They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.How does that evidence support the finding that the Russians were trying to help Trump and hurt Hillary — as opposed to just hacking into everything they could? Are senior Obama administration officials reliable in making that leap or is this political junk?
There's also the evidence that "it was largely documents from Democratic Party systems that were leaked to the public" (through Wikileaks). You have to interpret that evidence. Republicans say "their networks were not compromised, asserting that only the accounts of individual Republicans were attacked." The NYT cites a "senior government official" corroborating that position.
The NYT also raises the theory that the Russians — like most people — assumed Hillary was going to win, and they weren't trying to defeat her, but undercut her presidency. In this theory, they weren't so concerned with hurting Trump because they didn't think he'd win.
I'm reading these new conclusions as political junk.
पोस्ट्स
३३७ टिप्पण्या:
337 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»What they want is for people to conclude that Trump colluded with the Russians for obviously nefarious reasons. Now - let's speculate what those reasons are. This will be the source of much fake news.
The Russians hacked into the New York Times's computers, too, but they couldn't find any news there.
All i know is people who didn't believe jackshit during W's admin now take whatever comes from Obama as the unvarnished and unquestionable truth. The government lies to protect its interests, and Obama aint gone yet.
Fake news like "if like your doctor you can keep..."
The agencies may have high confidence in their conclusions; Obama may believe this intell. No one else does. Even the NYT is throwing other conspiracy theories at the wall and hoping one sticks. Fake News. The Russians have a tunnel from the King Kong Pizza to the White House situation room and when no one is working, which is most of the time, they sneak in and change the chairs around and alter statistics and download from computers and generally are very mean and sneaky.
The agencies may have high confidence in their conclusions; Obama may believe this intell. No one else does. Even the NYT is throwing other conspiracy theories at the wall and hoping one sticks. Fake News. The Russians have a tunnel from the King Kong Pizza to the White House situation room and when no one is working, which is most of the time, they sneak in and change the chairs around and alter statistics and download from computers and generally are very mean and sneaky.
Boris: We don't need computer weapon to kill moose and squirrel. We've been trying to kill moose and squirrel for 35 years.
Natasha: And we've never even come close.
Boris: Exactly.
Is political junk the same as fake news? Oh wait...I see that tag....
The Russians were looking for chess problems.
Are our intelligence agencies so weak they can't pick up on Russia interfering with our elections and then stop it?
Either they are that weak, and that's terrible.
Or they aren't that week, and this didn't really happen as portrayed.
Is the strategy supposed to be something like 'Russians Wanted Trump To Win So Republicans Aren't Allowed To Pass Tax Reform or Defund Planned Parenthood'?
I suppose it's really all they have left, like It's only a flesh wound!
Hillary was a non-attacking queens problem.
The Washington Post reported yesterday that all of the 17 intelligence agencies did not agree.
[quote]
The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies. A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.
For example, intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees. Moscow has in the past used middlemen to participate in sensitive intelligence operations so it has plausible deniability.
[unquote]
As soon as Trump becomes President he should inform the US public how many of the 17 intelligence agencies did concur and how many did not concur.
So far, the public knows only that the press release was signed by only:
1) Director of National Intelligence James Clapper
2) The Department of Homeland Security
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.f938a017f08c
Leaks from senior Obama Administration officials is how the MSM runs its fake news scam.
And does this come from the same intelligence agencies that missed 9-11?
How do we know this true? Couldn't it just been the Russian mob? Or someone in Bulgaria pretending to be in Russia?
So now they believe the CIA?
The Russians would rather deal with a corrupt numskull like Hillary--one they could talk into selling them America's uranium reserves, helium reserves, or dismantling all of our nuclear weapons. Pickles is nothing if not pliable and easily cowed.
And yes< I believe this is a push to get the right Secretary of State
During the 2012 campaign the left and media roundly mocked Romney for saying that Russia was our number one geopolitical for. Now that they've lost this election, they're suddenly finding Ivan behind every bush, tree and rock.
Sad!
But, hey, all of the stuff in Podesta's emails were true!
Hillary is just lucky that the deleted 33,000 emails weren't leaked.
Boy, the media has done and continues to do some real damage to their brand. Good, I don't believe a single word from the democrat media anymore. And the democrat media opinion writers and democrat politicians I just ignore with a sod off.
The Department of Homeland Security
A hack knows a hack.
"Are senior Obama administration officials reliable in making that leap or is this political junk?"
Sorry, but it's political gold, true or not. A large nugget. One big step in the effort to delegitimize Trump.
"Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump...""
God bless them.
The difficulty I am having: The media spent considerable effort in trying to elect Hillary. That is undeniable. I think every Journalist at the Times and the WaPost is aghast and surprised that Trump won, and to excuse their extreme myopia they're running all sorts of stories to the effect of "See??? We weren't so wrong, LOOK at what's happening!!"
The challenge is to find the wheat among the very considerable chaff that the Post and Times throw out daily. After all, an *unbiased* press is a key to a functioning Democracy -- if I can't trust what I read, how do I know if things go awry? My cynicism towards the Press -- that the Press has earned, without doubt -- could be a dangerous thing. The Press has made being a good citizen more difficult.
That said, I don't believe this particular narrative from the Press. Even if it is true -- why would having elected someone from an organization that has been hacked by the Russians be a good thing?
political junk = NYT
NYT staff and owners = Spastic gnomes with green teeth.
Listen. There are millions of Russian hackers. That's a legacy of Communism and the crappy Russian economy. Russian hackers package their successful exploits and sell them on 4Chan and the dark web. Those are little programs and apps to disable specific security features and hackers around the world keep stuff like that to make up their "toolkit." Try one tool and if it doesn't work, try another. Now the DNC hack showed some of those Russian apps being tried, but that means nothing. Hackers from every country use those. When this thing started, some computer website talked to the some of the people from the top PRIVATE computer security companies that were brought in to consult. When they compared the DNC hack to their proprietary databases of past hacks and looked at all the technical details, these private security people concluded that the hack DID NOT come from Russia. Obama's lackeys have gotten stupid political apparatchiks at our Security Agencies to say that it was Russian because of those tools used. Those political apparatchiks will be out as soon as Trumps takes office. Obama and Hillary are playing a dangerous game just to set up the next narrative for the Left and that is why these people should never hold power again.
I guess the 80's foreign policy never left in the first place, eh Barack?
More fake news from the NYT?
This all stems from the desperation to cover up #pizzagate. It goes all the way up to the Usurper.
Read this and get up to speed.
https://dcpizzagate.wordpress.com/
The MSM is DESPERATE to cover for their puppeteers in the political establishment, who have been exposed as pedophiles by Wikileaks and the determination of we the people. The MSM is now trying to declare that of course they were right, and the Crooked Old Lady would have won, if it weren't for those meddling Russians, despite the fact that less than 500 of nearly 3200 Counties in the US voted for HRC. ALL of her supposed 2 million vote margin can be attributed to 4 boroughs in NY--- and much of it there and in Ca. are probably illegal votes. There is something very sinister afoot here, as the Usurper has demanded that the "Report" on Russian meddling be delivered to him by Jan 20, just in time to declare the election invalid, and in the meantime allow Electors to become unfaithful (as the Republicans don't want Trump in office either.
The veil has been lifted and the curtain pulled back, revealing the brick wall behind the veneer of our government that Frank Zappa foretold. The Media has been exposed as the propaganda outfit they are, and that genie will never be put back in the bottle. This "Real Fake News" report identifies NO EVIDENCE of the claims it purports, citing anonymous sources--- hmmm.
be careful of cornered and desperate animals.
The Russians make such good villains.
Maybe they did hack the RNC. And maybe they didn't disclose any of those emails because they're wasn't anything interesting or the emails showed privately whatever was already being said publicly.
I wonder if Snowden is behind any of this somehow, like sharing ways and means with his host country.
Exhuming McCarthy
It's a sign of the times
It's a sign of the times...
Enemy sighted, enemy met, I'm addressing the realpolitik
Look who bought the myth, by jingo, buy America
"Let us not assassinate this man further Senator,
You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, mame?
At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
We're sharpening stones, walking on coals
To improve your business acumen.
Sharpening stones, walking on coals,
To improve your business acumen.
Enemy sighted, enemy met, I'm addressing the realpolitik
You've seen start and you've seen quit
(I'm addressing the table of content)
I always thought of you as quick
Exhuming McCarthy
(Meet me at the book burning)
Exhuming McCarthy
(Meet me at the book burning)
The left is angry because the truth was leaked. That is all you need to know of the left. When the truth is not on your side, then it is you who is on the wrong side; Liars should be suppressed, not the truth.
Please tell Vlad after my election I'll have more flexibility.
I have thought all along that Wikileaks was probably getting the stuff from either the Israelis, who have no love for Hillary, or disgruntled US employees of NSA, angry at her ignoring security rules and law.
The Russians have no reason to defeat her. IF they had good stuff on her, wait until she is in office.
I can't believe all these people who love Obama so much are falling for this! Surely Obama would not have let this happen!!!
Hillary is just lucky that the deleted 33,000 emails weren't leaked.
Nothing but recipes, yoga routines and wedding plans. Did I mention, I have some lovely Florida property for sale?
Progressives believe the government should "curate" information given to the public so they won't come to the wrong conclusions.
So does Putin.
""American agencies have concluded with 'high confidence' that the media acted covertly in every stage of the presidential Republican primary campaign to harm many candidate's chances and promote Donald J. Trump...""
""American agencies have concluded with 'high confidence' that the media and the DNC acted covertly in every stage of the presidential Democratic primary campaign to harm Bernie Sander's chances and promote Hillary Clinton...""
I'm reading this as fake news, personally.
Are our intelligence agencies so weak they can't pick up on Russia interfering with our elections and then stop it?
I'm impressed that the "deep dive" ordered yesterday is already completed. Sounds legit.
They went in with pre-conceived notions then selectively looked at a few things that vaguely suggested those notions and thereby came to their "conclusions with high confidence."
Why doesn't the media examine Jill Stein's Russian ties and her efforts at undermining our election?
What they want is for people to conclude that Trump colluded with the Russians for obviously nefarious reasons.
Trump and the GOP are not only Nazis, they are Commies too! It's the Red Menace!
After all, if George H.W. Bush can get on a secret spy plane to collude with the Ayatollah to keep imprisoning the hostages in Iran, then this is obviously true too.
There's also the evidence that "it was largely documents from Democratic Party systems that were leaked to the public" (through Wikileaks). You have to interpret that evidence. Republicans say "their networks were not compromised, asserting that only the accounts of individual Republicans were attacked." The NYT cites a "senior government official" corroborating that position.
My take-away from that article is that the RNC had a fucking clue as to how to secure their network & the DNC didn't.
Oh course, foreign intelligence sources are trying to hack into the US centers of political power. That's what they do for a living.
"senior administration officials" which means the NYT pulled that one out of one of their orifices.
My own theory is that the Russians had so much information from the Emails that her staffers deleted after the Russians read them which could be used to blackmail her, that if anything they would have preferred Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump.
The New York Times and the Washington Post seem to have dropped any pretense of offering anything other than fake news -- in the case of the Post you can more or less trust them with reporting the scores on sporting events. Other than that, not so much.
I blame Jay Carney and his love of Soviet propaganda posters.
It's funny to see the Media and Democrats going all Joe MCCarthy on Russian cyber infiltration. Jesus aren't Obama, Hillary and the Mdia the "RESET" morons, "the 80s wants their foreign policy back" folks.
If the Russian influence on the election is true, Trump is not responsible for it. Trump didn't run a corrupt DNC or an unsecured private server doing State Dept business. Trump wasn't President over the last eight years and did nothing to secure the US government data bases till 30 days prior to leaving office. The list of government computers that have been hacked over the last eight years is long, tell me again how this reflects on Trump.
Interesting. Didn't the president recently throw the intelligence community under the bus with respect to ISIS? OK, now we can believe them?
She would have gotten away with it too, if weren't for those meddling kids.
The 80's called...
Trump and the GOP are not only Nazis, they are Commies too!
And I just now saw Michael Kinsley's column saying that "Donald Trump is actually a Fascist."
Boo. The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming!
The Republicans is the stupid, and simpleminded, party. It is possible "the Russians" hacked the RNC too, but got just boring stuff.
Then, at the DNC however, they struck pay dirt and fed it over to Wikileaks. Maybe.
But I think it most likely that the Democrats just are trying to deflect attention from the content of their e-mails.
If it was "the Russians" at all. They may not be all that interested with everything else that is going on and they have to cope with, and it may even be that Putin is smart enough to stand aside when the Americans are having a free-for-all among themselves.
I won't believe it until I hear it directly from Colin Powell.
One of Trump's promises was to do a better job with the threat from terrorism. Picking a fight with the CIA is a great way to start off.
I can see where the Russians might have hacked the DNC's emails. What I don't understand is why they would not also hack Hillary's bathroom server?....Is there any possibility that this might have been the work of a pissed off Bernie Sanders' supporter?
"High confidence" = pro-democrat hack media speak for - bullshit.
David said...
"Are senior Obama administration officials reliable in making that leap or is this political junk?"
Sorry, but it's political gold, true or not. A large nugget. One big step in the effort to delegitimize Trump.
12/10/16, 9:18 AM
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
So let's assume that the Russians did it: Acquire emails that proved what we knew of Hillary:
* That her foundation was a play-for-pay deal for anyone with the bucks
* That the DNC shafter Bernie Saunders and thought his supporters were idiots
* That her own staff was concerned about her mental and physical state
* That The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Boston Globe coordinated their coverage with the campaign, and individual reporters allowed the DNC to vet their stories before publishing.
So the Russians did exactly the same thing as Daniel Ellsburg did with the Pentagon Papers, and Deep Throat did with Watergate.
(Also, remember how they got the Podesta emails, because he clicked on an emailed link to reset his password even though he was told specifically to go directly to Google and reset it from there. So is John Podesta a Russian agent, too?)
There are millions of Russian hackers...
Podesta's emails were hacked using the simplest method possible. Anyone with reasonable good HTLM could have gotten his keys because the idiot failed to take the most basic security measures. Russians? Podesta could just as easily be hacked by a middles school CS club in Hackensack, NJ.
Hillary was hacked because she deliberately avoided State Department security rules with criminal intent and got burned.
"Republicans say "their networks were not compromised, asserting that only the accounts of individual Republicans were attacked.""
Perhaps the RNC wasn't stupid enough to email their people new passwords like the DNC did.
Nobody is alleging the leaked emails weren't real. Releasing them wasn't meddling, it was reporting.
The Russians were just doing a job Americans wouldn't do.
It'll be OK. The new default password, "password", is unhackable.
It should be kept in mind that for most people around the world, the difference between Republicans and Democrats is like the difference between the Denver Broncos and the Dallas Cowboys - or is it the Denver Cowboys and the Dallas Broncos? It is all very confusing and it is difficult to understand what the Americans get so excited about. They are such an inscrutable people.
What's the worst that could happen...it is not like Trump could accept a hefty contribution to his foundation, and then sign a waiver letting Russia buy up most of our uranium production.....Hillary has already done that.
Trump and the GOP are not only Nazis, they are Commies too! It's the Red Menace!
The Red Menace is coming, and they are wearing brown shirts!
@Ann Political junk is an accurate description. It is hard to be cynical enough about the garbage that is being printed about the election. It will be interesting when the "Russians" release their hacks of the post election conspiracy between the Clinton campaign and the MSM. Personally I agree with Trump that it was a couple of kids in a basement in NJ ( or NE or IA) who hacked the DNC, etc. If true, of course, it makes the DNC look pretty foolish and underscores their incompetence; so it must be the Russians.
@Hagar: "They are such an inscrutable people." Like, you celebrate the black leftie in Berlin and give him a prize in Oslo, next thing he does is start using drones to drop bombs on people. Then he overthrows a government to create chaos in a country that funnels migrants to Europe. Then he efs up red lines in Syria which promptly goes to hell, pushing out yet more migrants to Europe. Then you have the leftie promoting free trade through TPP and the first thing the Republican does is nix it. Americans!
If the Russians were responsible for the Wikileaks Democrat documents dump, then Americans owe Putin a collective French kiss. It revealed what truly corrupt,conniving, and downright nasty people are the engineers of "progressivism."
@Bill P.
Also, remember how they got the Podesta emails, because he clicked on an emailed link to reset his password even though he was told specifically to go directly to Google and reset it from there
And it gets worse. Even after Podesta was informed that he had been phished, he didn't change his email password! So, his password was public knowledge to pretty much any hacker on the 'net.
The Russians are secretly staying in Trump Hotels and paying double the Kayak rates. Don't tell anyone.
One more reason Marriot wants Romney as Secretary of Mormon State.
Meanwhile Trump is secretly meeting with Samurais who will make Nippon great again and want Pearl Harbor back.
AndThis all has certainty over at CIA.
"Nobody is alleging the leaked emails weren't real. Releasing them wasn't meddling, it was reporting. The Russians were just doing a job Americans wouldn't do."
Exactly. I really don't care whether the Russians were trying to influence the election. In my book, there's nothing wrong with influencing an election by publishing true facts, no matter who you are. Just imagine how outraged Clinton and Obama would have been if Russians had published devastating Trump documents.
'Political junk' is a rather strong expression. I prefer 'Partisan Blather'.
Maybe the Democrats should be concerned with the free elections the Obama influenced around the world with cash and propaganda. They could ask representatives from Egypt and Israel to come testify, just to name a few of our friends.
My take-away from that article is that the RNC had a fucking clue as to how to secure their network & the DNC didn't.
I tend to agree more with Hagar that the RNC had only dull stuff, like running a campaign and no vote stealing or payoffs.
Republicans are so dull. Nixon got impeached for doing stuff that Hillary would not even bother with.
Like trying to take care of underlings' families.
Hmmmm, coming at the same time that Georgia is accusing DHS of attempting to hack into it's election database...
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/309530-state-of-georgia-allegedly-accusing-homeland-security-of-attempted-hack
Well, Sebastian, as a Middle Eastern diplomat lately told his American counterpart, "We all do stupid things, but you do stupid things in such a complicated fashion that you keep us wondering if perhaps we are missing something!"
On the DNC hack, the Trump and Sanders factions within the CIA, who are Americans, probably is more interested in the intricacies of the American elections than any foreign governments - perhaps with the exception of Israel, who have got themselves into a situation of being way too dependent on U.S. money and military armaments.
"But, hey, all of the stuff in Podesta's emails were true!" Correction: was true.
"Are senior Obama administration officials reliable in making that leap or is this political junk?"
In our hatred and disgust for the lying vermin of the media, let's not forget that the Obama Administration is also full of lying vermin who deserve our hatred and disgust. If you do not have enough hatred and disgust for all of them, just think about Lois Lerner for a few seconds. Or my own personal favorite Democrat POS, Tom Vilsack, who has turned the USDA into a cash register for making billion-dollar payouts to Democrats.
What Russians hacked?
Which intelligence agencies agreed?
What Senior Administration Official leaked?
Fake news from the ghost army of the legacy mediaswine. Pap for Democrats afflicted with confirmation bias who still insist that the Russians didn't hack Hillary's emails and that Bush lost Florida in 2000.
Questions apparently unasked by WaPo and NYT: Are the Russkies hacking anything of importance - besides the former Secretary of State's classified emails - in Obama's cyberporous America? How are the intelligence agencies that were unable to definitively tell us about Hillary-hacks involving national security able to be so specific about the country and the motive behind hacks involving politics?
Fake news emanating from political hacks. (Pun intended.)
I knew you would write this post, Althouse. Just as you did write it. And I agree. Bravo. I am posting, to add this to the discussion; this is today's leading news story, throughout the English-speaking world. It is leading all NPR news programming. CBC Canada radio, which I listen to on Saturdays for the Metropolitan Opera broadcast, is leading with it.
Ann, it is political junk and, in the short term, it will continue to undermine the legacy media's reputation with everyone but the most hard core supporters of the Democratic Party. However, I am not nearly as sanguine about this as most people are. This is part and parcel a concerted effort to initiate full censorship of internet news and opinion; and this spreading censorship doesn't require the Democrats to actually have any control in government- all it requires is for social media companies, and the companies that provide the platform software and hardware for internet sites, to allow curation of what qualifies as news and acceptable opinion. This censorship drive might fail, but then again I am not very confident in this opinion.
Was the election itself claimed to be hacked, or is the hacking involved just the exposure of the emails so that the American people would be able to have a transparent view of the DNC?
I think if there was engaged mucking about with election totals, that's an issue, but simply having poor internet security resulting in exposed emails isn't a concern. It's what the media should have been doing in its reporting, telling us who these people really are. Instead, we learn the media colluded with the DNC.
The Russians, ironically, undermined the pravdation of the American media establishment in providing transparency about the candidates that could provide more informed choices.
Remember when Bush emails got hacked and publicized. It turns out he was the same sort of person in private as in public. If the Democrats had the same integrity the emails would have helped not hurt. They hurt because the Democrats in power are hypocrites and horrible people.
Why would the Rooskies want Trump? He is -- hat tip: Chuck -- perhaps unstable and certainly unpredictable; which is the last thing they want. Why wouldn't they prefer Deplorable She -- they've had files on her for decades? It makes no sense.
Senior Obama administration officials?
Fake news!!! Fake news!!! Fake news!!!
Yep Fabi, they would want someone they could BUY.
And Hillary surely could be bought!
Does anyone else wonder if "American intelligence agencies" is worded that way to imply more than it says? There are apparently 17 different agencies. If only two of them have "high confidence" in this conclusion, that make a plural "American intelligence agencies" technically true, even if the opinion of the other fifteen ranges from "low confidence" to "extreme confidence in the precise opposite" to "what are the heads of those two smoking?". If it's (hypothetically) only two, an honest newspaper (remember those? it's been a while) would say "Some American intelligence agencies" or better "A small minority of . . ." or most explicitly "Two of the seventeen American intelligence agencies". By leaving out any such qualification, they imply that it's all of them without actually saying that it's even a majority or a plurality. Makes me suspect they don't say the latter because they know it's a damned lie.
Breaking news. Election affected by truth about Hillary and the DNC.
Film at 11.
We've had many recordings, videos and hacks over the past few political seasons. There is one constant I have noted.
If the hack/recording/video hurts the Republican, the substance is the critical issue.
If the hack/recording/video hurts the Democrat, the source is the critical issue.
So, what is the evidence of intent here? That is, what is the evidence that some element of the Russian government decided to do things for the purpose of aiding Trump?
readering said...
"One of Trump's promises was to do a better job with the threat from terrorism. Picking a fight with the CIA is a great way to start off."
Here's readering again unable to see the forest for the lefty trees. Who really picked the fight? Is the CIA administration even reliable or a political cesspool? How does the CIA divine the motive for the hacks? Why is the CIA investigating "crimes" committed on American soil involving political entities?
Hmm?
Interesting, there have been published reports of everyone steeling internal government data from all countries, the Chinese more than most since they teach this in their high school sophomore computing labs where they are graded by interesting, commercially significant, political, military operations (particularly congressional data since they have effectively no security and most often just don't care because it's a pain to deal with, and defense weapon's data. So the complaint here is that Putin may have chosen to release data that might influence the election more than Ms.Cs. on mistakes have, that every other government has other than ours since we refuse to admin we collect on our own people, even to the defend them. Strange world we live in.
So this is what it's come to, eh? Repeating rumors from people with an agenda and calling it news?
Syllogism:
1. Hillary was supposed to win.
2. She didn't.
Ergo, somebody cheated.
QED
Well, at least it wasn't something egregious like a sitting U.S. Senator secretly contacting a Russian leader to help support his party's candidate against the incumbent.
Like *that's* never happened...
Oh...
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/ted-kennedy-secretly-asked-the-soviets-to-intervene-in-the-1984-elections/
So connecting the dots, the first dot would be: Democrats are clueless about computer security."
It's hacks vs. hackers.
The hacks lied to us.
The hackers gave us the facts.
Now the hacks are telling us if the hackers hadn't done that Hillary would've won so Trump's not a legitimate President.
Okay, got it.
I'm reading these new conclusions as political junk.
Yeah, one would think the Dems would get a clue after years of getting whacked at the polls at the State & Federal level, apparently NOT! The first law of holes is, when you are in one, PUT THE SHOVEL DOWN!
A well functioning democracy needs at least one opposition party but the democrats keep going down the same road, Pelosi for one and Ellison as DNC chair would just insure at least 10 more years of republican rule. WAKE UP DEMS, your house is on fire!
"WAKE UP DEMS, your house is on fire!"
Shhhh!
My big thing is, who says the Russians were the only ones who hacked in? If one group can get in, others could too. That doesn't imply the kind of cause -> effect relationship the chatterati are trying to make, to me.
We can think Trump is legitimate or not. What's the diff?! He'll be President nonetheless. All that matters is rallying opposition to oppose everything he does. It's pure propaganda at this point. Whether I consider him legitimate or not hardly matters. All that matters is getting in the way and doing as much harm to his policies and anyone who supports him. Sad, to be sure. But that's our country. We can all do a lot of subtle harm to the pond scum that supports this moronic thug. Remember Obama! Remember what they've done to Obama. That ought to be motivation enough!
Hmmmm, coming at the same time that Georgia is accusing DHS of attempting to hack into it's election database...
I noticed that. And the accuser provided actual evidence to bolster the claim.
The article downplays the fact that the "news" contains no specifics and is anonymously sourced.
Althouse is correct. This is political junk.
China hacks NYT
Quaestor has low confidence in any claim of high confidence by the NYT given the fact that the NYT had high confidence in a Hillary win right up to 9 pm EST on Election Day.
While the Russians have a compelling interest to avoid Obama/Clinton's reset of the cold war, other nations also have a need to avoid their legacy of global regime changes that end with mass abortions, sodomy trials, and refugee crises (a.k.a. immigration "reform"). The Obama/Clinton regimes made more than a few enemies over nearly three decades of social "justice" adventurism. Any one of those nations and peoples from Europe to Asia to Africa would have an incentive to expose them to public scrutiny.
That said, the New York Times self-exposed itself to public scrutiny. It lost the election.
Which is worse the content of the hacked emails or the hacking?
Trump as two words for people who fail his organization: "You're fired!". The CIA, who told us Saddam had loads of WMDs, has belatedly realized they are part of swamp Trump is coming to drain. Hence the need to "de-legitimize" him, if they can.
Hopefully, Trump will fire a few of these people for this report as soon as he takes office.
One way to look at an article like this is to look at its claims and see if they can be confirmed or verified, e.g. they could not have been written by a journalist sitting at his computer and simply making things up,
We have:
American intelligence agencies have concluded with “high confidence” that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump, according to senior administration officials.
They based that conclusion, in part, on another finding — which they say was also reached with high confidence — that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.
Can't confirm this independently.
On Friday, a senior committee official said he had no comment.
A nameless person had no comment.
One senior government official, who had been briefed on an F.B.I. investigation into the matter, said that while there were attempts to penetrate the Republican committee’s systems, they were not successful.
This probably should have been written "One senior government official, who claimed that he had been briefed on an F.B.I. investigation into the matter . . ." But it still tells you nothing you can confirm.The whole article is like this. The things you can confirm aren't important, the things you cannot confirm make the headline.
Here is NBC chiming in with some REAL FAKE NEWS. The full court press is on to cover up the exposition of a pedophile ring w/in the power elite of DC and to de-legitimize the election of Trump. All BS of course, with no real evidence, although that pic of the back- side view of the guy is pretty damning/ (just like the views of the supposed "Bin Laden" watching TV in Islamabad). These people are really just children, having a hissy fit, but desperate animals are very dangerous. (Massive narcissistic rejection syndrome)
"Dimitri — who asked NBC News not to use his real name — is one of dozens of teenagers in the Macedonian town of Veles who got rich during the U.S. presidential election producing fake news for millions on social media."
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/fake-news-how-a-partying-macedonian-teen-earns-thousands-publishing-lies/ar-AAlmttG?li=BBnb2gg
And yet the Dems claim these same hackers didn't get into Hillary's illegal email server.
"Remember what they've done to Obama. That ought to be motivation enough!"
Mindless fools. What has anyone done to Obama that is worse than what he has done to himself and, incidentally, to all of us.
"If you like your doctor..."
"The JV team..."
"I have a pen and a phone....."
Reading as "political junk" actually means that the writers of the statements are just making "stuff" up. There are a lot of moose meadow muffins served up by the boys and girls in the fantasy kitchen at the New York Times.
"Remember what they've done to Obama. That ought to be motivation enough!"
Yeah, sure. Isn't it about time to remind us you are a Republican...... again?
"And yet the Dems claim these same hackers didn't get into Hillary's illegal email server." I know, right? It's almost like they're implying that the security of the communications of top Dem officials could have national defense implications. Fever swamp.
Well, boys, I reckon this is it — hacking combat toe to toe with the Rooskies.
Now they're claiming that the Russians may have tried to hack the Republicans' emails, too, but either failed or in their dastardly way refused to share what they hacked. So if the time-honored standard is that an R hack means the story is about the content but a D hack means the story is about the source, then a combined R/D hack means that the D part is about the source, and the R part would be about the content except that those awful Rs skillfully protected their content, or else those awful Russkis prevented us from seeing the evil R content that everyone has a right to see, no matter what the source, because free press.
Because I'm just assuming that if the Russians had leaked documents devastating to the Trump campaign, the press would be fainting with anxiety over the danger to a free press and an uncorrupted election process.
The Left should know that the cover-up is worse than the hack. Whether it is Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, their local and national babyhunts, "everything is fine at Fannie and Freddie", the transhuman activities at Planned Parenthood et al, the social "justice" adventurism from Benghazi to Kiev, the DNC's class diversity problems, or Clinton's sacrifice of women and interns for political progress, it was the cover-up that raised the threat of a clear and present danger.
LMFAO @
Blogger Fernandinande said...
Well, boys, I reckon this is it — hacking combat toe to toe with the Rooskies.
Dead funny!! A lil Slim Pickens in Dr Strangelove, i think it was more like
"Noo-ku-lar Combat"
Well, boys, I reckon this is it — hacking combat toe to toe with the Rooskies.
And Hillary rides that $90,000 Brocade encrypting ethernet switch she was too cheap to buy for her bathroom straight into the ground. WAH-HOO!
Yeah the Russians are why Trump won. Yeah that's it.
Don't worry, you're not going crazy. This all makes sense, you are smart, Hillary should have won. She was inevitable, the next, the perfect first women president.
Its true.. the NYT says so.
I wonder which is worse. An outside group working to reveal the truth that the Clinton State Department and Obama Administration had sought to keep hidden and obstructing Congress and justice to do so, or weaponizing the branches of the federal government to obstruct and interfere with a federal election and the free speech rights of US citizens as plainly happened during the 2012 election?
NPR is on the bandwagon. This morning they interviewed a WaPo reporter -- didn't catch the name -- and treated his report that the Russians explicitly acted to help Trump win as established fact. No mention that the story was sourced anonymously, no mention that the WaPo had early on taken a virulently anti-Trump editorial stand, and that there was documented bad blood between Trump the WaPo's owner, Amazon's multi-billionaire founder, Jeff Bezos.
Razor tweets: Putin is so brilliant he masterminded Hillary getting 3M more votes than Trump but still lose the election by almost 75 electoral votes.
The Russians are coming! I’m old enough to remember this was the way to savagely mock political losers.
Darrell at 9:26 am.
This!
Speaking of political junk,
Just got an email from Dem folk with gift suggestions.
If you work the snark correctly, you might enjoy some of these even if not one of Dem folk.
Like a boss#ThanksObama
The NYTimes has lost all ability to be ashamed of itself.
They used to say "All the news that's fit to print" in the upper left side of the front page. About two years ago that changed to "All in for Hillary!" and now it's "No longer able to be ashamed of ourselves." Kind of sad.
All the news that's print to fit.
Hey..their return to real journalism will take time..
Unknown: "Remember Obama! Remember what they've done to Obama. That ought to be motivation enough!"
Oh yes. Remember what "they" did to Obama when the Dems had Congress and when the Dems had the Senate and Reid killed over 300 bills from the Republican house. What Obama legislation did the Repubs kill, exactly?
Where does this partisan ignoramus sleep as the world passes by.
Or is this the new Dem troll game, to pretend that Obama has been thwarted by Republican pussies?
He's a for journal reporter who had some good scoops re benghszj initially.
Here is NBC chiming in with some REAL FAKE NEWS. The full court press is on to cover up the exposition of a pedophile ring w/in the power elite of DC and to de-legitimize the election of Trump. All BS of course, with no real evidence, although that pic of the back- side view of the guy is pretty damning/ (just like the views of the supposed "Bin Laden" watching TV in Islamabad). These people are really just children, having a hissy fit, but desperate animals are very dangerous. (Massive narcissistic rejection syndrome)
The Lefties I know buy into this completely. I've asked "OK, this kid you don't know is running this site that isn't named writing stories that aren't linked and making thousands that cannot be verified --- and this is your REBUTTAL to 'fake news'"?
I think it was Mad magazine 30+ years ago that mocked the NYT motto with their own "All the news that fits, we print".
The NYT probably assumed nobody would read the entire article and find this quote from a GOP oppo researcher as the very last paragraph...
“I’m not upset at all,” he said. “I try in my communications, quite frankly, not to say anything that would be embarrassing if made public.”
If Democrats had followed that simple common sense approach, nothing that hackers had pulled off their servers would have harmed them in the election.
The next season of the Americans is just gonna be the couple watching TV in 2016 and high fiving each other
-david dennis
The best part of the fake news meme is that the media has undone itself.
Rex Tillerson is the new Secretary of State. That means Exxon and Russia can soon renew their billion barrel oil discovery in the arctic Kara Sea worth 500 billion dollars. The Chinese wept.
"Dimitri — who asked NBC News not to use his real name — is one of dozens of teenagers in the Macedonian town of Veles who got rich during the U.S. presidential election producing fake news for millions on social media."
So? How is this more egregious than social media filtering news and/or search results to favor one candidate/party over the other?
They're grabbing for any lifeline that will explain the election result other than, simply, "Trump won"
@Andy: "If Democrats had followed that simple common sense approach, nothing that hackers had pulled off their servers would have harmed them in the election." Right. The question is why they lacked common sense. The answer is that their sense was not common. Leave aside their technological ignorance. Their sense was that they were above it all, that they ran D.C., that they were entitled, that they could get away with anything, that the MSM were on their side, that they were the Anointed. Sure, there were one or two, like Tanden, who tried to get through to the rest, but they were lone voices. Hill perfectly personified her posse. She and they almost got away with it.
Obama and his fellow traveler pedophiles attempting to create more "Real Fake News":
"Iceland Interior Minister Reveals Plot By Obama Administration 'To Frame Julian Assange'"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-10/iceland-interior-minister-reveals-plot-obama-administration-frame-julian-assange#comments
The Hits, they keep coming. Once the veneer of invincibility and power is broken it cannot be recaptured. The Globalists and their Propagandists are outed and desperate.
They're grabbing for any lifeline that will explain the election result other than, simply, "Trump won"
More accurately "Hillary Lost". It was hers to lose, and she lost it. Nobody else lost it for her.
OBAMA VOTER ANN ALTHOUSE NOT IMPRESSED WITH JIFFY-POP CIA REPORT ON RUSSIAN HACKING AND THE ELECTION:
I found this headline over at Instapundit. I thought it was kinda harsh.
Someone please clarify: is there evidence of the Russian government doing the hacking, or just "Russians". If it's the later, then this appears to be flimsy evidence. If the former, there needs to be some pretty amazing proof since FSB would not leave a clear digital trail of breadcrumbs leading back to them/Putin.
"Ex-CIA operative: We may need a new vote
Former CIA Operative Robert Baer says if the CIA can prove that Russia interfered with the 2016 election then the US should vote again.Source: CNN"
They have lost their ever-loving minds.
It's a serious matter if the Russians are behind the hacking of the DNC and the leaks. If the leaks from the intelligence agencies (!!) are to be believed, they are very confident that the hacking originated in Russia, less so that the Russian government was behind it.
I assume that (leaking) US intelligence agencies are more than confident enough to determine that the hacks came from IP addresses in Russia. So (unless you are disinclined to believe apparent leaks from American intelligence agencies to American journalists), accept that the identified IP addresses of the hackers are Russian. This is a reasonably straightforward fact based determination.
But the following are not fact based:
1. Was the Russian government behind the hacks? (Possible, and even more likely that the Russian government allowed this even if they did not originate it.)
2. Was the purpose of the hacks to favor Trump over Clinton? (Questions include "why would they do this?" Is the inference of favoritism--there is apparently no direct evidence--justified?
3. Was there a successful hack of the Republican or Trump campaign computers? Some of the reporting says so but RNC denies it very vehemently, saying that NYT refused to even look at RNC's own results of their internal inquiry.) This would go a long way to explaining why only Democratic info was released to Wikileaks.
4. Why should journalists who were actively supporting Clinton over Trump be believed on this? They might not make it up, but they have certainly proved how credulous they are.
If you want to speculate, maybe the Russians actually favored Clinton and found worse evidence than was released and suppressed it. Perhaps they, like pos everyone else, thought Clinton would win anyway and wanted her to know that they knew her secrets and would use them against her in her presidency? (I don't find this highly plausible, but a lot of this is not highly plausible, so why is this any more farfetched than the idea the Russians would favor Trump.
It is very clear that Trump is going to seek a renewed military buildup in the United States. The Russians had to know this. Why would they favor the candidate who will increase our troop levels, build more combat ships and aircraft, increase cyber war and security capacity, build orbital launch rockets, modernize the nuclear arsenal and perhaps build more submarines and aircraft carriers?
It's a serious matter. It could have happened the way it's now being reported, but it's more likely that our intelligence agencies know less than they don't know, and perhaps think they know more than they actually do.
If the democrats were not such two-faced rotten liars and money grubbing crooks- perhaps leaked e-mails would not matter?
Maybe we should vote again. Given the number of people totally turned off by the Democrats' post-election antics I predict Trump will win all the states he won November 8th and three or four besides.
According to the UK Daily Express, a US official familiar with the CIA probe told Angela Merkel that Putin intends to take her down next. Have you ever heard such nonsense in your life. It's remarkable the excuses humans can concoct to explain away their failures.
Maybe if Putin can restore Russia to communism, the left will love them again.
Maybe we should vote again. Given the number of people totally turned off by the Democrats' post-election antics I predict Trump will win all the states he won November 8th and three or four besides.
A lot of reluctant Trump voters will have turned into enthusiastic ones. Jill Stein voters not so much.
BTW, Drudge has a picture of Trump greeting troops at the Army-Navy game. He is positively beaming. I don't think he looked that happy on election night (or, rather, the day after election early morning). I never thought he really wanted the job, but he seems to be embracing it with gusto.
Once again: reputable computer security analysts stand up, state their name, present their findings with the appropriate caveats, reveal their methods, and let the audience reach their own conclusions based on the (reproducible) data.
We computer scientists are lucky: we work in the only scientific domain with 100% reproducibility. We can hand you our code and our data so you can literally reproduce the results yourself. And if we refuse to do that, or even tell you who we are, not only should you not trust us any more than you'd trust any other stranger with possibly conflicting motives, you should instantly distrust us in the extreme, precisely because it's so easy for us to put our money where our mouth is.
"They can't reveal the details for reasons of national security" is, by the way, top-grade bullshit. That's what zero-knowledge proofs are for, and anyone who has any business in security in any government agency damn well knows it.
"Obama the most awesome President ever" the NYT reports, citing "senior administration officials."
How 'bout that!
Let's face it, for some reason, people who have suffered an [unexpected] loss find it psychologically comforting to blame a sinister conspiracy for their plight. It is especially so for those on the far left and the far right to blame sinister forces rather than face up to the unpopularity of their ideas. I can forgive ordinary people for believing all sorts of ridiculous conspiracy allegations, but for political professionals to believe that is another sign of incompetence. The Democrats are being played by the White House. Nothing good will come of this.
I guess it was not an issue when Clinton operatives blatantly worked against Bibi Netanyahu's re-election.
I guess it wasn't an issue when Hillary used an insecure server as Secretary of State. The Russians would never hack her top secret e-mails.
I guess it wasn't an issue when Obama and his hacks in the DNC-MSM went after Mitt Romney for declaring Russia to be an adversary.
The remarkable stupidity, hypocrisy and irony of this manner of delegitimtizing Trump amazes me. Really. This is truly amazing.
@readering: One of Trump's promises was to do a better job with the threat from terrorism. Picking a fight with the CIA is a great way to start off.
Ronald Reagan didn't start off picking a fight with the CIA exactly. But neither did he accept the intelligence community party line on the Soviet Union. He asked to see analyses from outside the consensus box. He had an idea the USSR wasn't the colossus we would just have to live with as most everyone claimed and there were people in the CIA who agreed. He and those shunned analysts were right. No president should swallow whole what the CIA tells him. A healthy skepticism is, well, healthy. On the other hand, no president, like someone I can name, should discount what he's being told simply because it runs counter to his personal worldview.
@Lem: Razor tweets: Putin is so brilliant he masterminded Hillary getting 3M more votes than Trump but still lose the election by almost 75 electoral votes.
Brilliant indeed. And however did he get Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania to turn red?!
Okay, seriously for a minute. Can anyone. Any. One. Tell explain to me precisely why Putin should prefer Trump over Clinton?
Whether or not Putin tried to influence the recent US election, Obama and Kerry CERTAINLY tried to influence Netanyahu's Israeli election.
@JAORE: If the hack/recording/video hurts the Republican, the substance is the critical issue.
If the hack/recording/video hurts the Democrat, the source is the critical issue.
Insightful observation.
One of the more amusing aspects was Hillary and the Dems telling us that since the emails were obtained by a highly dubious source using nefarious methods, we had an obligation to not read them.
I'm reading these new conclusions as political junk.
And everyone apart from your much smaller readership reads your own intentionally dismissive post on the matter as even more blatantly unworthy "political junk", as well.
So there you have it.
Big Mike, Trump might be a better dancer. He might also have a better wine selection.
Okay, seriously for a minute. Can anyone. Any. One. Tell explain to me precisely why Putin should prefer Trump over Clinton?
I can.
It's translating it into mindblind-speak that's the tricky part.
Mindless fools. What has anyone done to Obama that is worse than what he has done to himself and, incidentally, to all of us.
So says a happy class warrior who grew up with a black nanny as a wet nurse in some gated community in Chicago. Yes, by all means do tell us what Obama has done to this upper class over-privileged gaggle of wet-nursed trustafarians of yours you refer to as "all of us."
Seriously, though, I could imagine that Trump, a bargainer (as shown already by the Carrier deal), might seem to be a POTUS that Russia could like. Hillary was bizarre on foreign policy, and maybe Putin would prefer a POTUS who isn't a moron.
If I were Putin, I'd probably prefer Trump. Someone with whom I could talk on equal terms.
The sun is over the yardarm, and somebody is into the cooking sherry. CHeers!
I'm enjoying the left's recently discovered love and trust of the CIA! Lulz
When did we pass through the looking glass where Democrats support free trade and fear the Red Menace?
"I'm reading these new conclusions as political junk."
"And everyone apart from your much smaller readership reads your own intentionally dismissive post on the matter as even more blatantly unworthy "political junk", as well.
So there you have it."
Hear hear!
Althouse readers would rather believe Alex Jones and General Flynn's crazy son's Pizza Gate over the CIA. No wonder they voted for Trump.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/12/10/how-russian-hackers-can-blackmail-donald-trump-and-the-gop.html
"If it is true that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee as well as the DNC, then their power over POTUS potentially knows few bounds.
“We need a new election,” said Bob Baer, a former CIA operative who himself used to interfere in the affairs of foreign governments. “This is a constitutional crisis. It’s unprecedented. If the CIA had hacked and steered a democratic election in a foreign country, say France or Germany, that country would demand a new election. No question,” he said in an interview.
“There’s a real revolt going on,” said a former intelligence officer of the CIA leaks, citing discussions with former colleagues. “They don’t like [National Security Adviser nominee Michael] Flynn and they hate Trump’s guts. This is their whole life’s work being thrown out the door. They feel like the whole intelligence committee is on probation.” The ex-spy spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to discuss the agency’s internal anguish publicly.
“[CIA director] John Brennan does believe the Russians are behind it,” said ret. Col. Tony Shaffer, who briefed Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn this past week at Trump Tower. “He did brief the senate on his belief that the Russians were involved, but he did not provide any specific evidence. My understanding is the data provided was only of opinion in nature, not details of specific attacks. The American people are owed an answer, but my understanding is they are never going to get an answer because there’s no basic data to back up the allegation,” said Shaffer, who is a member of the New York-based London Center for Policy Research where Flynn is a fellow."
You thought the Clinton server and emails were a big story? This is going to be a bigger story. It is going to have legs. Putin and Trump's interaction with Putin are going to be ongoing stories. Picking the CEO of Exxon for Secretary of State instead of Romney or Bolton or Petraeus. Wow. Political junk? Hah! This isn't a two horse horse race any more. It's the foreign relations and national security of the United States.
I have as much faith in the CIA as I have in the FBI.
This isn't about Alex Jones or Flynn's son, UnknownInga -- it's about an extraordinary claim of Russian interference in a US election. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. So far we have none.
This is going to be a bigger story.
In what? The NYTs? The Washington Post? HuffPo?
Do you not get that no one believes what the media says anymore? You could have pics of Trump and Putin in bed together and no one would care.
Its OVER. You LOST. No one cares.
Heh. Maybe they hacked the RNC but didn't find reports of them fixing the primaries to favor Donald Trump. Don't know who they favored, but it wasn't him.
When did we pass through the looking glass where Democrats support free trade and fear the Red Menace?
Heh, it gets even better. Now all of a sudden they "care" about National Security.
Next they'll be lecturing us about the need for Border Control. LOL.
Hahaha. This month as been SO entertaining. Thank you Trump!
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-intelligence-specialists-232471
"Intelligence and foreign policy specialists were aghast Saturday at President-elect Donald Trump’s latest disparagement of the intelligence community and perturbed by the Republican National Committee’s accusation that intelligence officials are hawking politically motivated narratives.
“Appropriate skepticism … is healthy,” said Raj De, the former general counsel at the NSA. “Outright denial is not.”
“That does not bode well for the future,” warned John Cohen, who served in intelligence posts under both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama."
Althouse readers would rather believe Alex Jones and General Flynn's crazy son's Pizza Gate over the CIA. No wonder they voted for Trump.
Yes that's it. You lost because we are so stupid. Keep playing that one.
Maybe double down on the Nazi slurs too. They were very effective, you just didn't shout them loud enough. If only you had driven the point home by setting yourself on fire in protest...
UnknownInga didn't even read her own 7:17. "...opinion in nature, not details" and "...no basic data...". Lulz
@R&B, I'll take that as a no.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/10/us/politics/trump-mocking-claim-that-russia-hacked-election-at-odds-with-gop.html?_r=0
"WASHINGTON — An extraordinary breach has emerged between President-elect Donald J. Trump and the national security establishment, with Mr. Trump mocking American intelligence assessments that Russia interfered in the election on his behalf, and top Republicans vowing investigations into Kremlin activities.
On Saturday, intelligence officials said it was not until the week after the election that the C.I.A. altered its formal assessment of Russia’s activities to conclude that the government of President Vladimir V. Putin was not just trying to undermine the election, but had also acted to give one candidate an advantage.
Wary of being seen as politicizing their findings, C.I.A. analysts had been reluctant to come to that conclusion in the midst of the election — even as many supporters of Hillary Clinton believed it was obvious, given the leak of emails from her campaign chairman and others.
One intelligence official said there were indications in early October that the Russians had shifted their focus to harm Mrs. Clinton. The C.I.A.’s slowness in shifting its assessment, another official said, was one reason President Obama ordered a full review of “lessons learned” on the operation to influence the election."
http://www.politico.com
Ah Politico. Another fake news sites. Keep em coming.
I hear there is a Vast Right Wing Conspiracy out there too. Go get em! Dedicate your life to uncovering the truth. Watch out for Aliens along the way.
And the New York Times. Good one. It's not like they got EVERYTHING wrong about the last election. Trusted source, sure.
What amazes me is that the main reason you people are so shell-shocked by the election results is that you swallowed all these fake narratives from the likes of the NYTs. They blinded you to what was really going on in America. But instead of directing your anger at them, you take another swig of the Kool-aide.
I'm quite sure that as the days pass we will all be finding out wayyyyy more. This is just the tip of the iceberg. All the political junk that was written on this blogpost's comments section has to be a new low in Althousia. Junk blog post, junk comments.
I enjoy the NYT referencing "intelligence officials" -- that's certainly believable! I'll wait on named officials and sworn testimony myself. Lulz
Althousian's prefer Alex Jones over the NYTs or WaPo. Very impressive.
Strange how Trump picks the guy who's Putin's buddy too...not.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/309823-mccain-tillerson-ties-to-putin-a-matter-of-concern
"Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Saturday he has concerns about the possibility of Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson being nominated for secretary of State, given his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“I don’t know what Mr. Tillerson’s relationship with Vladimir Putin was, but I’ll tell you it is a matter of concern to me,” McCain said in an interview with Fox News."
Russia harmed Hillary though the means of providing transparency. The Obama administration is looking into the accidental transparency.
That's the scandal? That we knew what they really believed? This is the equivalency of the Birther argument. Russia is the new Kenya.
I don't even like Trump (still!) but find this mode of arguing absurd. When are progressives going to realize that if they want to win back the people they need to have a strong anti-corruption push? Not play mid-20th century games and hide their corruption behind blaming whoever blabbed their deception.
If Democrats had nominated someone who actually believe what Democrats say they stand for, there wouldn't be a scandal, because emails would show integrity behind the scenes. But by all means, blame the fact that transparency cost the election.
I'm sure we will find out more, 'Unknown'. For instance, when I read something like this: "The ex-spy spoke anonymously because he was not authorized to discuss the agency's internal anguish publicly", I suspect it actually means "The ex-spy spoke anonymously because he was invented out of whole cloth by the author of this story to 'prove' his point". I look forward to the truth coming out some day. Do you?
Someone please clarify: is there evidence of the Russian government doing the hacking, or just "Russians". If it's the later, then this appears to be flimsy evidence.
Actually it's neither. What they have is "digital fingerprints" from Russian hackware. Short version is that hacking is big business in Russia and most the money is made from selling hacking software to 3rd parties.
So in this instance, its like finding an AK-47 at the scene of a crime and blaming the Russians for it, since they manufacture the AK.
One of the truths I hope to find out some day - maybe even soon after January 20th - is who has been paid to post comments on this and other influential blogs, how much they were paid, and (most important) by whom.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-intelligence-community-232463
"Donald Trump's insult-laced dismissal of reports that the CIA believes Russia hacked the 2016 election to help him is rattling a spy community already puzzled over how to gain the ear and trust of the incoming president.
Some fear that Trump's highly public rebukes of the U.S. intelligence apparatus will undermine morale in the spy agencies, politicize their work, and damage their standing in a world filled with adversaries. After all, if the U.S. president doesn't believe his own intelligence officials, why should anyone else?
Trump, a career businessman with no national security experience, has long taken positions that have alarmed intelligence officials, such as supporting torture and suggesting that it's OK to kill the family members of terrorists.
His choice of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a man who promotes conspiracy theories on Twitter, as his national security adviser has unnerved observers. And his apparent reluctance to accept daily intelligence briefings since winning on Nov. 8 has fueled concerns that Trump will assume the presidency blind to the dangers facing the United States.
But Trump, who often speaks fondly of Russian President Vladimir Putin, really struck a nerve during the latter stages of the presidential campaign by refusing to accept the U.S. intelligence consensus that Moscow was behind cyber-attacks on U.S. election organizations. On Friday, after The Washington Post reported that the CIA believes Russia was trying specifically to help Trump, the president-elect's team compared the allegations to the flawed claims that prompted the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq."
Libtard: Althousian's prefer Alex Jones over the NYTs or WaPo. Very impressive.
Liar. I don't even know who Alex Jones is. And I never mentioned him.
My point was that no one believes anything from the NYTs or WaPo anymore.
But of course, like most lefties, you lie.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा