Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House

[theyarecomingforyou]

28 minutes ago, ncoday said:

Interesting how Obama & the US Gov't spent money trying to influence the recent Israeli elections:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jul/12/obama-admin-sent-taxpayer-money-oust-netanyahu/

You act as if I support the US meddling in elections. The US has a long history of interfering in the elections of other nations and I strongly condemn that.

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 minute ago, ctebah said:

Nope.  Debating with assumptions makes you seem foolish, I would have thought you'd stop this by now.

 

If Russia did meddle in the recent US elections, and there is proof, then provide it...

I already have provided plenty of articles throughout this topic setting out the evidence for Russia's involvement: the hacking group's ties to Russian military intelligence; the methodology of the attacks; the previous targets of the group; the time of the attacks and IP addresses used; the lack of attacks during Russian holidays; the alignment of the hack with Russia's state propaganda, etc. Even if I obtained and produced a signed order from Putin himself you wouldn't believe me, so there's no point discussing this any further with you.

 

It's hard to understand what your point is. Are you claiming it's all an elaborate conspiracy - that Obama, the FBI, the CIA and independent cyber security specialists have all conspired to implicate Russia and Putin is just an innocent victim? Because that's exactly what it sounds like. No matter what evidence is provided you'd just change the goal posts or dismiss it out of hand.

[ctebah]

Just now, theyarecomingforyou said:

I already have provided plenty of articles throughout this topic setting out the evidence for Russia's involvement: the hacking group's ties to Russian military intelligence; the methodology of the attacks; the previous targets of the group; the time of the attacks and IP addresses used; the lack of attacks during Russian holidays; the alignment of the hack with Russia's state propaganda, etc. Even if I obtained and produced a signed order from Putin himself you wouldn't believe me, so there's no point discussing this any further with you.

 

It's hard to understand what your point is. Are you claiming it's all an elaborate conspiracy - that Obama, the FBI, the CIA and independent cyber security specialists have all conspired to implicate Russia and Putin is just an innocent victim? Because that's exactly what it sounds like. No matter what evidence is provided you'd just change the goal posts or dismiss it out of hand.

No, what I'm saying, is that NO ONE has provided any proof for this.  Not even Obama.  Your articles are worthless.  

 

Most of the people who are now accusing Russia of hacking have said the complete opposite before the elections.  These aren't conspiracy theories, this is how the governments work.  Are you really THAT gullible?

[ncoday]

The problem I have with this is how do you prove intent?

 

How can you prove that Russia wanted Trump to win?

 

One might argue that since they only hacked the democrats that that proves intent. It doesn't, all it proves is IF it was the Russians even at all, the Democrats were the only ones they were able to successfully hack.

 

Nothing will come of this people and Obama knows it. He would be wise to think this through very carefully, Russia is a country that won't back down. They may not be the Soviet Union of the Cold War era, but they are still capable of inflicting serious damage to a country, including the US.

[Dysphoria]

21 minutes ago, ncoday said:

The problem I have with this is how do you prove intent?

 

This is how you prove intent:

 

[wakjak]

6 minutes ago, Euphoria said:

This is how you prove intent:

 

If that were true Clinton would have been charged. Fail.

[Dysphoria]

Just now, wakjak said:

If that were true Clinton would have been charged. Fail.

Yes, you should be asking yourself that question....

Why is she not being charged?

What did Bill Clinton say to Loretta Lynch when he barged in her plane while on the landing strip.?

Look at the video and tell me that she had no intent...  

[wakjak]

Just now, Euphoria said:

Yes, you should be asking yourself that question....

Why is she not being charged?

What did Bill Clinton say to Loretta Lynch when he barged in her plane while on the landing strip.?

Look at the video and tell me that she had no intent...  

I've seen it. And that moron Gowdy makes it difficult mind you. 

She's not being charged because they didn't find intent. Simple.

[Dysphoria]

Just now, wakjak said:

I've seen it. And that moron Gowdy makes it difficult mind you. 

She's not being charged because they didn't find intent. Simple.

According to who?

The guy who she ordered to delete all emails and remove the headers to the the ones he does not delete?

According to Comey who agrees that she lied at each of the testimony's?

According to John Podesta who warned her to remove all email trails before she is called to testify?

... I could keep going on .... but is pointless... lets just focus on the evil Russians as how dare these hackers show the truth to the US voters...

[PGHammer]

1 hour ago, DocM said:

Not just Israel. They sent "progressive" campaign teams to S. America and other locales.

Or even - egad - Australia.  (No; I did NOT stutter.  At least one historical drama - "The Falcon and the Snowman" - points to this as part of the motivation of the central characters - one then a contractor employee, and specifically for TRW; the other, a failed cocaine dealer - to sell secrets to the Soviet Union.)

[PGHammer]

21 hours ago, DocM said:

 

I'd estimate 300,000-350,000 Democrats changed their registration to Republican between PA (100k alone!), Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.

 

Even those who didn't showed their disdain another way: they stayed home.

 

In Detroit alone many tens of thousands of blacks didn't vote in November who did in 2012. A very large percentage of them had the same reason as white and Hispanic Trump voters in the region: job migration, leaving them chronically un- or under-employed, and they knew damned well Clinton would open the borders even further for imported unskilled Laborers. 

Doc - I was referring specifically to the affiliation changes (which would not - and should not - count my OWN change, since it was to independent - not GOP).

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 hour ago, ctebah said:

No, what I'm saying, is that NO ONE has provided any proof for this.  Not even Obama.  Your articles are worthless.  

 

Most of the people who are now accusing Russia of hacking have said the complete opposite before the elections.  These aren't conspiracy theories, this is how the governments work.  Are you really THAT gullible?

You claim it's not a conspiracy theory yet you're suggesting that Obama, the CIA, the FBI and independent cyber security analysts are all lying to implicate Putin when actually he's completely innocent. You're part of the Post Truth Era™, where evidence can be rejected out of hand and personal beliefs are all that matter.

 

Let's set aside proof for the minute, as when you reject any evidence out of hand that's impossible to provide. Instead let's talk about probability. Do you believe it's probable that Putin ordered the hack on the DNC and interfered with the US election? If not then what do you think probably happened?

[ctebah]

3 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

You claim it's not a conspiracy theory yet you're suggesting that Obama, the CIA, the FBI and independent cyber security analysts are all lying to implicate Putin when actually he's completely innocent. You're part of the Post Truth Era™, where evidence can be rejected out of hand and personal beliefs are all that matter.

Let me make this simple for you, since you're running around in a circle:

 

THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE SO FAR, ONLY ACCUSATIONS.

 

These same agencies were on the same page every time a government needed to sell an impeding war to it's gullible population.  Seriously, once again, you can't be this gullible?

 

Quote

Let's set aside proof for the minute, as when you reject any evidence out of hand that's impossible to provide. Instead let's talk about probability. Do you believe it's probable that Putin ordered the hack on the DNC and interfered with the US election? If not then what do you think probably happened?

I think it's possible, but until presented with the evidence, I will continue to believe that it's just a bunch of crying democrats ###### off at loosing the elections.

[DocM]

Just a note:

 

Trump has 240 electoral votes to Clintons 115, with Texas (38 votes) voting in the next hour. Much of the mountain states and west remain.  Needed: 270.

 

It's over.

 

1 faithless elector so far: Minnesota's 4th District elector refused to vote for Clinton and was replaced.

Edited December 19, 2016 by DocM

[wakjak]

18 minutes ago, DocM said:

Just a note:

 

Trump has 240 electoral votes to Clintons 115, with Texas (38 votes) voting in the next hour. Much of the mountain states and west remain.  Needed: 270.

 

It's over.

 

1 faithless elector so far: Minnesota's 4th District elector refused to vote for Clinton and was replaced.

Electoral College vote thread > 

 

[theyarecomingforyou]

1 hour ago, ctebah said:

Let me make this simple for you, since you're running around in a circle:

 

THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE SO FAR, ONLY ACCUSATIONS.

 

These same agencies were on the same page every time a government needed to sell an impeding war to it's gullible population.  Seriously, once again, you can't be this gullible?

 

I think it's possible, but until presented with the evidence, I will continue to believe that it's just a bunch of crying democrats ###### off at loosing the elections.

Insulting people isn't a way to lend credibility to your argument. If the election genuinely was influenced by a foreign government—which both Democrats and Republicans are concerned about—then that is a serious matter, especially in a closely fought election. I can't imagine if the situation were reversed you'd be saying the same thing.

 

The evidence all points to Russian involvement.

[ctebah]

4 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

Insulting people isn't a way to lend credibility to your argument. If the election genuinely was influenced by a foreign government—which both Democrats and Republicans are concerned about—then that is a serious matter, especially in a closely fought election. I can't imagine if the situation were reversed you'd be saying the same thing.

 

The evidence all points to Russian involvement.

You're talking about credibility while zero evidence exists of Russian involvement in the elections?  I think you've just defined irony.

 

Putin said it best: "Show us the evidence or shut up."

[theyarecomingforyou]

9 minutes ago, ctebah said:

You're talking about credibility while zero evidence exists of Russian involvement in the elections?  I think you've just defined irony.

Look, if you want to base your opinions on Russian propaganda then feel free. It's very clear from Russian state media coverage that Russian had an interest in Trump being elected; it's very clear that Russia has sought to influence US politics through articles published by Russia Today; it's also supported by assessments by the CIA, the FBI and independent security specialists. There also isn't a credible alternative that has been put forward.

 

That said, the number of times the US has influenced the elections in other countries I don't have any sympathy for Clinton. She is nearly as corrupt as Putin.

[ctebah]

7 minutes ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

Look, if you want to base your opinions on Russian propaganda then feel free.

What propaganda?  Russia is asking for proof and the US has only provided the accusations.  These are FACTS.

 

Quote

It's very clear from Russian state media coverage that Russian had an interest in Trump being elected

Absolutely.  He wants to work with Russia whereas Clinton would have started another war by now.

 

Quote

; it's very clear that Russia has sought to influence US politics through articles published by Russia Today

Absolutely.  Russia preferred Trump, and as such would have published articles favorable to him.

 

Quote

; it's also supported by assessments by the CIA, the FBI and independent security specialists.

As I've already shown you, these organizations have LIED over and over and over again when it came to almost every conflict since WW2.  There is zero reason to believe them now and all the reason to question what they say.

 

Quote

There also isn't a credible alternative that has been put forward.

This is irrelevant.  An absence of a credible alternative isn't proof.

 

Quote

That said, the number of times the US has influenced the elections in other countries I don't have any sympathy for Clinton. She is nearly as corrupt as Putin.

I agree.

[ensiform]

3 hours ago, theyarecomingforyou said:

Insulting people isn't a way to lend credibility to your argument. If the election genuinely was influenced by a foreign government—which both Democrats and Republicans are concerned about—then that is a serious matter, especially in a closely fought election. I can't imagine if the situation were reversed you'd be saying the same thing.

 

The evidence all points to Russian involvement.

The evidence (or lack-there-of) points to no influence what-so-ever I'm afraid.  All of the articles you have posted have talked about leaked emails months before and continued email leaks which has absolutely 0 relevance to the election itself.  End of story.  Drop it and move on with your life.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

 

Quote

Declassify the Evidence of Russian Hacking!

 

 The debate over possible intervention in the election should be based on publicly disclosed evidence, not unverifiable, anonymous leaks.

 

...the charges of Russian responsibility for the e-mail hacks of the Democratic National Committee and of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta have been repeated so often and so emphatically that it’s become easy to forget that they have yet to be conclusively proved.

 

While the CIA asserts that Russia interfered with the election in order to assist Trump, it is by no means clear that the nation’s other intelligence agencies agree on all of the details. What is clear is that WikiLeaks managed to obtain a trove of often embarrassing and self-serving e-mails written by DNC officials, Clinton campaign operatives, and media elites. But exactly how did it obtain them? Were they leaked, as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange claims, or were they deliberately stolen by Russian hackers? We still don’t know for sure. What we do know is that Podesta fell victim to a common (and obvious) spear-phishing ploy, and that the DNC’s system was penetrated by what is widely believed to be a group of Russian-speaking hackers associated with the Russian government. Yet the nature of that association is far from clear.

 

Even so, we find it troubling that these charges of Russian interference are serving to distract from the very real domestic challenges that threaten our democracy: growing voter suppression, the influence of corporate and dark-money PACs, gerrymandering, and...

 

[xrobwx71]

I'll concede the Russian's hacked the relevant systems. I'll also concede that they did the job our own US media should have done in the first place. It's the information that I am interested in not who revealed it or how. 

[coth]

On 20.12.2016 at 1:19 AM, theyarecomingforyou said:

Look, if you want to base your opinions on Russian propaganda then feel free. It's very clear from Russian state media coverage that Russian had an interest in Trump being elected; it's very clear that Russia has sought to influence US politics through articles published by Russia Today; it's also supported by assessments by the CIA, the FBI and independent security specialists. There also isn't a credible alternative that has been put forward.

 

That said, the number of times the US has influenced the elections in other countries I don't have any sympathy for Clinton. She is nearly as corrupt as Putin.

Hang on a minute, I have an incoming call from Vlad for instructions.

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

 

Quote

Rick Santorum ‘unconvinced’ Russia behind alleged election hacking

 

Former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has said he is “unconvinced at this point” that Russia was behind the hacking of a number of US institutions in the run up to November’s elections.

 

Santorum described as “clearly political” the length of time Obama waited to announce the latest sanctions against Russia, with the real motive being to destabilize the incoming administration, adding that it was a decision that won’t “go down as a bright spot for the Obama presidency.”

 

“Some of this wasn’t even a hack, it was a basic phishing expedition, where one of the DNC officials gave a password. That’s not a hack, that’s just criminal activity,” Santorum said in an interview with CNN. “It may be Russia, or maybe somebody else took advantage.”

 

“First off, who did the actual hacking,” Santorum asked when pressed by host Kate Bolduan about Russian involvement, adding that “state actors aren’t the ones doing the hacking.”

 

“I’m unconvinced at this point,” the former Pennsylvania Senator added. “I’m willing to be convinced but I’m unconvinced at this point that this is what really happened here.”

 

 

[+Mirumir Subscriber¹]

WashPost Is Richly Rewarded for False News About Russia Threat While Public Is Deceived

 

CNN Used a Video Game to Show How Russians Hack Stuff