vice Motherboard interviewed a person who identified himself as “Guccifer 2.0”. During their on-line chat session, the individual claimed that he was Romanian (see transcript of the interview below). His poor Romanian language skills were later used to unmask his Russian identify.
…I’m not a scientific linguist nor do I even know where to find one if my life depended on it, but I’m certain that you can’t reliably determine nationality based on someone impersonating another language or from the use of fake metadata in files. This elaborate theory also has the obvious flaw of assuming that the Russian intelligence services are dumb enough to show up to an interview posing as Romanians without actually being able to read and write flaunt Romanian.
After providing a couple more examples of why the Russian story doesn’t stick, Apelbaum closes with this –
The bottom line is that if we want to go beyond the speculative trivia, the pseudo science, and the bombastic unverified claims, we have to ask the real tough questions, mainly: is Guccifer 2.0 even the real attacker and how did he circumvent all of the logs during several weeks of repeated visits while downloading close to 2 GB of data?
Esteemed NSA whistleblower Bill Binney reported in June 2019 that there was no way Russians hacked the DNC based on the speed of the transfer of the data that was hacked. But according to Apelbaum the transfer speeds is a minor issue here. It’s just an indicator that it would have been difficult for Guccifer 2 who was sitting in Romania to access the DNC system remotely.
Per an illustration from Apelbaum, Guccifer 2 is depicted as the red devil icon below:
This illustration shows the Crowdstrike was obviously false in its claims that Russia hacked the DNC.
This is because:
1. If Guccifer 2 did it from Romania (the red devil icon on the left of the illustration), he needed a 23 Mbit/s transfer rate. At the time of this hack in 2016, Romania was only supporting 16Mbit/s speeds. But to do that he had to go through all of the red hell in the middle of the illustration, which I don’t believe he did based on the poor technical skill set he demonstrated during his interview with Motherboard vice.
2. If the leak came from the inside (the half green half red icon in the right side of illustration), he had the full 23 Mbit/s transfer rate because he just plugged-in a USB drive to the computer. He also didn’t need any hacking skills because he most likely had full system access.
Finally, we know that WikiLeaks stated numerous times that Russia did not provide them with the emails they leaked in 2016 and Julian Assange stated that WikiLeaks had nothing to do with Russia.
But of course, the Mueller gang never interviewed WikiLeaks in an effort to determine how they received the Clinton emails. Of course the Mueller team could not risk WikiLeaks saying the emails were not received from Russia which would destroy their ‘Russia hacked the DNC’ fairy tale.
We know there is no evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC. This was made up from the start. And the Obama administration knew this.
Crowdstrike is a multi-billion dollar company worth reportedly $115 billion that holds contracts with the US Defense Department and several government agencies.
More… Lisa Page knew that if investigators ever started digging – they would all be busted!
The post Breaking… Durham Appendix: Clinton Supporters in FBI Lacked “Conclusive Irrefutable Evidence” of Russia’s Involvement of DNC Email Scandal — And Lisa Page Knew This! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
