Beyond Biden: Trump Also Pushed Ukraine to Investigate Conspiracies About 2016 Hacking

False claims about a cybersecurity firm are consistent with the president’s downplaying of Russia’s attacks.

September 23, 2019 - New York, New York, USA - President DONALD TRUMP participates in a bilateral meeting with Polish President at the InterContinental New York Barclay in New York City. (Credit Image: © White House/ZUMA Wire/ZUMAPRESS.com)

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The White House released a memorandum memorializing a July phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Wednesday, hoping it would show that the president’s self-admitted effort to get the government of Ukraine to dig up dirt on Joe Biden wasn’t nearly as bad as preliminary reporting based on a whistleblower complaint had made it sound.

While the document largely substantiated the whistleblower’s alleged complaint, it also revealed that Trump had pressed Zelensky to investigate CrowdStrike, a private cyber security firm that the Democratic National Committee hired in 2016 to probe whether it had been hacked, and that Trump incorrectly suggested is owned by a Ukrainian. The request was an outgrowth of his longstanding grievances over the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton, and her emails.

Despite the US intelligence community’s 2017 finding that the Russian government orchestrated the infiltration of the Democratic National Committee, some of the president’s supporters have long claimed CrowdStrike’s founders, Shawn Henry and Dmitry Alperovitch, were involved in a plot to manufacture a fake Russian hack to divert attention from a Clinton loss or to strengthen public perceptions about Trump’s Russia connections. Proponents of the theory posit that the DNC and CrowdStrike never allowed the FBI to independently verify CrowdStrike’s findings about Russian hacking. In June, a senior Justice Department lawyer said the department had in fact done so.

“With regards to our investigation of the DNC hack in 2016, we provided all forensic evidence and analysis to the FBI,” CrowdStrike said in a statement following the document’s release. “As we’ve stated before, we stand by our findings and conclusions that have been fully supported by the US Intelligence community.”

The two leaders’ exchange about the company came not long after Trump had twice emphasized the US’s “very very good” support for Ukraine, and complained about a lack of reciprocity in the relationship, and immediately after Zelensky spoke about his country’s desire to purchase US made weapons. Trump then asked Zelensky for a favor:

Zelensky didn’t directly respond to the CrowdStrike reference, instead pivoting to an assurance that Ukraine would work to “open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine.”

Trump has previously discussed the company in public, associating it with supposed malfeasance by Clinton and the Democrats. He brought it up in an interview with the Associated Press in April 2017, falsely claiming it was based in Ukraine. 

TRUMP: …. If they had the proper defensive devices on their internet, you know, equipment, they wouldn’t even allow the FBI. How about this, they get hacked, and the FBI goes to see them, and they won’t let the FBI see their server. But do you understand, nobody ever writes it. Why wouldn’t (former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John) Podesta and Hillary Clinton allow the FBI to see the server? They brought in another company that I hear is Ukrainian-based.

AP: CrowdStrike?

TRUMP: That’s what I heard. I heard it’s owned by a very rich Ukrainian, that’s what I heard. But they brought in another company to investigate the server. Why didn’t they allow the FBI in to investigate the server? I mean, there is so many things that nobody writes about. It’s incredible.

Jessie K. Liu, the Trump appointed US Attorney for the District of Columbia, shot down this notion in June of this year, asserting in court that the Department of Justice had “independently verified” CrowdStrike’s findings. It’s unclear where Trump may have gotten the notion the company is Ukrainian owned or based, or that a computer server relevant to its investigation could be in that country. While Alperovitch was born in Moscow, conspiracists have suggested his role as a fellow at the Atlantic Council and that think tank’s history of funding from Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk—who has also donated to the Clinton Foundation—represent significant connections between the California company and the Eastern European country.

On Wednesday, Trump was asked if he believed Hillary Clinton’s emails were specifically located in Ukraine, responding “I think they could be.”

CrowdStrike was founded in 2011, but first came to wide public attention in June 2016, after the DNC announced it had been hacked in Washington Post story. CrowdStrike’s investigation into the breach, released that month, found two sophisticated Russian military or intelligence hacking operations within the DNC’s network, one lasting a matter of months, the other going back at least a year. The operations, which incorporated basic spear phishing attacks into a broader and more sophisticated operation, also targeted Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Emails and documents taken from all three were later publicized via WikiLeaks, on DCLeaks.com, and through the Guccifer 2.0 persona on Twitter and a WordPress blog.

The Russian hacking operation was central to question of whether Trump and his associates conspired with the Russian government and a key investigative focus of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, whose office indicted 12 Russian military intelligence officers, charging them with carrying out the country’s operations targeting the 2016 elections.

***

Listen to Mother Jones Washington Bureau Chief David Corn explain what happens next in the Trump-Ukraine scandal in a special impeachment edition of the Mother Jones Podcast:

This article has been updated to include Trump’s Wednesday comments.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate