US Officially Blames Russia

A VETERAN SPY REPORTS HE PROVIDED THE FBI WITH EVIDENCE TRUMP WAS COMPROMISED AND HAS BEEN WORKING FOR RUSSIA FOR FIVE YEARS

Mother Jones was the next news organization out with its own equally disturbing late October surprise on Monday. It reported that, earlier this summer, an experienced Western Intelligence officer had reported to the FBI that he had found evidence of “an established exchange of information” between the Kremlin and Trump going back no less than five years.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
While the specifics may have been off, are we still willing to dismiss Russia / Trump ties? And that those ties deal with money?
 
Since Bob would apparently prefer not fouling up his thread with discussion of the validity of the claim itself:

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/14/heres-the-public-evidence-russia-hacked-the-dnc-its-not-enough/

First up, the disclaimer:
Again, it’s completely possible (and probable, really) that the CIA possesses hard evidence that could establish Russian attribution — it’s their job to have such evidence, and often to keep it secret.
Click to expand...

This is my position on it, as well. There are many aspects of the current theory that 'pass the smell test' as it were. There are also, however, some claims that contradict other claims, such as:
Compare that description to CrowdStrike’s claim it was able to finger APT 28 and 29, described above as digital spies par excellence, because they were so incredibly sloppy. Would a group whose “tradecraft is superb” with “operational security second to none” really leave behind the name of a Soviet spy chief imprinted on a document it sent to American journalists? Would these groups really be dumb enough to leave cyrillic comments on these documents? Would these groups that “constantly [go] back into the environment to change out their implants, modify persistent methods, move to new Command & Control channels” get caught because they precisely didn’t make sure not to use IP addresses they’d been associated before? It’s very hard to buy the argument that the Democrats were hacked by one of the most sophisticated, diabolical foreign intelligence services in history, and that we know this because they screwed up over and over again.
Click to expand...
(Emphasis added)

That has perhaps been my one issue with this as it has grown. The 'orgy of evidence' (to use a term from one of the best horrible movies ever :9) starts to work against itself as a credible implication. Among them being the 'business hours in Russian time zones' bit. When I think hackers, I don't think of people working 9 to 5 shifts (which they may very well do, but not in the sense of being directly related to their nefarious activities). Even state-sponsored electronic espionage being structured around 'office hours' seems a little weird.

Naturally some of this goes off in the other direction of tin-foil-hattery, so I take it with a grain of salt.

What I do consider a rational exercise, however, is considering the open question: what other plausible explanations remain in the face of the most direct, irrefutable evidence?

Which is incredibly tough to consider since there is an abundance of circumstantial evidence and a lot of plausible theorizing that some sources have presented as concrete fact.
 
It seems like the story is far from settled:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E

Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking - sources

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...termediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

EXCLUSIVE: Ex-British ambassador who is now a WikiLeaks operative claims Russia did NOT provide Clinton emails - they were handed over to him at a D.C. park by an intermediary for 'disgusted' Democratic whistleblowers
 
LTC8K6 said:
It seems like the story is far from settled:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-intelligence-idUSKBN14204E

Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking - sources

<snip>
Click to expand...


I think the headline is just a little bit misleading. The first line of the second paragraph in the article cited;
While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.
Click to expand...
Sounds like some "declined to be named" "officials" are trying to cover both sides of the street.

Plausible dissimulation.
 
Last edited:
If the Putin/Trump bromance ends prematurely, and Russia did indeed hack RNC computers and plans to embarrass Republicans next election, we can bet Democrats will argue we should ignore the dirt on Donald since it's being released by a foreign power with the intention of influencing American voters.
 
Cain said:
If the Putin/Trump bromance ends prematurely, and Russia did indeed hack RNC computers and plans to embarrass Republicans next election, we can bet Democrats will argue we should ignore the dirt on Donald since it's being released by a foreign power with the intention of influencing American voters.
Click to expand...

Meh, "Oh come on! That was four years ago, let's focus on this election, please" is all it will take to defuse that one. American voters are easily duped by a good platitude such as "we need to look forward, not backwards."

If the RNC was also hacked, the most potential for it is probably blackmail fodder for the present or immediate future. The value of it diminishes with every passing day.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Meh, "Oh come on! That was four years ago, let's focus on this election, please" is all it will take to defuse that one. American voters are easily duped by a good platitude such as "we need to look forward, not backwards."

If the RNC was also hacked, the most potential for it is probably blackmail fodder for the present or immediate future. The value of it diminishes with every passing day.
Click to expand...

Hack both, attack one and blackmail the one you have the worse dirt on or you believe is the weaker, less morally courageous, side.

So much respect Putin has for the Republicans.
 
Sure would be nice to have actual evidence. Not anonymous leaks from self-interested parties.

Amazing how many people are willing to take the FBI's and CIA's word for it when it suits them.
 
KwamiFabu said:
Sure would be nice to have actual evidence. Not anonymous leaks from self-interested parties.

Amazing how many people are willing to take the FBI's and CIA's word for it when it suits them.
Click to expand...

Yea. I hear ya.

Russia and Trump are both is WAY more trustworthy.

:dl:
 
KwamiFabu said:
Sure would be nice to have actual evidence. Not anonymous leaks from self-interested parties.

Amazing how many people are willing to take the FBI's and CIA's word for it when it suits them.
Click to expand...

Every intelligence agency agrees the Russians hacked us. The only people that don't believe it is Trump, his people, and some of his more fervent supporters. Since Trump has been skipping his security briefings he may not be the most trustworthy one in all of this.
 
Sooo...
Not reacting dramatically to the "red line crossing" in Syria was wrong for Obama, but completely ignoring Russian interference in the election is right ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom