The four statements contain varying degrees of truth, but none are strictly wrong.
According to the FBI, they reached out to the DNC to examine their computer systems, but were rebuffed by the DNC. The FBI continuously stressed to the DNC that they needed direct access, but were not able to come to terms with the DNC until after they had enlisted the help of CrowdStrike to examine their systems. The FBI was then allowed to go through with their investigation, but only through CrowdStrike as a subsidiary.
This is a link to a CNN story entitled "FBI: DNC rebuffed request to examine computer servers" that was published January 5, 2017. Relevant to points (1) and (2) are the sections:
The Democratic National Committee "rebuffed" a request from the FBI to examine its computer services after it was allegedly hacked by Russia during the 2016 election
The FBI instead relied on the assessment from a third-party security company called CrowdStrike
However, according to a story published on Buzzfeed (which is also referenced in the CNN story), Eric Walker, the DNC’s deputy communications director, claimed that the FBI never reached out to the DNC to examine their servers (emphasis theirs).
The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington (DC) Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers
Note that while points (1) and (2) seems to be stuck in a he-said-she-said situation, there seems to be no question that CrowdStrike was working with the DNC, as evidenced by this Esquire Magazine article about CrowdStrike and its time working with the DNC during the 2016 Election Campaign. Note that this also seems to confirm that Dmitri Alperovitch, and indeed CrowdStrike as a whole, are against Russia, specifically the Putin regime, and are actively fighting to combat Russian cyber-attacks.
As for Google Capital (or CapitalG as it is now called), there seems to be no question that CrowdStrike has received funds from the Venture Capital arm of Google. Here are articles from Fortune 500, The Wall Street Journal (note: paywall but can see the relevant data), Business Insider, and the CrowdStrike Wikipedia entry detailing the connection between CapitalG and CrowdStrike.
EDIT: At ventsyv's suggestion and after pointing it out to me, FBI Director James Comey did announce during a Congressional investigation that
...the FBI would have preferred to "get access to the original device or server" that was the target of hacking at the DNC. CNN previously reported that the Democratic National Committee "rebuffed" a request from the FBI to examine its computer services after it was allegedly hacked by Russia during the 2016 election.
The FBI instead relied on the assessment of a third-party security company called CrowdStrIke. Comey told senators that the "highly respected private company eventually got access and shared" the evidence with the FBI.
So it appears that Michael Savage jumped on the first reports from the FBI and did not see the follow-up testimony by Director Comey. The first article implies that the DNC was unwilling to provide the FBI access to their servers, but when put in the context of the Esquire article and the followup CNN report, it makes it seem more likely that CrowdStrike was involved in the initial work in the hacks, and the FBI only became involved after it became publicly known that there was a hack of the DNC.
Also from the Esquire article, it seems that the DNC, at the advice of CrowdStrike, did a full wipe of their computer systems after the hack took place. This would explain why the FBI had to receive the evidence from CrowdStrike instead of from the servers directly.
